ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

438 dtd. 28.08.2009." 6. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the assessee had originally filed return of income declaring total income of ₹ 1,83,83,761/- on 30.11.2006, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Search operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Shri Ramchandra Maruti Mohite

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

438 dtd. 28.08.2009." 6. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the assessee had originally filed return of income declaring total income of ₹ 1,83,83,761/- on 30.11.2006, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Search operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Shri Ramchandra Maruti Mohite

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

438 dtd. 28.08.2009." 6. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the assessee had originally filed return of income declaring total income of ₹ 1,83,83,761/- on 30.11.2006, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Search operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Shri Ramchandra Maruti Mohite

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

438 dtd. 28.08.2009." 6. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the assessee had originally filed return of income declaring total income of ₹ 1,83,83,761/- on 30.11.2006, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Search operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Shri Ramchandra Maruti Mohite

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

438 dtd. 28.08.2009." 6. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the assessee had originally filed return of income declaring total income of ₹ 1,83,83,761/- on 30.11.2006, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Search operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Shri Ramchandra Maruti Mohite

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. D.M. CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10 are allowed and for assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13 are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1805 To 1811/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Central Circle, Kolhapur …. Vs. D.M. Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 240/B, Mohite House, Gen. Thorat Marg, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Tarabai Park, Kolhapur Pan: Aadcm6281H

438 dtd. 28.08.2009." 6. Briefly, in the facts of the case, the assessee had originally filed return of income declaring total income of ₹ 1,83,83,761/- on 30.11.2006, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Search operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Shri Ramchandra Maruti Mohite

VINAYAK HANUMANTRAO GHORPADE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.1438 & 1439/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 Vinayak Hanumantrao V Vaishnavi Satish Bankar, Ghorpade, S. Pune. F.No.7, Plot No.60/61, S.No.165/1B, Shivanjali, Near Central Circle-1(3), Pune. Mahadev Temple, Indira Nagar, Pune – 411033. Pan: Afdpg6919A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte Revenue By Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar –Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Pune-11 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2019-20 & 2020-21, Both Dated 02.05.2024 Emanating From Separate Assessment Order U/S.153A R.W.S 144 Of The I.T.Act, Both Dated 23.09.2021.For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals

TDS has been deducted on these consultancy charges. It has been specifically mentioned by the Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A) that almost entire receipts of the Assessee are from Garware Technical Fibers Limited. The Assessee has claimed expenditure of Rs.5 lakhs as consultancy charges paid to SHAILJA ROOPCHAND. Though apparently, it is highly unlikely that a person doing consultancy

VINAYAK HANUMANTRAO GHORPADE,PUNE vs. VAISHNAVI SATISH BANKAR, PUNE

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.1438 & 1439/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 Vinayak Hanumantrao V Vaishnavi Satish Bankar, Ghorpade, S. Pune. F.No.7, Plot No.60/61, S.No.165/1B, Shivanjali, Near Central Circle-1(3), Pune. Mahadev Temple, Indira Nagar, Pune – 411033. Pan: Afdpg6919A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte Revenue By Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar –Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Pune-11 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2019-20 & 2020-21, Both Dated 02.05.2024 Emanating From Separate Assessment Order U/S.153A R.W.S 144 Of The I.T.Act, Both Dated 23.09.2021.For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals

TDS has been deducted on these consultancy charges. It has been specifically mentioned by the Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A) that almost entire receipts of the Assessee are from Garware Technical Fibers Limited. The Assessee has claimed expenditure of Rs.5 lakhs as consultancy charges paid to SHAILJA ROOPCHAND. Though apparently, it is highly unlikely that a person doing consultancy

SHATABDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH,AGASKHIND vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SHATABDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH,AGASKHIND vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SPADEWORK SOFTWARE SERVICES P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC) -TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SPADEWORK SOFTWARE SERVICES P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC) -TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SPADEWORK SOFTWARE SERVICES P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CPC) -TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SHATABDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH,AGASKHIND vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SHATABDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH,AGASKHIND vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SHATABDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH,AGASKHIND vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SHATABDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH,AGASKHIND vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SHATABDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH,AGASKHIND vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication

SHATABDI INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND RESEARCH,AGASKHIND vs. ACIT, CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314. 4. There is a common grievance in all these appeals before us and at the time of hearing, the respective Counsels for the aforestated assessees submitted that the only issue for adjudication