EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2),, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & G.D.Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.590/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Eaton Technologies Private Limited, Dcit, Circle-1(2), Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Vs Pune Plot No.1, Sr.No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Pan : Aabce4323Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.902/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Eaton Technologies Private Limited, Pr.Cit-1, Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Vs Pune Plot No.1, Sr.No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Pan : Aabce4323Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue

234C of the Act. Each and above grounds is independent and without prejudice to the other grounds of appeal preferred by the Appellant.” 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that this tribunal’s recent common order in Revenue’s appeals ITA Nos. 42 and 43/PUN/2021 for A.Yrs. 2015-16 and 2016-17 dated 07-07-2022 has already

EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-1,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & G.D.Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.590/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Eaton Technologies Private Limited, Dcit, Circle-1(2), Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Vs Pune Plot No.1, Sr.No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Pan : Aabce4323Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.902/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Eaton Technologies Private Limited, Pr.Cit-1, Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Vs Pune Plot No.1, Sr.No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Pan : Aabce4323Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue

234C of the Act. Each and above grounds is independent and without prejudice to the other grounds of appeal preferred by the Appellant.” 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that this tribunal’s recent common order in Revenue’s appeals ITA Nos. 42 and 43/PUN/2021 for A.Yrs. 2015-16 and 2016-17 dated 07-07-2022 has already

NANASAHEB BHAGAWAN SASAR,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 2(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

TDS credit of Rs.6,50,000/- and accordingly calculated interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. In response section

VISION ENTERPRISES,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, AHMEDNAGAR

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 192/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Vision Enterprises, Hotel Sulai, Dhankawadi, Pune. Pan: Aajfv0168P . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah & Shri Akshay Garg Revenue By : Shri Sardar Singh Meena सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 11/04/2023 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 11/04/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; With The Following Grounds Of Appeal The Assessee Challenges The Revisionary Order Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -1, Pune [For Short ‘Pcit’] Dt. 22/03/2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’] For Assessment Year [For Short ‘Ay’] 2015-16; “1. The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Passing Order U/S. 263 Of The Act Without Appreciating That The Assessment

TDS’] u/s 194A(1) of the Act. (ii) Repayment of unsecured loan otherwise than by an account payee cheque/draft in violation of provisions of section 269T. (iii)Failure to charge interest u/s 234C

SAMEER SHRIKANT PISE,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 12, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

TDS credit allowed to the appellant by the CPC. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. Regarding the issue of charging of interest u/s 234 of the Act, it is held that charging interest under sections 234 is consequential in nature and mandatory. This has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anjum M.H.Ghaswala

VAISHALI KESHAV KULKARNI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 13(2), PUNE

In the result the Grounds Numbers 2, 3 and 4 raised by the assessee are allowed

234C of the Act.\n7.\nYour appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify alter and / or delete any of the above grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing.\nDelay condonation :\n1.1 There is a delay of 16 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. We have perused the submission and found that there is sufficient and reasonable

M/S. VISHAY COMPONENTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 12, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

TDS amount of INR 90,000 while computing the tax liability of the Appellant and consequential1y error in computation of interest liability under section 234C

KAPIL ALCOTECH LLP,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21

234C of the Act being mandatory and consequential in nature, is dismissed. 6. So far as the ground No.4 is concerned, the same relates to the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the disallowance of Rs.5,90,000/- being remuneration to working partners. 7. Facts of the case in brief are that the Assessing Officer during the course

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

234C\n& 234D if applicable. Issue demand noticed and challan accordingly. Issue Penalty\nnotice under section 274 r.w.s.270A of the Income Tax Act 1961, separately for mis-\nreporting and under-reporting of income.\n\nAggrieved by the assessment order, assessee now is in\nappeal ITA No.632/PUN/2022 before this Tribunal raising the\nfollowing grounds of appeal:-\n\n“Based

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. CUMMINS INDIA LTD , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

234C\n& 234D if applicable. Issue demand noticed and challan accordingly. Issue Penalty\nnotice under section 274 r.w.s.270A of the Income Tax Act 1961, separately for mis-\nreporting and under-reporting of income.\nAggrieved by the assessment order, assessee now is in\nappeal ITA No.632/PUN/2022 before this Tribunal raising the\nfollowing grounds of appeal:-\n“Based on the facts

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.338/Pun/2021 & 236/Pun/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18

TDS amounting to Rs.29,52,565/-. The AO is directed to verify the asssessee’s contention and decide the issue accordingly. 19. Ground no.8 is against levy of interest u/s.234C amounting to Rs.31,76,153/-. The only prayer of the assessee is that the computation part of interest u/s.234C be checked. We order accordingly and direct the AO to examine

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.338/Pun/2021 & 236/Pun/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18

TDS amounting to Rs.29,52,565/-. The AO is directed to verify the asssessee’s contention and decide the issue accordingly. 19. Ground no.8 is against levy of interest u/s.234C amounting to Rs.31,76,153/-. The only prayer of the assessee is that the computation part of interest u/s.234C be checked. We order accordingly and direct the AO to examine

UMESH DHONDIRAM SHINDE,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

234C of the Act, 1961. 4) On facts and in circumstances of the case the Learned CIT (A) has erred in law and on merit in confirming penalty under section 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5) The appellant craves for leave to amend, modify or add to any of the above grounds of appeal

APAASSO MALI,PUNE vs. ITO 11(1), SWARGATE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

TDS) amounting to 3,48,250/-, which was deducted from the income of the Appellant. Ground No.5 5.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case the LD AO erred in invoking section 69 to tax undisclosed investments when the appellant is assessed under section 44AD on presumptive basis. 5.2 On the facts and circumstances of the case

SHRIPATRAO DADA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3),, KOLHAPUR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

234C is not justified. 2 Shripatrao Dada Sahakari Bank Ltd. A.Y. 2015-16 2. The first ground is that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition made by the ld. A.O. of Rs. 91,150/- being admission fees received from nominal members admitted. The A.O has discussed this issue at para 5 of his order

VIJAY TUKARAM RAUNDAL,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

TDS of Rs.3.20 crores\nand self assessment tax of Rs.0.43 crore.\n15. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that specific disclosure of\nmaterial facts were furnished for making the claim in the return. Referring to page\n7 of the paper book for assessment year 2013-14, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee\ndrew the attention of the Bench

SHRIHARI HANMANT NAVRANGE,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -3, LATUR

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

234C is not justified. 10. The appellant craves to leave, add/amend or alter any of the above grounds of appeal.” 3. There is hardly any dispute between the parties that the latter assessee’s appeal ITA.No.574/PUN./2023 also raises the identical substantive grounds and the sole distinction therein is quantum of the interest income in issue received u/secs.28

AZIZUDDIN LATIPHODDIN KAZI L/H OF DECEASED LATIPHODDIN AJIMODDIN KAZI,LATUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, LATUR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godaraआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.835/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Azizuddin Latiphoddin Kazi, The Income Tax Officer, L/H Of Deceased Latiphoddin Vs Ward-4, Latur. Ajimoddin Kazi, . Block No.71, Kazi Nivas, Dastagir Galli, Tal. Ahmedpur, Latur – 413515. Pan: Aynpk5231E Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri P P Kulkarni – Ar Revenue By Shri B.S.Rajpurohit - Dr Date Of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18/08/2023

234C is not justified. 8. The appellant craves to leave, add/amend or alter any of the above grounds of appeal.” 3. The assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal challenges correctness of both the learned lower authorities’ action assessing his interest income received under section 28 r.w.s 33 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894; as the case