KAY POWER AND PAPER LIMITED,SATARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SATARA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

purchased and sold scripts at a price which are very less as compared to the market price on that particular day. During the FY 2014-15, M/s Kay Power and Paper Ltd. has made the transactions and booked the profit of Rs. 2,67,66,250/-. During the F.Y 2014-15, M/s Kay Power and Paper Ltd has made such

MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

bogus\ncompanies?\nAns: The accommodation entries by way of unsecured loans were taken to\npurchase properties. I did not have the amounts in the bank accounts but\nhad the cash. Therefore to purchase the properties, I had to do this\nexercise.\n6\nITA No.1178/PUN/2023\nITA No.2017/PUN/2024\nThe return of income for AY 2011-12 filed on 29/09/2011 by the assessee

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA vs. KAY BOUVET ENGINEERING LIMITED, SATARA

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

148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2022. The assessee in response to the same filed its return on 27.04.2022 declaring total income of Rs.48,59,880/- after adjusting year-wise losses of Rs.1,94,50,981/-. 5. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had shown total sales of Rs.224

M/S. GERA DEVELOPMENTS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee in assessment year 2010-11 is allowed and appeal of assessee in assessment year 2011-12 is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1807/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Gera Developments Pvt. Ltd., 200, Gera Plaza, Boat Club Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aaacg6703F Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1(2), Pune

2) of the Act and 148 of the Act and all that assessee was agitating, could be submitted by filing reply to said notices, the assessee was unjustified in invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction at notice stage itself but the proposition which has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is course of action to be taken after notice

M/S. GERA DEVELOPMENTS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee in assessment year 2010-11 is allowed and appeal of assessee in assessment year 2011-12 is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1807/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Gera Developments Pvt. Ltd., 200, Gera Plaza, Boat Club Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aaacg6703F Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1(2), Pune

2) of the Act and 148 of the Act and all that assessee was agitating, could be submitted by filing reply to said notices, the assessee was unjustified in invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction at notice stage itself but the proposition which has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is course of action to be taken after notice

CHETAS CONTROL SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

148 was issued to the assessee on 28/3/2013 and was served on it. The AO has recorded reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment before issue of notice u/s.148 of the Act. 4. Considering the quantum of bogus purchases and circumstances of the case, survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises of assessee

CHETAS CONTROL SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

148 was issued to the assessee on 28/3/2013 and was served on it. The AO has recorded reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment before issue of notice u/s.148 of the Act. 4. Considering the quantum of bogus purchases and circumstances of the case, survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises of assessee

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANVEL CIRCLE PANVEL vs. OUTABOX MEDIA SOLUTIONS LLP, GHATKOPAR MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

148 for the making of the return or by the notice under the first proviso to section 115WF or under the first proviso to section 144 to show cause why the assessment should not be completed to the best of the judgment of the Assessing Officer, whichever is earlier; (c) where an action has been taken under section

ANITA SANJAY AGRAWAL,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

SHRAWAN KESHAVLAL AGRAWAL HUF,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

TRIMURTI FURNANCE PRIVATE LIMITED,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ,, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

TRIMURTI FURNANCE PRIVATE LIMITED,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ,, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

SANJAY SHRAWAN AGRAWAL HUF,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

ANITA SANJAY AGRAWAL,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

TRIMURTI FURNANCE PRIVATE LIMITED,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ,, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

SANJAY SHRAWAN AGRAWAL HUF,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

ANITA SANJAY AGRAWAL,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148

SHRAWAN KESHAVLAL AGRAWAL HUF,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER ,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2622 To 2624/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the order passed by the AO u/s. 147 of the Act as the AO has not summarily rejected the objections raised against reasons recorded for the notice issued u/s. 148