SANGEETA BASAVRAJ MANGRULE,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, AURANGABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

section 68 is called for. Since the assessee has placed the contract note, payment through cheques identifying the company whose shares were transacted, the genuineness of claim of long term capital gain should not have been doubted. We do not find merit in these contentions of the assessee in the light of the facts that there is prevalent practice

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

197 24-12-2019 2,00,50,000 2015-16 72,591 24-12-2019 2,51,96,000 2016-17 16,254 24-12-2019 2,34,00,000 2017-18 -20,60,094 24-12-2019 78,00,000 3. During the proceedings, list of donors used to be submitted by the assessee. Thereafter, to verify the genuineness

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

197 24-12-2019 2,00,50,000 2015-16 72,591 24-12-2019 2,51,96,000 2016-17 16,254 24-12-2019 2,34,00,000 2017-18 -20,60,094 24-12-2019 78,00,000 3. During the proceedings, list of donors used to be submitted by the assessee. Thereafter, to verify the genuineness

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

197 24-12-2019 2,00,50,000 2015-16 72,591 24-12-2019 2,51,96,000 2016-17 16,254 24-12-2019 2,34,00,000 2017-18 -20,60,094 24-12-2019 78,00,000 3. During the proceedings, list of donors used to be submitted by the assessee. Thereafter, to verify the genuineness

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

197\n24-12-2019\n2,00,50,000\n2015-16\n72,591\n24-12-2019\n2,51,96,000\n2016-17\n16,254\n24-12-2019\n2,34,00,000\n2017-18\n-20,60,094\n24-12-2019\n78,00,000\n3. During the proceedings, list of donors used to be submitted by the\nassessee. Thereafter, to verify

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

197\n24-12-2019\n2,00,50,000\n2015-16\n72,591\n24-12-2019\n2,51,96,000\n2016-17\n16,254\n24-12-2019\n2,34,00,000\n2017-18\n-20,60,094\n24-12-2019\n78,00,000\n3. During the proceedings, list of donors used to be submitted by the\nassessee. Thereafter, to verify

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

197\n24-12-2019\n2,00,50,000\n2015-16\n72,591\n24-12-2019\n2,51,96,000\n2016-17\n16,254\n24-12-2019\n2,34,00,000\n2017-18\n-20,60,094\n24-12-2019\n78,00,000\n3. During the proceedings, list of donors used to be submitted by the\nassessee. Thereafter, to verify

NANDU ATMARAM WAJEKAR,PANVEL RAIGAD DISTRICT vs. ACIT CIRCLE PANVEL, PANVEL RAIGAD

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

capital gain’ as against undisclosed income u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act by the Assessing Officer. He accordingly submitted the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC is not justified in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer in treating such income declared under the IDS, 2016 as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and charged

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6, PUNE vs. ABHAY SADASHIV GADGIL, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

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

section 45(1) of the IT Act, 1961, without appreciating the facts that amount of Rs. 1,21,00,000/- was received by the assessee on account of retirement from firm M/s P N Gadgil & Sons is over and above his Capital Contribution and taxable under the head Long Term Capital Gain. 2. For this and such other reasons

M/S. BILCARE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

Gains”. The CBDT vide circular No.2/2018 dated C.O. No.14/PUN/2021 15.02.2018 had clarified that this amendment takes effect only from 01.04.2018, accordingly applied for A.Y. 2018-19. 65. Thus, we find that the reasons assigned for disallowing the claim for determination and carry forward of long term capital loss on the sale of shares of Bilcare Singapore PTE Ltd. held

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE vs. M/S. BILCARE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

Gains”. The CBDT vide circular No.2/2018 dated C.O. No.14/PUN/2021 15.02.2018 had clarified that this amendment takes effect only from 01.04.2018, accordingly applied for A.Y. 2018-19. 65. Thus, we find that the reasons assigned for disallowing the claim for determination and carry forward of long term capital loss on the sale of shares of Bilcare Singapore PTE Ltd. held

SHILA PADMAKAR LATKAR,,THANE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

section 50C as against the actual total consideration of Rs.1,40,00,000/- that should have been considered for the purposes of computing the assessee's share of Long Term Capital Gains on sale of the impugned land. 2] The assessee submits that the A.O. may please be directed to allow credit of advance tax of Rs.3,50,000/- paid

SMT. ASHA NARAYAN SHEWALE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11 (2),, PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed for

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1105/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05

capital gain before the ld. first appellate authority, who dismissed the appeal and also made enhancement on the basis of the report of DVO, which was received after the completion of assessment. The assessee is aggrieved by such confirmation/enhancement. 3. I have heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record. The first issue in this appeal

NITIN NARAYAN SHEWALE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11 (1),, PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed for

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1105/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05

capital gain before the ld. first appellate authority, who dismissed the appeal and also made enhancement on the basis of the report of DVO, which was received after the completion of assessment. The assessee is aggrieved by such confirmation/enhancement. 3. I have heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record. The first issue in this appeal

NITIN NARAYAN SHEWALE , LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. CHANDRABHAGA E. SHEWALE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11 (1),, PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed for

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1105/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05

capital gain before the ld. first appellate authority, who dismissed the appeal and also made enhancement on the basis of the report of DVO, which was received after the completion of assessment. The assessee is aggrieved by such confirmation/enhancement. 3. I have heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record. The first issue in this appeal

UTTAM SADHU TUPE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (3),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1108/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05

197, SadesatraNali, Pune Hadapsar, Pune 411 028 PAN : AAMPT9911D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Abhay A. Avchat Respondent by Smt. Vranda U. Matkari Date of hearing 06-02-2020 Date of pronouncement 07-02-2020 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These two appeals by different but connected assessees relating to the assessment year 2004-05 involve common issue

HEMANT SUDAM TUPE,,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD - 1 (3),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1108/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05

197, SadesatraNali, Pune Hadapsar, Pune 411 028 PAN : AAMPT9911D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Abhay A. Avchat Respondent by Smt. Vranda U. Matkari Date of hearing 06-02-2020 Date of pronouncement 07-02-2020 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These two appeals by different but connected assessees relating to the assessment year 2004-05 involve common issue

DHANOTTAM VASANT LONKAR,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3), , PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain on conversion of\nland. Ld. AO assessed the income at Rs.3,96,34,320/-.\nThe\nassessee thereafter challenged the validity of notice issued\nu/s.143(2) of the Act as well as the validity of the assessment\nproceedings before the ld.CIT(A) making following submissions :\n\"2. APPELLANT ADDRESS:\n301 Kamala Residency, CTS NO 1050 MODEL COLONY PUNE

KAY POWER AND PAPER LIMITED,SATARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SATARA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

capital gains of Rs. 52,91,606/ The non-genuine profit of Rs. 2,67,66,250/- remains unexplained as the assessee has not submitted any satisfactory explanation regarding options derivative reversal trades transactions by which assessee gained non-genuine profit of Rs. 2,67,66,250/- for the year under consideration. The assessee has filed return of income