GORUR INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW PANVEL vs. DY. CIT, PANVEL CIRCLE, PANVEL

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

96,335/-, respectively. Against which, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) wherein the CIT(A) partially confirmed the order of AO in respect of bogus purchases and gave relief u/s. 80IA(4) of the Act by holding that the assessee is entitled to claim exemption u/s. 80IA of the Act. The ld. AR submits that the appeal

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)

bogus purchases of Rs.36,56,250/- and suppression of gross profit. Further, reason to believe is based on escapement of income to tune of Rs.36,56,250/-. Thus Ld. AO had formed her own independent opinion with respect to reason to believe in escapement of income as required by Section 148 of the I T Act 1961. With respect

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

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

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

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

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

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

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

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/-. 6. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A). During the course of appellate proceedings, assessee along with making

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

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1302/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 1(1), Pune …. Vs. Chetas Control Systems Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.1, S.No.8+9, Chetas House, Shree Sidhatek Hsg. Society, Sutarwadi, Pashan, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pune – 411021 Pan: Aaacc7437N अऩीऱाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Gawli प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : None घोषणा की तारीख / सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2018

96,070/- as against the additional income offered during the survey and admitted by filing revised return of income. 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeal) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case in holding that the claim as revenue expenditure was on oversight and not a conscious decision. 4. The only issue raised

DATTATRAY HANMANTRAO DESAI,KARAD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

bogus purchases over and above rate of gross profit of 4.63 per cent declared by assessee and passed assessment order, since assessee had produced all necessary details of purchase, sales, audited books of account, quantity details and there was no discrepancy between purchase and sales declined, Assessing Officer had taken one possible view out of two assumption and thus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. RDS CONSTRUCTION CO.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.135/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle-2, Kolhapur …. Vs. M/S. Rds Construction Co., 233/3, Malati Towers, Tarabai Park, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Kolhapur Pan: Aabfr4457M

96,605/- after claiming the deduction under section 80IA(4)(iv)(a) of the Act at ₹ 43,56,397/-. The assessee thereafter filed revised return of income declaring total income of ₹ 12,83,90,386/- after claiming deduction under Chapter VI i.e. under section 80IA of the Act at ₹ 60,41,778/-. Search operation in the group case was carried

ITO, CENTRAL,, AURANGABAD vs. YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being

ITO, CENTRAL,, AURANGABAD vs. YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being

YOG INDUSTRIES LTD,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being

ITO, CENTRAL,, AURANGABAD vs. YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being

YOG INDUSTRIES LTD,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being

ITO, CENTRAL,, AURANGABAD vs. YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being

YOG INDUSTRIES LTD,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being

ITO, CENTRAL,, AURANGABAD vs. YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being

ITO, CENTRAL,, AURANGABAD vs. YOG INDUSTRIES LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue as well as assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

bogus bills for purchase of material such as sand, murum, rubble and metal from M/s. Marathe Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer after taking into statements of sub-contractors and documents on record came to the conclusion that 4.5% of the total contract receipts should be disallowed for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 being