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

capital gain,\ndetails of trade order, trade name, security quantity etc were produced before the\nAssessing Officer as well as before him.\n\n28. So far as the written submissions filed by the Ld. DR are concerned, the Ld.\nCounsel for the assessee filed the following written submissions rebutting the\ncontention of the Ld. DR:\n\nSr. No.\n1\nPara

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

capital gain and the reason for reopening was recorded on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai and the notice for reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act was issued income. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(A) read as under: “6.3 I have considered the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant is placing reliance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

capital gain and the reason for reopening was recorded on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai and the notice for reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act was issued income. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(A) read as under: “6.3 I have considered the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant is placing reliance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

capital gain and the reason for reopening was recorded on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai and the notice for reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act was issued income. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(A) read as under: “6.3 I have considered the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant is placing reliance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

capital gain and the reason for reopening was recorded on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai and the notice for reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act was issued income. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(A) read as under: “6.3 I have considered the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant is placing reliance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ASHISH OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

capital gain and the reason for reopening was recorded on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai and the notice for reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act was issued income. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(A) read as under: “6.3 I have considered the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant is placing reliance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

capital gain and the reason for reopening was recorded on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai and the notice for reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act was issued income. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(A) read as under: “6.3 I have considered the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant is placing reliance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

capital gain and the reason for reopening was recorded on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.), Mumbai and the notice for reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act was issued income. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(A) read as under: “6.3 I have considered the submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant is placing reliance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ASHISH OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

capital gain and the reason for\nreopening was recorded on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.),\nMumbai and the notice for reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act was issued\nfor the same transaction which was already shown by the assessee in his return of\nincome. The relevant observations of the Ld. CIT(A) read as under

CHANDRASHEKHAR BAGADE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 5(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14 Chandrashekhar Bagade Ito, Ward 5(1), Pune F 5, Windmill Village, Vs. Opp Ambrosiya, Paud Road, Pune – 411021 Pan: Amxpb8229M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sharad A Vaze Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R

capital gains. However, it set aside the issue of exemption u/s 54F to CIT(A) for re-adjudication. The Ld CIT(A) allowed the appeal vide his order dt 08/07/2019. 5. AO had, in the meanwhile, levied penalty

QUBIX BUSINESS PARK PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, Ground No.2 of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

capital gains earned during the subject year 8. Erroneous levy of interest under section 234A of the Act The NFAC / Ld.AO erred in levying interest under section 234A of the Act, despite the Appellant filing its return of income within the prescribed due date. 9. Erroneous levy of interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act The NFAC / Ld.AO

NINAD ARUN DIWAKAR,NASHIK vs. ITO, ACIT CIRCLE 1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1318/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2022-23 Ninad Arun Diwakar, V The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.F-98, Midc, S Acti Circle-1, Nashik. Satpur Nashik – 422007. Pan: Ahepd7516M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ca Sarang Gudhate Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date Of Hearing 15/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 24.03.2025 For The A.Y.2022-23 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 05.03.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Capital Gain deposit scheme on account of non-confirmation from the State Bank of India in response to notice issued under Section 133(6) of the Income tax Act. 1961 ("the Act") and presuming arbitrarily Certificate issued by State Bank of India as Self-made without any contrary evidences on record iii) That Appellant had very much discharged his duty

BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-8(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

Capital Gains', which had been suo-moto reclassified the head of income and also offered to tax by the Appellant, 2.3. Disregarding the accepted legal position that penalty

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

penalty per se is applicable for income added u/s.115BBC of the Act. We also observe that section 68 converts any credit entry not shown as income in the books of account, into income. For example unsecured loan, share capital, other capital receipts, share premium, sundry creditors etc. whereas in case of section 115BBC of the Act the donations are already

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

penalty per se is applicable for income added u/s.115BBC of the Act. We also observe that section 68 converts any credit entry not shown as income in the books of account, into income. For example unsecured loan, share capital, other capital receipts, share premium, sundry creditors etc. whereas in case of section 115BBC of the Act the donations are already

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

penalty per se is applicable for income added u/s.115BBC of the Act. We also observe that section 68 converts any credit entry not shown as income in the books of account, into income. For example unsecured loan, share capital, other capital receipts, share premium, sundry creditors etc. whereas in case of section 115BBC of the Act the donations are already

MR. GAURAV RAJENDRA MALU,JAYSINGPUR vs. PCIT, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1206/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

capital gain. He therefore issued notice u/s.148 of the Act and carried out the re-assessment proceedings. Therefore, the first ground raised by the assessee that the re-assessment proceedings are invalid and bad in law and could not have been a subject matter of revision u/s.263 of the Act has no merit and the same is hereby dismissed

PUNKAAJ KAALAY,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX ACT, CPC, CPC

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

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

Capital Gain (STCG) of Rs.1,59,77,75/- and (ii) unexplained investment of Rs.3,05,00,000/-. Simultaneously, he initiated the penalty