RAJANI PRAKASH KASHID,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, WARD 1(4), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

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

capital gain on transfer of such land. More so because it does not fall in specified items under section 49

POONAWALLA SHARES & SECURITIES PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.380/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income 16-B,/1, Sarosh Bhavan, Tax, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Circle-4, Pune. Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacp 6087 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune’S Order Dated 11.12.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-3/Cir 4/193/2018-19/428, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

49. It is relevant to note that impugned judgment in this appeal related on earlier judgment of Bombay High Court in Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (supra) where the Division bench of the Bombay High could after elaborately considering the principles to determining the prospectively or retrospectivity of the amendment has concluded that Rule 8D is prospective in nature

RAKESH YASHWANT SHINDE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 8(3),, PUNE

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.1133/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rakesh Yashwanth Shinde, The Income Tax Officer, Shop No.24, Rachana Industrial Vs Ward-8(3), Pune. Complex, Telco Road, Bhosari, Pune – 411034. Pan: Aorps 8006F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 27/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-13, Pune’S Order Dated 05.03.2018 Passed In Case No. Cit(A)-13/16- 17/583/617, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

capital gains as determined under general provisions of the Income-tax Act shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which such transfer took place and shall be computed as per provisions of the Income-tax Act without taking into account these provisions. 25.5 Consequential amendment to section 49

JAYANT AVINASH DAVE,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 5 , PUNE

In the result, the cross appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the CO is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.23/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Jayant Avinash Dave Vs. Dcit, Office No.801-804, 8Th Floor, Circle 5, Pune Amar Business Park, Sadanand Estates, Plot No.1, S.No.105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.182/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Dcit, Vs. Jayant Avinash Dave Circle 5, Pune 46/2/1B, Kaka Halwai Industrial Estate, Pune Satara Road, Pune – 411009 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.11/Pun/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.182/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Jayant Avinash Dave Vs. Dcit, Office No.801-804, 8Th Floor, Amar Circle 5, Pune Business Park, Sadanand Estates, Plot No.1, S.No.105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Cross Objector Respondent & Co No.11/Pun/2022

49% held by BorgWarner Ludwigsburg GmbH, Germany (hereinafter called `the foreign company‘). The assessee‘s wife transferred her shares to the assessee, which point is not disputed. The assessee transferred the resultant total shareholding of 10,71,000 shares in the Indian company to the foreign company for a consideration of Rs.85.79 crore. After taking the benefit of cost

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE vs. JAYANT AVINASH DAVE,, PUNE

In the result, the cross appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the CO is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.23/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Jayant Avinash Dave Vs. Dcit, Office No.801-804, 8Th Floor, Circle 5, Pune Amar Business Park, Sadanand Estates, Plot No.1, S.No.105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.182/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Dcit, Vs. Jayant Avinash Dave Circle 5, Pune 46/2/1B, Kaka Halwai Industrial Estate, Pune Satara Road, Pune – 411009 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.11/Pun/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.182/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Jayant Avinash Dave Vs. Dcit, Office No.801-804, 8Th Floor, Amar Circle 5, Pune Business Park, Sadanand Estates, Plot No.1, S.No.105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Cross Objector Respondent & Co No.11/Pun/2022

49% held by BorgWarner Ludwigsburg GmbH, Germany (hereinafter called `the foreign company‘). The assessee‘s wife transferred her shares to the assessee, which point is not disputed. The assessee transferred the resultant total shareholding of 10,71,000 shares in the Indian company to the foreign company for a consideration of Rs.85.79 crore. After taking the benefit of cost

SMT BEENA SHAMMI CHAUDHARI,PUNE vs. ITO., WARD 6(4), PUNE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Smt. Beena Shammi Chaudhari Vs. Ito, Ward B/3-302, Silver Oak, Florien Estates, 6(4), Pune Kalyani Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan : Adypc5109R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri V.L. Jain Revenue By Shri M.G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing 16-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement 17-02-2022

capital gains tax notwithstanding the fact that the property was not registered in the name of the developer. Jettisoning the Departmental line of reasoning, the Hon‟ble Apex Court held that 6 after the amendment of section 17(1A) and 49

ANU AGA FAMILY DISCRETIONARY TRUST,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

49,22,466/- in its return of income which comprises of – (i) short term capital gains under section 111A of the Income

QUBIX BUSINESS PARK PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, Ground No.2 of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

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

Capital Gains amounting to Rs.2,57,47,042/-. Assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-I Vs. Reliance Energy Ltd.(supra) [2022] 441 ITR 346 (SC). The Dispute Resolution Panelheld that there is no variation proposed in the Draft Assessment Order with reference to Assessee’s claim of deduction under section 80IAB

SATISH ZUMBERLAL FIRODIA,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.669/Pun/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

section 17 and 49 of the Registration Act, before amendment, it transpires that part performance of the contract, subject to fulfilment of the stipulated conditions, amounted to transfer recognised by the Registration Act, giving rise to liability towards capital gain

BHAGWAN RAGHUNATH PATHARE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 7(3),, PUNE

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

49 Are. The vendors shown in the sale Deed were Mr. Bhagwan, Mr. Tukararn, Mr. Sopan and Sushilabai Pathare and others. The Assessing Officer pointed out to the Assessee that, in absence of total or partial partition, apportionment of sale consideration was not commensurate with relevant provisions of the Act. The AR of the Assessee chose to reproduce

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - ICHALKRANJI, ICHALKRANJI vs. MANISHA RAJENDRA SHETE,, KOLHAPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.664/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Nilawati Neminath Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8442 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.665/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Niranjan Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Botps 0314 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.666/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Manisha Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8514 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shr Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2022

capital gains as under:- “9. Now I turn to contention of the ld. AR on section 47 of the Registration Act. This section with the heading `Time from which registered document operates‟ provides that : `A registered document shall operate from the time from which it would have commenced to operate if no registration thereof had been required or made

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ICHALKARANJI CIRCLE,, ICHALKARANJI vs. NIRANJAN RAJENDRA SHETE,, KOLHAPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.664/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Nilawati Neminath Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8442 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.665/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Niranjan Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Botps 0314 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.666/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Manisha Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8514 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shr Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2022

capital gains as under:- “9. Now I turn to contention of the ld. AR on section 47 of the Registration Act. This section with the heading `Time from which registered document operates‟ provides that : `A registered document shall operate from the time from which it would have commenced to operate if no registration thereof had been required or made

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ICHALKARANJI CIRCLE,, ICHALKARANJI vs. NILAWATI NEMINATH SHETE,, KOLHAPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.664/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Nilawati Neminath Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8442 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.665/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Niranjan Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Botps 0314 D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.666/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Manisha Rajendra Shete, Of Income Tax, Vs Mahaveer Nagar, A/P- Hupari, Ichalkalkaranji Circle, . Tal – Hatkanangale, Ichalkaranji. Dist-Kolhapur, Maharashtra – 416203. Pan: Aczps 8514 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shr Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/09/2022

capital gains as under:- “9. Now I turn to contention of the ld. AR on section 47 of the Registration Act. This section with the heading `Time from which registered document operates‟ provides that : `A registered document shall operate from the time from which it would have commenced to operate if no registration thereof had been required or made

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,JALGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, JALGAON, JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2011-12

capital gain on adhoc basis. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the following chart: Search material in case of Mr. Dilip Kotecha Date of search – search – 9/8/2011 Search Asstt Date Particulars Qty. Rate Amount materia Order l Page Page No. No. 20 29.11.10 Dellip Kotecha 25,000 154.43 38,60,850 20 1.12.10 Dellip Kotecha

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI AVINASH KANTILAL JAIN,, JALGAON

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

49,658/-. Thus, the long term capital gains of Rs.1,20,34,614/- which are taxable in the year of sale of shares by virtue of provisions of section

SHRI. PRAKASH GANPATRAO GHORPADE,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), KOLHAPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara

49 of the Registration Act deals with the effects of non-registration of documents required to be registered u/s 17 of that Act, section 47 of the Registration Act deals with an altogether different aspect of time from which a registered document operates. It is only after a document required to be registered is actually registered as per section

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 in case of depreciable assets. 50. Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (42A) of section 2, where the capital asset is an asset forming part of a block of assets in respect of which depreciation has been allowed under this Act or under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), the provisions of sections 48 and 49

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 in case of depreciable assets. 50. Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (42A) of section 2, where the capital asset is an asset forming part of a block of assets in respect of which depreciation has been allowed under this Act or under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), the provisions of sections 48 and 49