DEPUTU COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

127, 218 Taxman 45 are not applicable to the case of the appellant. Section 43 (5) ―43 In sections 28 to 41 and in this section unless context otherwise requires- (1)……. (5) ―speculation transaction‖ means transaction in which a contract for the purchase or sale of any commodity, including stocks and shares, is periodically or ultimately settled otherwise than

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

127, 218 Taxman 45 are not applicable to the case of the appellant. Section 43 (5) ―43 In sections 28 to 41 and in this section unless context otherwise requires- (1)……. (5) ―speculation transaction‖ means transaction in which a contract for the purchase or sale of any commodity, including stocks and shares, is periodically or ultimately settled otherwise than

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 (Page No. 371-373 of paperbook 2) Further, we wish to submit that an approval was granted to the Company by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce & Development (SEZ Section) for development, operation and maintenance of the sector specific SEZ for IT at Hinjawadi, Pune, Maharashtra vide No. F.2/274/2006-EPZ dated August

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI RANJIT HANMANTRAO MOHITE,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

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

capital gain. Similar view has also been held by the Pune ITAT in the decisions in the case of ITO Vs. Baguio Investment (p) Ltd. 127 TTJ 423 (Pune) and Shant Builders Vs. JCIT, 88 TTJ 519 (Pune). Thus, character of the asset is governed by the motive behind the transaction and in the instant case the facts brought

M/S GIRIRAJ ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

capital loss despite transaction is not falling under section 94 (7) of the act holding it to be sham and fictitious transaction is devoid of any merit. Accordingly on the merits also, orders of the lower authorities are reversed and ground number 4 – 7 of the appeal are allowed.” 20. We find Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal in the case

M/S BALAJI DEVELOPERS ,DHULE vs. ITO, WARD 1, DHULE, DHULE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.375/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17

gain has arisen not out of transfer of capital asset. It is out of transfer of stock in trade. Here the assessee firm has come in to existence with the motive of trading of plots This is the business of the assessee. The profit earned is also taxed as business income. Hence, exemption claimed on profit arisen on account transfer

MANOJ JAIKUMAR TIBREWALA,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1,, NASHIK

Accordingly. We make it clear that the assessee shall be at liberty to file all the relevant details in consequential proceedings. This last appeal ITA No. 609/Pun/2019 is allowed for statistical p...

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteit(Ss)A Nos. 06 & 07/Pun/2017 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Shri Manoj Jaikumar Tibrewala Acit, Central Circle-1 Vastu Shilp, Ground Floor Kendriya Rajaswa Bhavan Godavari Housing Society Vs. Gadkari Chowk Boys Town School Road Old Agra Road, Nashik Nashik 422005 Pan – Aakpt7009G Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Pamod S. Shingte Respondent By: Shri S.P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing: 25.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.05.2022

127/-. Whereas, deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) is adopted at Rs.1,19,27,086/-. 4.4 Admittedly, the advance paid was paid against the entitlement of appellant to the sale price under Development Agreement for development of land belonging to appellant & was received in the normal course of appellant‟s business and in subsequent year it is in fact adjusted

NATHA PANDIT RAUT,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19 Natha Pandit Raut Dcit, Circle 2, Pune Office No.101, Global Port Pashankar Auto Complex, Off Mumbai Vs. Bangalore Highway, Baner, Pune - 411045 Pan: Aatpr6854L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 6 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020, after all the taxes are paid and withdrawn the appeal. (Necessary documents are attached - Annexure 15 & 16) 8) AY 2016-17 - Normal assessment completed and all taxes paid (Annexure 17) 9) AY 2017-18-Normal assessment completed and all taxes paid (Annexure 18) 10) AY 2018-19- Details attached

M.M. PATEL PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,SOLAPUR vs. PCIT- CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

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

127 of the ITA, 1961.\n3. The Learned PCIT-Central Circle, Pune erred in law and on facts in\ncancelling registration u/s 12A/12AA for the period from 1/4/2019 to\n31/3/2021 without any cogent reasons.\n4. The registration u/s 12A r.w.s.12AB for the period from 1/4/2021\nonwards is cancelled without issuing show cause notice for the same\nand without any cogent

SMT. MEENA DILIP KOTECHA vs. C.I.T.-(CENTRAL), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

capital gain from investment in shares, Rs.2,01,925/- under the head ‘income from other sources’ after claiming deduction of Rs.1,28,542/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Nashik (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 28.03.2014 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A

SMT. JYOTI ASHOK KOTECHA vs. C.I.T.-(CENTRAL), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

capital gain from investment in shares, Rs.2,01,925/- under the head ‘income from other sources’ after claiming deduction of Rs.1,28,542/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Nashik (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 28.03.2014 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A

DELLIP V. KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.203/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dellip V. Kotecha, Vs. Acit, Central Circle- 1, 1, Pradhan Apartment, Nashik. Pratap Nagar, Jalgaon- 425001. Pan : Abcpk8441J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue By : Shri J. P. Chadraker Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Pune [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 22.12.2015 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “[A] Grounds Of Appeal: 1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned A.O. Erred In Assessing The Total Income Amounting To Rs.

capital gains in respect of sale of shares of M/s S.V. Electricals. As regards Rs.1,38,38,000/-, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the said addition by holding that the seized papers/documents revealed the transaction of advance of money and, therefore, upheld the addition. 5. Being aggrieved by the above decision of the ld. CIT(A), the appellant

SUVARNA KIRAN CHAVAN,NASHIK vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, NASHIK

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1785/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

127 CTR 671 (Guj), the Assessing Officer held that the immovable property sold by the assessee is not an agricultural land and addition under the head ‘Income from Capital gain’ is warranted. Eventually, the AO made addition of Rs.50,95,685/- on account of income from capital gain. 6. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who vide

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. PIMPRI CHINCHWAD NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

capital gains or other sources and it is provided that the word ‘income’ should be understood in its commercial sense. 31. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) while deciding the case of assessee which dealt in land and property and carried land developing business, held that wherein certain plots were sold and wholesale price

PIMPRI CHINCHWAD NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

capital gains or other sources and it is provided that the word ‘income’ should be understood in its commercial sense. 31. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) while deciding the case of assessee which dealt in land and property and carried land developing business, held that wherein certain plots were sold and wholesale price

PIMPRI CHINCHWAD NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

capital gains or other sources and it is provided that the word ‘income’ should be understood in its commercial sense. 31. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) while deciding the case of assessee which dealt in land and property and carried land developing business, held that wherein certain plots were sold and wholesale price

PIMPRI CHINCHWAD NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

capital gains or other sources and it is provided that the word ‘income’ should be understood in its commercial sense. 31. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) while deciding the case of assessee which dealt in land and property and carried land developing business, held that wherein certain plots were sold and wholesale price

PIMPRI CHINCHWAD NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

capital gains or other sources and it is provided that the word ‘income’ should be understood in its commercial sense. 31. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Calcutta Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) while deciding the case of assessee which dealt in land and property and carried land developing business, held that wherein certain plots were sold and wholesale price