DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

Bogus purchases’. 8. in confirming disallowance of rent paid of Rs.31,44,000/- for bungalow located at 70, Koregaon Park, Pune taken on lease (belonging to M/s. Poonawalla Finvest & Agro Pvt. Ltd., ZSP Group Company) for office of Director of appellant company and depreciation of Rs.12,97,701/- on the assets placed there at 9. a. not considering the ‘cost

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

Bogus purchases’. 8. in confirming disallowance of rent paid of Rs.31,44,000/- for bungalow located at 70, Koregaon Park, Pune taken on lease (belonging to M/s. Poonawalla Finvest & Agro Pvt. Ltd., ZSP Group Company) for office of Director of appellant company and depreciation of Rs.12,97,701/- on the assets placed there at 9. a. not considering the ‘cost

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

Bogus purchases’. 8. in confirming disallowance of rent paid of Rs.31,44,000/- for bungalow located at 70, Koregaon Park, Pune taken on lease (belonging to M/s. Poonawalla Finvest & Agro Pvt. Ltd., ZSP Group Company) for office of Director of appellant company and depreciation of Rs.12,97,701/- on the assets placed there at 9. a. not considering the ‘cost

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPNY LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2896/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

14A of the Act except to the extent of Rs.2,43,836/-, which has been suo-motu disallowed by the assessee in the computation of income. The ground of appeal No.2 raised by the assessee is thus, allowed.” Considering the above and following the principle of consistency, we are of the opinion that the grounds raised by the Revenue have

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SOMNATH VAIJANATH SAKRE,, AURANGABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2896/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

14A of the Act except to the extent of Rs.2,43,836/-, which has been suo-motu disallowed by the assessee in the computation of income. The ground of appeal No.2 raised by the assessee is thus, allowed.” Considering the above and following the principle of consistency, we are of the opinion that the grounds raised by the Revenue have

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,, PUNE

14A is held to be applicable, the disallowance in relation to non-taxable profits on sale! Redemption of investments and exempt dividend income should be restricted to Rs 11,56,172 as determined by the Assessee based on 'Net Income Method'. The Respondent craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of cross

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

14A is held to be applicable, the disallowance in relation to non-taxable profits on sale! Redemption of investments and exempt dividend income should be restricted to Rs 11,56,172 as determined by the Assessee based on 'Net Income Method'. The Respondent craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of cross

TULSI EXTRUSIONS LTD.,,JALGAON vs. JOINT COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1434/Pun/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Tulsi Extrusions Ltd. N-99 & 100, Midc Area, Ajantha Road, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon, Pin-425 003 Pan : Aaact8441P .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Jalgaon. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

section 14A, there has to be a proximate cause for disallowance which is its relationship with the tax exempted income. In absence of proximate cause for disallowance u/s.14A cannot be invoked. Further, We observe, the Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Corrtech Energy P. Ltd. reported in (2015) 372 ITR 97 ( Guj.) has categorically held

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. The stated judgement in the case of Cheminvest Limited (supra) is relevant. 25. Therefore, after hearing both the sides and considering the above written submission of the assessee on this issue, we are of the opinion that the grounds are required to be allowed in favour of the assessee

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. The stated judgement in the case of Cheminvest Limited (supra) is relevant. 25. Therefore, after hearing both the sides and considering the above written submission of the assessee on this issue, we are of the opinion that the grounds are required to be allowed in favour of the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. The stated judgement in the case of Cheminvest Limited (supra) is relevant. 25. Therefore, after hearing both the sides and considering the above written submission of the assessee on this issue, we are of the opinion that the grounds are required to be allowed in favour of the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. The stated judgement in the case of Cheminvest Limited (supra) is relevant. 25. Therefore, after hearing both the sides and considering the above written submission of the assessee on this issue, we are of the opinion that the grounds are required to be allowed in favour of the assessee

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. The stated judgement in the case of Cheminvest Limited (supra) is relevant. 25. Therefore, after hearing both the sides and considering the above written submission of the assessee on this issue, we are of the opinion that the grounds are required to be allowed in favour of the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. The stated judgement in the case of Cheminvest Limited (supra) is relevant. 25. Therefore, after hearing both the sides and considering the above written submission of the assessee on this issue, we are of the opinion that the grounds are required to be allowed in favour of the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, KOLHAPUR vs. VIJAYKUMAR RAJARAM SHAH,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. The stated judgement in the case of Cheminvest Limited (supra) is relevant. 25. Therefore, after hearing both the sides and considering the above written submission of the assessee on this issue, we are of the opinion that the grounds are required to be allowed in favour of the assessee

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. M/S. NATH BIO-GENERS (I) LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 642/Pun/2015 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

bogus. These extracts are in public domain and are borne out of Govt. records. At the relevant point of time and as per the said documents, the said lands were in use for agricultural activities. The land rents paid by the assessee to the respective landlords-cum-growers is undisputed. Of course, the 7/12 extracts do not bear the name

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, AURANGABAD vs. M/S. NATH BIO-GENES (I) PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 642/Pun/2015 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

bogus. These extracts are in public domain and are borne out of Govt. records. At the relevant point of time and as per the said documents, the said lands were in use for agricultural activities. The land rents paid by the assessee to the respective landlords-cum-growers is undisputed. Of course, the 7/12 extracts do not bear the name

VIPUL NIRANJAN SHAH,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2, PUNE

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1453/Pun/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mr.Vipul Niranjan Shah, The Deputy Commissioner Of 39, Mantri Court, Wellesley Road, Vs Income Tax, Circle-2,Pune. Sangam, Pune – 411001. Pan: Achps 9906 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sagar S.Tilak– Ar Revenue By Shri S.P.Walimbe- Dr Date Of Hearing 17/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/03/2022

section 14A of the Act and the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals), Pune-5, Pune has erred in confirming the same. 6. The Assessee requests for affording any other relief as Hon. Tribunal considers appropriate. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that

M/S. SAVA HEALTHCARE LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

bogus; when no authority to such effect existed with the learned TPO. The learned DRP erred in not deleting the entire addition proposed by the learned TPO on the above analogy as such and further erred in not proceeding with the matter instead of leaving the matter at that point, considering the scope of powers u/s 144C