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

133A was carried out by the department and subsequent actions\nrevealed that the shares of the company were manipulated to generate bogus long\nterm capital gain / short term capital gain for various beneficiaries. Referring to\nthe statements of Shri. P Amresh Kumar, MD of PFLIL, Shri Abhinandan Jain,\nDirector of PFLIL and Shri. Naresh Jain he submitted that

DINESHKUMAR RAMCHANDRA TULSYAN (HUF),,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dineshkumar Ramchandra Tulsyan (Huf) Ito, Ward 1(5), 214B, Laxmi Niwas, Mahatma Nagar, Vs. Nashik Nashik – 422007 Pan: Aachd5953R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Sumandevi Dineshkumar Tulsyan Ito, Ward 1(5), 214B, Laxmi Niwas, Mahatma Nagar, Vs. Nashik Nashik – 422007 Pan: Ackpt1322Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

capital gain as taxable and the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik has erred in confirming the same. 3. The learned Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Nashik, has erred in making addition of Rs.1,00,97,902/- under section 68 of the Act and the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik, has erred in confirming

SMT. SUMANDEVI DINESHKUMAR TULSYAN,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, NASHIK

capital gain as taxable\nand the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik has\nerred in confirming the same.\n3.\nThe learned Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(5), Nashik, has erred in making\naddition of Rs.1,00,97,902/- under section 68 of the Act and the learned\nCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik, has erred in confirming

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

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

133A was carried out by the department and subsequent actions revealed that the shares of the company were manipulated to generate bogus long CO Nos.2 to 5/PUN/2025 term capital gain / short term capital gain for various beneficiaries. Referring to the staternents of Shri. P Amresh Kumar, MD of PFLIL, Shri Abhinandan Jain, Director of PFLIL and Shri. Naresh Jain

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

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

133A was carried out by the department and subsequent actions revealed that the shares of the company were manipulated to generate bogus long CO Nos.2 to 5/PUN/2025 term capital gain / short term capital gain for various beneficiaries. Referring to the staternents of Shri. P Amresh Kumar, MD of PFLIL, Shri Abhinandan Jain, Director of PFLIL and Shri. Naresh Jain

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

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

133A was carried out by the department and subsequent actions revealed that the shares of the company were manipulated to generate bogus long CO Nos.2 to 5/PUN/2025 term capital gain / short term capital gain for various beneficiaries. Referring to the staternents of Shri. P Amresh Kumar, MD of PFLIL, Shri Abhinandan Jain, Director of PFLIL and Shri. Naresh Jain

ITO, NASHIK vs. ANKIT NARESH TULSIAN, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

capital gains (LTCG)\nfrom the sale of 200,000 shares of MISHKAFIN as unexplained\nmoney under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and\ntaxing it under section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in\nlaw, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the findings

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

133A of the Act was conducted on six premises of the assessee on 13/02/2019. Summons was issued to various donors, President and accountant of the assessee. Many statements were recorded. Thereafter, Re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 were initiated against the appellant from AY 2012-13 to AY 2017-18. 4. The learned AO, while concluding the 147 assessments, held that

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

133A of the Act was conducted on six premises of the assessee on 13/02/2019. Summons was issued to various donors, President and accountant of the assessee. Many statements were recorded. Thereafter, Re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 were initiated against the appellant from AY 2012-13 to AY 2017-18. 4. The learned AO, while concluding the 147 assessments, held that

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

133A of the Act was conducted on six premises of the assessee on 13/02/2019. Summons was issued to various donors, President and accountant of the assessee. Many statements were recorded. Thereafter, Re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 were initiated against the appellant from AY 2012-13 to AY 2017-18. 4. The learned AO, while concluding the 147 assessments, held that

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

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

133A of the Act was conducted on six premises of the\nassessee on 13/02/2019. Summons was issued to various donors,\nPresident and accountant of the assessee. Many statements were\nrecorded. Thereafter, Re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 were\ninitiated against the appellant from AY 2012-13 to AY 2017-18.\n4. The learned AO, while concluding the 147 assessments, held that

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

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

133A of the Act was conducted on six premises of the\nassessee on 13/02/2019. Summons was issued to various donors,\nPresident and accountant of the assessee. Many statements were\nrecorded. Thereafter, Re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 were\ninitiated against the appellant from AY 2012-13 to AY 2017-18.\n4. The learned AO, while concluding the 147 assessments, held that

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

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

133A of the Act was conducted on six premises of the\nassessee on 13/02/2019. Summons was issued to various donors,\nPresident and accountant of the assessee. Many statements were\nrecorded. Thereafter, Re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 were\ninitiated against the appellant from AY 2012-13 to AY 2017-18.\n4. The learned AO, while concluding the 147 assessments, held that

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

133A of the IT Act, 1961 in the case of M/s. JM Financial Asset Management Limited (JM Financial). In the course of survey, it was found that JM 7 IT(SS)A Nos.23 to 25/PUN/2024 Balanced Fund- Dividend Option Regular scheme (the "Scheme") of JM Financial had manipulated accounting methodology so as to artificially inflate the distributable surplus

RAMCHANDRAUDAYSINGHJADHAVRAO,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, PUNE

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

Section 45(2) of the Income Tax Act. Further,\nfor A.Y.2016-17, the proportionate capital gain in respect of\nbuildings C1, C2 and C3 (partial) comes at Rs.10.74 crores\n(working as per annexure-A) for A.Y. 2016-17, which I hereby offer\nas my income from LTCG for A.Y.2016-17 and will pay the due taxes\nwhile filing return by 17th

DCIT-CIRCLE 7 PUNE, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK PUNE vs. TRIO CHEMSUCROTECH ENG. PROJECTS PVT. LTD, PUNE

gains of business or profession\"\n2. 20. The following conditions should concur in order that a particular item of expenditure may be deductible under this section:\n• The expenditure should have been incurred in the accounting year\n• It should not be in the nature of personal nature\n• It should have been laid out or expended wholly and exclusively

LALCHAND NARAYAN BHAKT,JALNA vs. ITO WARD 2, JALNA

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

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2011-12

133A of the Act on 13.03.2015 in the case of Shri Santosh Karwa. According to the Assessing Officer the assessee has virtually handed over the property to Shri Santosh Karwa vide 11 Essar Pavti dated 18.02.2011 and received the amount of Rs.2 crore. He, therefore, invoking the provisions of section 2(47)(v) of the Act held that the consideration

DCIT CIRCLE 1 NASHIK, NASHIK vs. SHREE SAI PROPERTIES, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

133A of the Act. Shri Fakhruddin Kokani in his statement in respect of transaction recorded on page no. 13 and page no. 17 of item no. 7 of annexure-A has stated that a sum of Rs. 8,58,19,700/- was received by cheque by him and his family members in lieu of land at Savargaon and remaining amount