HREYANSH VASUNDHARA FAMILY TRUST,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 2(290) denotes two separate levies and hence MMR does not automatically include higher rate of surcharge. 5. In not appreciating that the total income of the appellant of Rs.18,86,13,290/- includes income of Rs.18,52,68,427/-on which maximum surcharge is 15 per cent (viz. short-term capital gains u/s 111A

POONAWALLA SHARES & SECURITIES PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.380/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income 16-B,/1, Sarosh Bhavan, Tax, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Circle-4, Pune. Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacp 6087 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune’S Order Dated 11.12.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-3/Cir 4/193/2018-19/428, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

gains arising out of securities sold on the stock exchange. It is also proposed to insert a new section 111A and amend section 115AD of the Income-tax Act, so as to provide that short-term capital

RAMESH G PORWAL,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

capital gains for taking advantage of the lower rate of taxation of 10% as introduced by section 111A for transactions

HREYANSH VASUNDHARA FAMILY TRUST,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 154 of\nthe Act, dated 07.08.2023 wherein partial relief is granted and surcharge is\nlevied at the rate of 15% on income of Rs.4,77,46,882/- on which\nmaximum surcharge is 15 per cent (viz. short-term capital gains u/s 111A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. FINOLEX INDUSTRIES LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

Section 153A, which treats the return filed or relied upon by the assessee as a fresh return and in consequence the Assessing Officer was well within his rights to assume jurisdiction over the said filed or relied upon return u/s.143(2) of the Income Tax Act,1961 notwithstanding the fact that an order u/s. 143(3) had been passed

ANU AGA FAMILY DISCRETIONARY TRUST,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1259/Pun/2024 & 2217/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2022-23 & 2023-24 Anu Aga Family Discretionary V The Income Tax Officer, Trust, S Ward-7(1), Pune. 501, Marvel Alina, Lane No.5, Koregaon Park, Pune - 411001. Pan: Aafta4748N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Ch Naniwadekar – Ar Revenue By Shri P R Mane & Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr(S) Date Of Hearing 23/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Add./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Gurugram Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 17.05.2024 For A.Y.2022-23 & 26.08.2024 For A.Y.2023-24 Respectively. For The

section 2(29C). 4. In not appreciating that the total income of the appellant of Rs.16,20,15,480/- includes income of Rs.15,79,10,947/- on which maximum surcharge is 15 per cent (viz. short term capital gains u/s 111A

ANU AGA FAMILY DISCRETIONEARY TRUST,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1259/Pun/2024 & 2217/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2022-23 & 2023-24 Anu Aga Family Discretionary V The Income Tax Officer, Trust, S Ward-7(1), Pune. 501, Marvel Alina, Lane No.5, Koregaon Park, Pune - 411001. Pan: Aafta4748N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Ch Naniwadekar – Ar Revenue By Shri P R Mane & Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr(S) Date Of Hearing 23/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Add./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Gurugram Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 17.05.2024 For A.Y.2022-23 & 26.08.2024 For A.Y.2023-24 Respectively. For The

section 2(29C). 4. In not appreciating that the total income of the appellant of Rs.16,20,15,480/- includes income of Rs.15,79,10,947/- on which maximum surcharge is 15 per cent (viz. short term capital gains u/s 111A

ADPR & ASSOCIATES,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

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

section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) has levied surcharge at the maximum rate of 37% on the entire amount of tax. On appeal, Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) upheld the intimation order of the Ld. AO/CPC for the reasons recorded in para 7.1 of his appellate order. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us against

ADPR & ASSOCIATES,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1) , NAHSIK

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

section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) has levied surcharge at the maximum rate of 37% on the entire amount of tax. On appeal, Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) upheld the intimation order of the Ld. AO/CPC for the reasons recorded in para 7.1 of his appellate order. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us against

EMPIRE DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 3(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.730/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Empire Developers & V The Income Tax Officer, Builders, S Ward-3(1),Pune. Krishna Dham, 117+121/4B, Lane No.12, Prabhat Road, Pune – 411004. Maharashtra. Pan: Aabfe4291N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms.Vaishnavi Badwe – Ar Revenue By Shri Ratnakar Shelake – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 01/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/05/2025 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] For A.Y.2011-12 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act On 23/01/2025 Emanating From The Order U/S.154 Dated 07/01/2019 Of The Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld. Ao Erred In Law & In Facts In Determining The Income Of The Appellant At Rs.35,01,876/-Instead Of Nil As Per The Return Of

section 111a(2)/112(2), if the balance current year income available is only income from capital gains then, in such