AUDYOGIK NIDHI VISHWAST SANSTHA POONA,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PMT BUILDING

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraaudyogik Nidhi Vishwast Sanstha The Cit (Exemption), Poona Pune 366, Narayan Peth, Limaye Vs. Building, Laxmi Road, Pune – 411030 Pan: Aaata1619H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05-02-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-04-2025 O R D E R

charitable trust created in the year 1905 by the great freedom fighter late Shri Bal Gangadhar Tilak and other patriots. The main objective of the trust was to generate employment and to make India self sufficient and industrialized. At that time the trust was also named as Audyogik Nidhi alias Paisa Fund. The trustees had literally collected one paisa each

POONA OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

loss\nbasis.\n7. The learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in law and on\nfacts to reject the application merely based on presumption, conjecture\nand on surmises basis.\n8. That the order passed by the learned Pr. Commissioner of Incomте Тах\nis bad in law and against the facts of the case.\n9. That any other relief

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INTERLOCKING SURGEONS,SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

loss carried forward, deduction, allowance. There is another provision in clause (i) regarding arithmetical errors in the return. There may be a case where the rate of tax is not disputed but while under this clause, i.e., while calculating the tax on the normal rate or maximum marginal rate there is a mistake which could be corrected and will fall

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INTERLOCKING SURGEONS,SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

loss carried forward, deduction, allowance. There is another provision in clause (i) regarding arithmetical errors in the return. There may be a case where the rate of tax is not disputed but while under this clause, i.e., while calculating the tax on the normal rate or maximum marginal rate there is a mistake which could be corrected and will fall

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INTERLOCKING SURGEONS,SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

loss carried forward, deduction, allowance. There is another provision in clause (i) regarding arithmetical errors in the return. There may be a case where the rate of tax is not disputed but while under this clause, i.e., while calculating the tax on the normal rate or maximum marginal rate there is a mistake which could be corrected and will fall

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

loss basis.\n7. The learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in law and on facts to reject the application merely based on presumption, conjecture and on surmises basis.\n8. That the order passed by the learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax is bad in law and against the facts of the case.\n9. That any other relief

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. MUKUND BHAVAN TRUST,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

set of appeals is; Whether the assessee has violated the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act. Before proceedings further it would be relevant to first see the provisions of aforesaid section. The relevant extract of the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) are reproduced herein-below : “[Section 11 not to apply in certain cases

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

loss at Rs.877.10 crores. Subsequently the said order was set aside by the Ld. CIT u/s 263 of the Act on 02.11.2006 and de novo assessment was directed. Pursuant to the said 263 order, we find the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 27.12.2007 assessing the total income of the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICERV(EXEMPTION) WARD 2, PUNE vs. CREDIA PUNE METRO , PUNE

loss and the only motive behind such activity is to maximize the profits. This observation also being upheld by the Ld. CIT(Appeal) is factually incorrect since the Revenue has not brought on record any evidence through enquiry or verification that the assessee used to actually charge any subscription for participating in such exhibition. On the contrary, no such subscriptions

CREDAI - PUNE METRO,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE

loss and the only motive behind such activity is to maximize the profits. This observation also being upheld by the Ld. CIT(Appeal) is factually incorrect since the Revenue has not brought on record any evidence through enquiry or verification that the assessee used to actually charge any subscription for participating in such exhibition. On the contrary, no such subscriptions

INCOME TAX OFFICERV(EXEMPTION) WARD 2, PUNE vs. CREDIA METRO PUNE, PUNE

loss and the only motive behind such activity is to maximize the profits. This observation also being upheld by the Ld. CIT(Appeal) is factually incorrect since the Revenue has not brought on record any evidence through enquiry or verification that the assessee used to actually charge any subscription for participating in such exhibition. On the contrary, no such subscriptions

CREDAI-PUNE METRO,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, PUNE

loss and the only motive behind such activity is to maximize the profits. This observation also being upheld by the Ld. CIT(Appeal) is factually incorrect since the Revenue has not brought on record any evidence through enquiry or verification that the assessee used to actually charge any subscription for participating in such exhibition. On the contrary, no such subscriptions

SHETH CHIMANLAL GOVINDDAS MEMORIAL TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

set aside the original assessment order to the file of\nassessing officer to be re framed on issue of taxation of investment of\nfunds made in a related entity with reference to section 131 13(2) read\nwith sec 11(5) of the Income-tax Act. 1961\n3. (Nothing is mentioned at Ground number 3)\n4. The ld Commissioner