ACIT CIR-II AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. SHRI BAJAJ JUGALKISHOR GIRDHARILAL,, BEED

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

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

Capital Gains arising on the sale of land. The claim of the assessees was rightly disallowed by the Assessing Officer as the assessee failed to qualify the condition i.e. the land should have been used 5 ITA Nos. 171, 172 & 173/PUN/2012, A.Y. 2008-09 by the assessee or his parents for agricultural purpose in immediately two preceding years from

ACIT CIR-II AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. SHRI BAJAJ SATYANARAYAN GIRDHARILAL,, BEED

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

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

Capital Gains arising on the sale of land. The claim of the assessees was rightly disallowed by the Assessing Officer as the assessee failed to qualify the condition i.e. the land should have been used 5 ITA Nos. 171, 172 & 173/PUN/2012, A.Y. 2008-09 by the assessee or his parents for agricultural purpose in immediately two preceding years from

ACIT CIR-II AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. SHRI BAJAJ MURLIDHAR GIRDHARILAL, BEED

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

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

Capital Gains arising on the sale of land. The claim of the assessees was rightly disallowed by the Assessing Officer as the assessee failed to qualify the condition i.e. the land should have been used 5 ITA Nos. 171, 172 & 173/PUN/2012, A.Y. 2008-09 by the assessee or his parents for agricultural purpose in immediately two preceding years from

DINAR UMESHKUMAR MORE,MALEGAON vs. ITO WARD 1, MALEGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

167 in respect of addition of Rs.50,21,520 made in the asst. order w/s 143(3) r.w.s.254 towards long term capital gains on transfer of immovable property on the ground that the appellant had concealed the particulars of his income without appreciating that the levy of penalty was not justified on facts and in law. 2 Dinar Umeshkumar More

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

167 ITR 471 (SC) to condone the impugned delay. This main appeal is taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. We now advert to the assessee’s pleadings of all these years to note that its former twin appeals IT(SS)A 06 & 07/Pun/2017 raise an identical issue of 2 IT(SS)A Nos. 06 & 07/Pun/2017 ITA No. 609/Pun/09 Shri

DIMPLE RAJESH OSWAL,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2016-17

167/- (Rs.43,150/- per sq. mt. *66.91sq. mt.) We have attached herewith the rates of ready reckoner applicable to the property under consideration. (Annexure 4) Also, index II of the property is attached for considering the area. (Annexure 5) 5. We have computed capital gain considering the actual purchase value and sale value as per the registered deeds. Hence

SHAILA BALWANT DAMBE,,CHIPLUN vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, RATNAGIRI

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Dipak P. Ripote

section 50C(1) first and second proviso inserted in the Act by the Finance Act, 2016 w.e.f. 01-04-2017 stipulating that a payment or part thereof could very well be taken as the fair market value of the capital asset, in case it is made by the specified banking channels, when the date of agreement and transferred

SUDARSHAN ZUMBARLAL BAFNA,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1272/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sudarshan Zumbarlal Bafna, Bafna Path, Shrirampur, Dist. Ahmednagar, Pin-413709. Pan : Aavpb3556D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

gain along with Xerox copies of all sale and purchase deed before the Assessing Officer. That even the copy of the relevant purchase deed was also enclosed and already been filed before the Department. 5. The Ld. AR vehemently argued that the issue raised in the show cause notice u/s.263 of the Act were all enquired into specifically

JAGU DNYANU DEOKATE,VELAUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD -2, PANDHARPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17

capital gain’. The sources of purchase of agricultural land were out of the sources of sale of his agricultural land and out of agricultural income only. It was further submitted that the only source of income was agriculture and that the assessee had no other source of income which is taxable under the Act. The assessee had even submitted

CHANDRAKANT VITHTHAL BHOPI,RAIGAD vs. ITO WARD 1 , PANVEL

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 Chandrakant Viththal Bhopi Ito, Ward-1, Panvel At Chinchpada, Post Panvel, Tal. Vs. Panvel, Dist. Raigad – 410206 Pan: Bjdpb7610L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Ajinkya M Vaishampayan Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 05-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-05-2025 O R D E R

capital gains from compensation or enhanced compensation from land acquisition, but not on interest on such compensation. In the present instance, the amount represents interest on enhanced compensation, but the compensation or enhanced compensation itself. Thirdly, reference is made to Section 57 (iv) rws 56(2)(viii). Section 57(iv) gives benefit of 50% deduction on amounts mentioned

RAJA BASHUMIYA MANIYAR,LATUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, LATUR, LATUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Allowed

gain account before 31.07.2010 i.e.Due Date for filing\nReturn of Income. Thus, in the assessment order, Assessing Officer\nhas accepted that Assessee has purchased a new asset within the\ntime specified under section 54F of the Act.\n8.1 The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Narayan\nRavi Prakash vs ITO [2024] 167 taxmann.com 192 (Karnataka) held

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

gain. 11.3 Ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily on the orders of the AO/CIT(A). 11.4 On hearing both the sides and on perusing the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2009-10, we find the issue of allowing the demat charges, stands decided in favour of the assessee. Therefore, following

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

gain. 11.3 Ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily on the orders of the AO/CIT(A). 11.4 On hearing both the sides and on perusing the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2009-10, we find the issue of allowing the demat charges, stands decided in favour of the assessee. Therefore, following

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

gain. 11.3 Ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily on the orders of the AO/CIT(A). 11.4 On hearing both the sides and on perusing the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2009-10, we find the issue of allowing the demat charges, stands decided in favour of the assessee. Therefore, following

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

gain. 11.3 Ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily on the orders of the AO/CIT(A). 11.4 On hearing both the sides and on perusing the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2009-10, we find the issue of allowing the demat charges, stands decided in favour of the assessee. Therefore, following

MANOHAR WAMAN PANDAGALE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 149 of the Act? 4. The ld CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.3546931/- u/s 69A rws 115BBE in respect of cash deposits in bank account without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The ld CT(A) erred in la and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.2145000

JAYVANTI JANARDAN BHANUSKAR,RAIGAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

167 ITR 471 (SC) has held that when\nsubstantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other,\ncause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot\nclaim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate\ndelay. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being\nthrown

A.C.I.T ,WARDHA CIRCLE , WARDHA , WARDHA vs. M/S KAPIL SOLVEX PVT .LTD , YAVATMAL

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2009-10

167, Dr. A. B. Road, Mumbai - 400018. PAN: AAACN2703L Whereas I have reason to believe that your income in respect of which you are assessable chargeable to tax for the A. Y. 2010-2011 has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. I, therefore, propose to assess for the said assessment year

DILIP BHATTU KARANJULE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1),, PUNE

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 838/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 Dilip Bhattu Karanjule 482/B, Audumber, Suraj Nagar, Shirur (Ghodnadi), Pune – 412210 Pan:Acdpk5361M . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Deepak Sasar Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 27/09/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 24/10/2016 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Arose Out Of Assessment Order Dt. 23/03/2015 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Pune [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-13. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

gains completed the assessment at ₹94,07,120/- by bringing to tax the a surplus of ₹89,51,715/- arose from trading in lands u/s 28 of the Act, finding that, parcels of lands acquired by the assessee were not with any intention to hold it for capital accretion, enjoyment or for cultivation, but with a sole motive of trading