INCOME TAX OFFICER WD 6(3), PUNE vs. ELLORA ISPAT, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1497/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2009-10

bogus purchases. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of dealing in MS plates and profile cutting. Return of income for the A.Y. 2009- 10 furnished on 21.10.2009 declaring income of ₹1,64,790. Return processed u/s.143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. SURYACHANDRA LALMANI DUBEY, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings. The AO made addition of Rs.2,04,80,489/-. Aggrieved by the Order the Assessee filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The 2 Suryachandra Lalmani Dubey [R] Ld.CIT(A) held that the AO had recorded the reasons for reopening as “needs to be verified”, which is outside the purview of section 147.Accordingly,Ld.CIT(A) allowed the Legal ground

DCIT-CIRCLE 7 PUNE, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK PUNE vs. TRIO CHEMSUCROTECH ENG. PROJECTS PVT. LTD, PUNE

purchases and expenses were pending to be received even till 31.03.2010, the provisioning made was not accepted and added back to the income, After making the above two additions, the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.30,94,50,800/-.\n6. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A). During the course of appellate proceedings, assessee along with making

PRAKASH METAL INDISTRIES,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 5(3), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1796/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2010-11

bogus purchases made by the assessee and ld. AO proceeded on the said information and after properly recording the reasons has also made addition of Rs.1,81,715/- Prakash Metal Industries on the basis of such information and the reasons recorded. Once the AO has made addition on the issue raised in the reasons recorded, then he can make other

VILSON ROOFING PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLHAPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLHAPUR

The appeal of the assessee is DISMISSED

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 956/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Vilson Roofing Products Pvt. Ltd., 1St Lane, Opp. Prataprao Jagdale Hall, Rajarampuri, Kolhapur, Pin – 416 008 . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan: Aaccv0661M

bogus ITAT-Pune Page 7 of 14 Vilson Roofing Products Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.956/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2009-10 purchase by assessee received by DRI from CCE which was passed on to revenue authorities was 'tangible material outside record' to initiate valid reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. TARADEVI RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

purchased by respondent on the floor of\nStock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries were taken,\ncontract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of\nStock Exchange. The ITAT therefore, in our view, rightly concluded that\nthere was no merit in the appeal.\"\n\nThe facts of the case at hand are similar

AADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

bogus purchase by assessee received by DRI from CCE which was passed on to revenue authorities was 'tangible material outside record to initiate valid reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), , PUNE vs. V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), , PUNE vs. V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PVT LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PVT LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), , PUNE vs. V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(4), , PUNE vs. V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including

V.M.MATERE INFRASTRUCTURES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE, PUNE

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

reassessment order passed u/s. 147 be declared null and void. 4 ITA.Nos.887 to 883/PUN./2022 And ITA.Nos.910 to 913/PUN./2022 V M Matere Infrastructures (India) Private Limited, Pune. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that – a. The notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law since the all aspects of sub-contracting expenses including