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

253 of the Income Tax 1. Act is emanating out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (A) - Pune – 11 dt.21.12.2015 for the assessment year 2006-07. 2. The relevant facts as culled out from the material on record are as under :- 2.1 Assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of PVC Resin

KISHOR MADHAV PARANJAPE,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1887/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Kishor Madhav Paranjape, The Dcit, Central 1139/516, Venu Apts, Vs Circle-2(2), Pune. Off F C Road, Shivajinagar, Pune – 411016. Pan: Abipp 3973 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas P Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe– Dr Date Of Hearing 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30/06/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-12, Pune For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Dated 23.09.2019. 2. The Facts Emanating From The Assessment Order & Penalty Order Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Deriving Income From Business. He Is A Partner In Various Firms, Earning Share Of Profit, Interest On Capital & Remuneration From Partnership Firms. It Is Pertinent To Note That All The Firms Wherein The Assessee Is A Partner, Are All Engaged In The Business Of Land Development & Building Construction. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For Assessment

Capital gains of Rs.50,05,237/-. The income was assessed at Rs.99,48,880/- and proceedings u/s 271 (l)(c) of the I T Act for concealment of income were initiated. The factual position arising is that the assessee had purchased land at Bhukum on 05/04/2006. The said transaction of purchase was not recorded in the Books of Accounts. Subsequently

BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-8(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

capital gain’ as has been originally declared it as ‘business income’ in the books. It is clearly a case of re-classification of income and cannot be considered as under reporting or misreporting of income. 7 Bajaj Housing Finance Limited 11. Though assessee has referred various decisions in the case law paper book referred (supra), I however taking note

DCIT CIRCLE-7, PUNE vs. THAKUR HASARAM MULCHANDANI, PUNE

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.55/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dcit, Circle-7, Pune. Vs. Thakur Hasaram Mulchandani, Flat No.1, Building No.1, Sukhasagar Terrace, Sadhu Vaswani Chowk, Opp. Gpo, Pune- 411001. Pan : Aaxpm9871G Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16 Arises Against The Cit(A)-5, Pune’S Order Dated 15.10.2019 Passed In Case No. Pn/Cit(A)-5/Dcit, Cir. 7, Pune/10020/2018-19 Involving Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short The Act. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised Herein Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Reversing The Penalty

capital gains and also books of accounts of the Appellant had reflected the said transaction and therefore it could not be said that any inaccurate particulars of income were furnished in the return of income. It was also contended that the appellant had cooperated to the assessment proceedings and there was no conscious breach of law and further that

MARUTI G.THOPTE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is emanating out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (A) – 6, Pune, dt.29.01.2017 for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. The relevant facts as culled out from the material on record are as under :- Assessee is an individual having income from business, capital gains and other sources. Assessee filed his return

SHRI SUNIL NANA KADAM,TAL RAHURI, DIST. AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER (ITO), WARD 4, AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

253(1 )(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’), against the order dated 09th August 2024, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC, Delhi) (hereinafter referred to as 'CIT(A)’) under section 250 of the Act, confirming the assessment order under section 147 r.w.s

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5(1),, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES DEPOSIT GURANTEE CORP. LTD,, PUNE

In the result, quantum assessment appeals for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.709/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Ito, Ward 5(1), Vs. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Pune Credit Societies Deposit Guarantee Corp. Ltd., Suraksha Bhawan, Plot No.9, Gultekdi, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aabtm4090M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1492 & 1493/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Ito, Ward 5(1), Vs. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Pune Credit Societies Deposit Guarantee Corp. Ltd., Suraksha Bhawan, Plot No.9, Gultekdi, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aabtm4090M Corrigendum Per R.S.Syal, Vp : This Corrigendum Is Being Issued To Correct The Typographical Mistake In The Date Of Pronouncement Mentioned In First Page Of Order. The Same May Be Read As “13.08.2021” Instead Of “13.05.2021”. (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) (R.S.Syal)पुणे Pune; दििधंक Dated : 18Th August, 2021 Gcvsr

Capital gains‟, interest on FDs, etc. would fall under the head „Income from other sources‟ and the amount of loss for the year and brought forward loss from sale of mutual funds would be set off in terms of sections 70/71 and 74 of the Act. 7. In the result, these two appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5(1),, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES DEPOSIT GURANTEE CORP. LTD,, PUNE

In the result, quantum assessment appeals for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.709/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Ito, Ward 5(1), Vs. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Pune Credit Societies Deposit Guarantee Corp. Ltd., Suraksha Bhawan, Plot No.9, Gultekdi, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aabtm4090M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1492 & 1493/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Ito, Ward 5(1), Vs. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Pune Credit Societies Deposit Guarantee Corp. Ltd., Suraksha Bhawan, Plot No.9, Gultekdi, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aabtm4090M Corrigendum Per R.S.Syal, Vp : This Corrigendum Is Being Issued To Correct The Typographical Mistake In The Date Of Pronouncement Mentioned In First Page Of Order. The Same May Be Read As “13.08.2021” Instead Of “13.05.2021”. (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) (R.S.Syal)पुणे Pune; दििधंक Dated : 18Th August, 2021 Gcvsr

Capital gains‟, interest on FDs, etc. would fall under the head „Income from other sources‟ and the amount of loss for the year and brought forward loss from sale of mutual funds would be set off in terms of sections 70/71 and 74 of the Act. 7. In the result, these two appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES DEPOSITE GURANTEE CORP.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, quantum assessment appeals for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.709/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Ito, Ward 5(1), Vs. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Pune Credit Societies Deposit Guarantee Corp. Ltd., Suraksha Bhawan, Plot No.9, Gultekdi, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aabtm4090M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1492 & 1493/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Ito, Ward 5(1), Vs. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Pune Credit Societies Deposit Guarantee Corp. Ltd., Suraksha Bhawan, Plot No.9, Gultekdi, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aabtm4090M Corrigendum Per R.S.Syal, Vp : This Corrigendum Is Being Issued To Correct The Typographical Mistake In The Date Of Pronouncement Mentioned In First Page Of Order. The Same May Be Read As “13.08.2021” Instead Of “13.05.2021”. (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) (R.S.Syal)पुणे Pune; दििधंक Dated : 18Th August, 2021 Gcvsr

Capital gains‟, interest on FDs, etc. would fall under the head „Income from other sources‟ and the amount of loss for the year and brought forward loss from sale of mutual funds would be set off in terms of sections 70/71 and 74 of the Act. 7. In the result, these two appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

PRAKASH KRISHNA GHULE,SATARA vs. ITO, WARD-5, SATARA, SATARA

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2013-14 Prakash Krishan Ghule 165/9, Opp. Renukamata Mandir, Sahau Nagar, Godoli, Satara-415001. .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Ahspg1542N

253(1) of the Act on 09/03/2024 and thereafter case was listed for hearing first time on 11/06/2024 where none appeared at the behest of the assessee therefore case was adjourned. The case thereafter scheduled for hearing on; 08/07/2024, 31/07/2024, 05/09/2024 and 25/09/2024 however the counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant sought adjournments for various reasons which the bench

MOHITE AND MOHITE (ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS),KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLHAPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.286 To 288/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Mohite & Mohite Vs. Acit, Central Circle, (Engineers & Contractors), Kolhapur. 240/B, Mohite House, General Thorat Marg, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur- 416003. Pan : Aacfm4102F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Suhas Kulkarni Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-11, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 15.02.2022 For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.286/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

capital gains under the provisions of section 50 by reducing the sale consideration from the opening WDV and brought to tax a sum of Rs.44,63,718/-. This addition was not contested in appellate forum. Thus, the assessment made by the Assessing Officer attained the finality. Simultaneously, the Assessing Officer also initiated the penalty proceedings

MOHITE AND MOHITE (ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS),KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, , KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.286 To 288/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Mohite & Mohite Vs. Acit, Central Circle, (Engineers & Contractors), Kolhapur. 240/B, Mohite House, General Thorat Marg, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur- 416003. Pan : Aacfm4102F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Suhas Kulkarni Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-11, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 15.02.2022 For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.286/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

capital gains under the provisions of section 50 by reducing the sale consideration from the opening WDV and brought to tax a sum of Rs.44,63,718/-. This addition was not contested in appellate forum. Thus, the assessment made by the Assessing Officer attained the finality. Simultaneously, the Assessing Officer also initiated the penalty proceedings

MOHITE AND MOHITE (ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS),KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, , KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.286 To 288/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Mohite & Mohite Vs. Acit, Central Circle, (Engineers & Contractors), Kolhapur. 240/B, Mohite House, General Thorat Marg, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur- 416003. Pan : Aacfm4102F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Suhas Kulkarni Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-11, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 15.02.2022 For The Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.286/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

capital gains under the provisions of section 50 by reducing the sale consideration from the opening WDV and brought to tax a sum of Rs.44,63,718/-. This addition was not contested in appellate forum. Thus, the assessment made by the Assessing Officer attained the finality. Simultaneously, the Assessing Officer also initiated the penalty proceedings

RUHI KHALID PARWANI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 14(3) PUNE, PUNE

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt. Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 1553/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ruhi Khalid Parwani 9, Meher House, Kahun Rd., Camp, Pune-411001 Pan : Aovpp5464Q . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

253(1) of the Act which in turn arisen out of the order of assessment framed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act by the National Faceless e-Assessment Centre, Delhi. [‘Ld. AO’] ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 6 Ruhi Khalid Parwani. Vs ITO ITA No.1553/PUN/2024 AY:2014-15 2. Tersely stated facts of the case are that; the assessee

VIJAY MOHAN HARDE,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.588/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

capital gains arising therefrom. Thus, invoking section 50B of the Act, he made an addition of Rs.91,43,141/-. Subsequently, a penalty of Rs.31,42,000/- was imposed on this score by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) after issuing notice u/s 274 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A), after elaborately discussing the issue, upheld the penalty. Aggrieved thereby

BHANDARI ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

253 ITR 124 b. National Plastic and Allied Industries vs DCIT 67 TTJ 824 c. Mool Raj Singh and others vs ITO 63 TTJ 211 d. CIT vs Smt. Nirmal Anand 245 ITR 836 e. Jay Commercial Ltd vs CIT 66 TTJ 731 f. Hycron India vs ACIT 82 TTJ 450 13. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Bombay

WARANA INDUSTRIES LTD,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -1, , KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1284/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Warana Industries Limited, The Acit, Circle-1, Gat No.795, Tatyasaheb Kore Vs Kolhapur. Nager, Chikurde Road, A/P: Warnanagar, Tal.Panhala, Kolhapur – 416113. Pan: Aaacw 1694 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri S.N.Puranikh – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Kolhapur For The A.Y. 2006-07 Dated 16.07.2019, Emanating Out Of Order Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 23.05.2014. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Gain declared by the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noted that assessee has debited certain expenditures as revenue expenditure under the Head- Purchase of dairy machinery and spare parts. For the reasons discussed, the AO treated Rs.79,26,31/8/- as capital expenditure and disallowed it. The AO initiated penalty proceedings under section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 253 of\nthe Act.\nIt is also a matter of fact to be known that, the impugned\nappellate order of CIT(A), NFAC has been passed on 12.11.2022\nwhereas the Hon'ble Apex Court's judgement of ACIT (Exemptions) Vs\nAhmedabad Urban Development Authority (AUDA) [2022] 143\ntaxmann.com 278 (SC) passed on 19.10.2022 was very much\navailable before