PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

221; or (B) section 271, section 271A, section 271AAA, section 271AAB, section 271F, section 271FB, section 272AA or section 272BB; (C) section 272, section 272B or section 273, as they stood immediately before the 1st day of April, 1989, in respect of an assessment for the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1988, or any earlier assessment

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

221; or (B) section 271, section 271A, section 271AAA, section 271AAB, section 271F, section 271FB, section 272AA or section 272BB; (C) section 272, section 272B or section 273, as they stood immediately before the 1st day of April, 1989, in respect of an assessment for the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1988, or any earlier assessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE vs. M/S. IAC INTERNATIONAL AUTOMOTIVE INDIA PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

section 92CA(1) of the Act in order to determine the Arm‟s Length Price (“ALP”) in respect of such international transactions. 2.2 The assessee undertook the following international transactions with its AEs during AY 2013-14 and benchmarked each transaction by selecting the Most Appropriate Method (“MAM”) mentioned in the table below: Sr. Nature of International Amount

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL , SOLAPUR,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CPC)-TDS , GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,SOLAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC)- TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PANDHARPUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,PANDHARPUR vs. DCIT (CPC)-TDS ,GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 305 To 315/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16 Pandharpur Municipal Council Navi Peth, Pandharpur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Aaalp1606R बनाम / V/S. Dcit (Cpc)–Tds, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Ghaziabad. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Eleven Appeals Is Challenged Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Risen Out Of Separate Orders Of Intimation Passed U/S 154 Of The Act, By Dcit-Cpc, Tds Ghaziabad [For Short “Cpc-Tds”], For Five Assessment Years [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 To 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

TDS is protected by the first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act?’ and in reaching the answer hereto, it is apt to quote the provision in verbatim which reads as; “201. Consequences of failure to deduct or pay [(1) Where any person, including the principal officer of a company,— (a) who is required to deduct

PUSPAK STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

1. On the facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per the provisions and the scheme of the Act it be held that it be held that the disallowance made of Rs. 2,19,348/- u/s 14A r.w. rule 8D(2)(iii) of 2 the Income Tax Rules is not in accordance with provisions

HEMANT ENTERPRISES,NASHIK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

221 of the Act and rigorous imprisonment under section 276B of the Act can also be imposed upon such defaulting person or the company. Thus, complete machinery is provided under the Act for recovery of tax deducted at source from the person who has deducted such tax at source and the revenue is barred from recovering the TDS amount from

SIDDHARTH CONSTRUCTION,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

221, Matrix Business Centre, Kalda Corner, Aurangabad-431005 PAN : ACEFS1673D .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. ACIT, Centralized Processing Cell-TDS, Ghaziabad ……प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : N O N E Revenue by : Shri Suhas Kulkarni सुिवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 20-12-2022 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 21-12-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal

REKHA KISHORE BARI,DHULE vs. ASSESSING OFFICER-NFAC, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1667/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Rekha Kishore Bari, V The Assessing Officer- Datta Bari Bhavan, S Nfac. Opp.Rana Pratap Statute, Dhule – 424001. Pan: Abepb3597J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani – Ar Revenue By Shri Sandeep P Sathe – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] For Assessment Year 2020-21 Dated 19.07.2024 Passed U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Emanating From The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act, Dated 31/08/2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

TDS Actual Area land Rs. 3(G)(2) ction Compensation amount well paid 3534 14,31,27 1,43,127 47803 16,22,200/- 1,62,220 14,59,980 sq.m 0 4.3 Thus, the actual amount of Rs.14,59,980/- was paid to the assessee on 30/08/2010. The assessee filed an appeal against the compensation. The Additional Divisional Commissioner

BHADANES HITECH TECHNOLOGY COMPUTER PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, NASHIK

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhadanes Hitech Technology Vs. Ito, Ward Computer Pvt. Ltd. 1(1), Nashik Flat No.10, Padmavishwa Plaza, Nashik Pune Road, Tagore Nagar, Nashik – 422006 Pan : Aadcb9102E Appellant Respondent

221 TaxmaN14 dated 28th November, 2013 wherein it is held inter-alia as under:- FACTS • On basis of some information from the Investigation Wing that assessee was identified as one of beneficiaries who had received bogus entries, notice under section 148 was issued to the assessee and the assessee was required to furnish information in respect of persons