RAMESHWARDAS SHIVCHARANDAS AND COMPANY ,NANDED vs. ITO WARD 1, JALNA

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.524/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16

capital gain from sale of said land. 3. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) placing various legal issues but on account of non-compliance ld.CIT(A) passed an exparte order and confirmed the addition made by AO without passing a speaking order. 4. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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 411016.\nThe

PUNE MATHADI HAMAL AND OTHER MANUAL WORKERS BOARD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1012/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pune Mathadihamal & Other The Income Tax Manual Workers Board, V Officer, Shramashakti Bhavan, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Coomercial Plot No.1, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aaalp0097L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vipul Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Shri Rajesh Gawali– Dr’S Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Orders Of Ld.Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Act Dated 14.07.2023 :

sections 11 and 12.”Unquote. 10 Pune Mathadi Hamal and Other Manual Workers Board [A] 4.7 The above decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court and Hon’ble Karnataka High Court. 4.8 The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Quest

BVG INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

282 (a) of the Act of 1961, which provides that notice or other documents to be issued for the purpose of the Act of 1961 by any income-tax authority shall be deemed to be authenticated if name and designation is provided. In approval under Section 151 of the Act of 1961, name, designation and office is printed. Hence, submission

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Allowed

Section 147 Proviso, after the expiry of Four(04)\nYears from the end of the assessment year, re-assessment can be\ndone only if Income has escaped assessment by reason of failure on\nthe part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts.\n4.3 In this case, there is a finding in the Assessment Order\nu/s.143

SULOCHANA LAXMIKANT BHALE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1594/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

capital gain arising out of sale of property. 3. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant society is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. I heard the rival submissions and perused the material

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

gain calculation and copy of deed.” 23. We find the assessee in response to the said notice has submitted various details, copy of which is placed at page 374 of the paper book. We find as per para 1 of the said letter the assessee has enclosed the following details: “1. Details of person from whom unsecured loan taken during

AHMEDNAGAR ZILLA GRAMSEVAKANCHI SAHAKAR PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,AHILYANAGAR vs. PCIT, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

282\n(SC)] has held that-\n\"Interest on such investments, therefore, could not fall within the meaning of\nthe expression 'profits and gains of business. Such interest income could not\nbe said to be attributable to the activities of the society, namely, carrying on\nthe business of providing credit facilities to its members or marketing of the\nagricultural produce

AIDS SOCIETY OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE

282 that it is a :\n\"Well-known principle of law that the provisions of an Act of Parliament shall not be evaded by shift or contrivance\"\nAnd that \"To carry out effectually the object of a Statute, it must be construed as to defeat all attempts to do, or avoid doing, in an indirect or circuitous manner that which

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

section 143(3). In large number of cases we find that the above distinction is not kept in mind by the Assessing Officer. It is for this reason that we have spelt out the difference between the regular assessment and the block assessment under Chapter XIV-B.” 22. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has also referred to following decisions wherein

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

section 132(4) of the Income-tax Act even though retracted, the addition could be justified. The judgements are distinguishable on facts.” 25. In the light of above findings, we are of the considered opinion that the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) suffers from illegality and cannot be sustained in the eyes

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK vs. MICO EMPLOYEES CREDIT COOP SOCIETY LTD., NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

282 (SC), wherein the Apex court has held that the words used in section 80P "the whole of the amount of profits & gains of business" emphasize that the income in respect of which deduction is sought must constitute the operational income and not the other income which accrues to the society & as such interest earned on funds which

MARATHI BANDHKAM VYA vs. AYIK ASSOCIATION,PUNEVS.ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-1(1),PUNE, PUNE

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

Section 57(iii) provides for deduction of any other expenditure, which is not in the nature of capital expenditure and is laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income. The respondent-assessee must have incurred some expenses for earning interest income other than the exempted interest income and, therefore, if the Tribunal

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

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

gains of\nbusiness which is not incidental to the attainment of its objectives\nor separate books of account are not maintained by such trust or\ninstitution in respect of the business which is incidental to the\nattainment of its objectives; or\n(c) the trust or institution has applied any part of its income from\nthe property held under

AGRA OBSTETRICAL AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,AGRA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PUNE

282 that it is a :\n\"Well-known principle of law that the provisions of an Act of\nParliament shall not be evaded by shift or contrivance\"\nAnd that \"To carry out effectually the object of a Statute, it must be\nconstrued as to defeat all attempts to do, or avoid doing, in an\nindirect or circuitous manner that which

R&DE (ENGRS) EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 7(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society is not carrying on any separate

YASHWANT NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 10(1) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

282 (SC) and is of the view that the said judgement is applicable to decide the taxability of interest income u/s ITA No.644/PUN/2024/ Yashwant Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit [A] 80P(2)(d) also. 6. The CIT A states that as discussed from the Supreme Court decision in the case of Totagars Co-operative Sale Society and Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank

LEKHAKOSH KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PR. CIT, PUNE-4, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

282 (SC) and the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Pr. CIT, Hubali Vs. Totgars Cooperative Sale Society, 392 ITR 74 (Karnataka, the Ld. PCIT set aside the order of the Ld. AO for proper verification of facts and to re-examine the assessee's claim for deduction u/s 80P of the Act by observing

BRAHM PRECISION MATERIALS PVT LTD,AURANGABAD vs. CIT(A), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

gained from filing this appeal with a delay. We\ntherefore taking guidance from the judgments of Hon'ble Apex\nCourt in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag &\nAnr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in\nthe case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment\ndated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay