PRAKASH DASHRATH BALWADKAR,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-2, Vs. Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Pune House No.329, Near Laxmi Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Prakash Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1116A Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dashrath Kondiba Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Aqapb5784C Appellant Respondent

gain would arise in respect of only those capital assets in the acquisition of which an element of cost is etc actually present or capable of being reckoned and not in respect of those capital asset in the acquisition of which the element of cost is altogether inconceivable. The appellant has relied upon several case laws. The appellant raised this

VILAS DASHRATH BALWADKAR,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-2, Vs. Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Pune House No.329, Near Laxmi Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Prakash Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1116A Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dashrath Kondiba Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Aqapb5784C Appellant Respondent

gain would arise in respect of only those capital assets in the acquisition of which an element of cost is etc actually present or capable of being reckoned and not in respect of those capital asset in the acquisition of which the element of cost is altogether inconceivable. The appellant has relied upon several case laws. The appellant raised this

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, ICHALKARANJI vs. PARIKH SHANKARLAL KUNDANMAL,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue and the Cross Objections by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.733 To 736/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2004-05 To 2006-07 & 2009-10

583 & 584/PUN/2009 relating to assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06, vide order dated 24.11.2010 and directed the Assessing Officer to reframe the assessment de-novo after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the ITA Nos.733 to 736/PUN/2017 4 & CO Nos. 22 to 25/PUN/2018 assessee. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, ICHALKARANJI vs. PARIKH SHANKARLAL KUNDANMAL,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue and the Cross Objections by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.733 To 736/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2004-05 To 2006-07 & 2009-10

583 & 584/PUN/2009 relating to assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06, vide order dated 24.11.2010 and directed the Assessing Officer to reframe the assessment de-novo after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the ITA Nos.733 to 736/PUN/2017 4 & CO Nos. 22 to 25/PUN/2018 assessee. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, ICHALKARANJI vs. PARIKH SHANKARLAL KUNDANMAL,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue and the Cross Objections by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.733 To 736/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2004-05 To 2006-07 & 2009-10

583 & 584/PUN/2009 relating to assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06, vide order dated 24.11.2010 and directed the Assessing Officer to reframe the assessment de-novo after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the ITA Nos.733 to 736/PUN/2017 4 & CO Nos. 22 to 25/PUN/2018 assessee. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, ICHALKARANJI vs. PARIKH SHANKARLAL KUNDANMAL,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeals of Revenue and the Cross Objections by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.733 To 736/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2004-05 To 2006-07 & 2009-10

583 & 584/PUN/2009 relating to assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06, vide order dated 24.11.2010 and directed the Assessing Officer to reframe the assessment de-novo after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the ITA Nos.733 to 736/PUN/2017 4 & CO Nos. 22 to 25/PUN/2018 assessee. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to the assessee and asked the assessee

TIBCO SOFTWARE B.V.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (IT), CIRCLE - 2,, PUNE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Sonjoy Sarma,Jm Assessment Year : 2014-15 Tibco Software B.V. ...... Appellant C/O Tibco Software India P.Ltd. 3 Floor, Binnarius,Deepak Complex, National Games Road, Shastri Nagar, Yerwada, Pune – 411 006. Pan : Aaect3252G V/S. Dcit(It),Circle-2, Pune ……Respondent

Capital Gains,40 ["IndiaIreland DTAA"]. Article 12 of the aforesaid treaty defining "royalties" would alone 7 Tibco Software B.V. A.Y. 2014-15 be relevant to determine taxability under the DTAA, as it is more beneficial to the assessee as compared to section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, as construed by the High Court. Here again, section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. HONEYWELL AUTOMATION INDIA LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

gains of an eligible business cannot be tinkered with by the Assessing Officer merely because they are more than the ordinary profits or that they are quite high. The existence of substantial or more than ordinary profits by itself does not sufficiently empower the Assessing Officer to disregard them and determine the profits which he may consider to be reasonably

M/S. HONEWELL AUTOMATION INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

gains of an eligible business cannot be tinkered with by the Assessing Officer merely because they are more than the ordinary profits or that they are quite high. The existence of substantial or more than ordinary profits by itself does not sufficiently empower the Assessing Officer to disregard them and determine the profits which he may consider to be reasonably

DANA INDIA PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.473/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

4), make rules for Safe Harbour’. The relevant rules from 10TA to 10TG came to be inserted by the Income-tax (Sixteenth Amendment) Rules, 2013 w.e.f. 18-09-2013. Rule 10TD(1) provides that the transfer price declared by the assessee in respect of eligible transaction shall be accepted by the income-tax authorities

DCIT,CIR.-1(1),, PUNE vs. MANTRI HOUSING & CONSTRUCTIONS LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

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

583. 5. The order of the CIT(A), may be vacated and the order of A.O. be restored.” 4. On the disallowances that were made by the AO in the 2nd round for A.Y. 1996-97 vide order dt.27.03.2002, AO vide penalty order dt.31.03.2005 levied penalty of Rs.7,25,34,996/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved

M/S. GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE & TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,PUNE vs. ITO, WD.-3(3),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

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

583. 5. The order of the CIT(A), may be vacated and the order of A.O. be restored.” 4. On the disallowances that were made by the AO in the 2nd round for A.Y. 1996-97 vide order dt.27.03.2002, AO vide penalty order dt.31.03.2005 levied penalty of Rs.7,25,34,996/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved

ACIT, CIR.-1(2),, PUNE vs. GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE & TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

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

583. 5. The order of the CIT(A), may be vacated and the order of A.O. be restored.” 4. On the disallowances that were made by the AO in the 2nd round for A.Y. 1996-97 vide order dt.27.03.2002, AO vide penalty order dt.31.03.2005 levied penalty of Rs.7,25,34,996/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved

DCIT,CIR.-1(1),, PUNE vs. GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE & TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

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

583. 5. The order of the CIT(A), may be vacated and the order of A.O. be restored.” 4. On the disallowances that were made by the AO in the 2nd round for A.Y. 1996-97 vide order dt.27.03.2002, AO vide penalty order dt.31.03.2005 levied penalty of Rs.7,25,34,996/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved

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

BRAHM PRECISION MATERIALS PVT. LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW 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