MANOHAR WAMAN PANDAGALE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3), PUNE

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

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

condoning the delay without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The impugned notice u/s 148 dated 07.04.2022 is invalid and bad in law being issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer as the same was not in accordance with Section 151A

KALPANA PRAKASH KALE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(5), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

condoning the delay when there was sufficient cause beyond the control of the assessee. 2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the impugned reassessment proceedings are valid in law which are initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 Jurisdictional Assessing Officer in contravention of the provisions of Section 151A

ANANDA GORAKHANATH PAWAR,SATARA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 3, SATARA, SATARA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1796/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ananda Gorakhanath Pawar, Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Satara. At Post Ambawade, Khatav, Satara- 415506. Pan : Blhpp6081R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri R. C. Doshi : Revenue By : Shri Milind Debaje Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.06.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Filed The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Cit Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant By Refusing To Condone The Delay Of 26 Days On Grounds Of Period Of Limitation, Notwithstanding The Fact That Appellant Has Submitted The Application & Explained The Reasons For Delay.

delay to filing the Appeal should not be condoned especially when he had dealt with all the issues in Appellate Order. 3. The learned CIT has erred both in facts and in law in not dealing with other issues on merits. 4. The Assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s

SHAHBAZ MOHAMMED SHAFEEQUE,MALEGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, MALEGAON

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2291/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shahbaz Mohammed V The Income Tax Officer, Shafeeque, S. Ward-1, Malegaon. House No.904, Lane No.2, Malegaon City S.O., Malegaon, Nashik, Malegaon – 423203. Maharashtra. Pan: Cfppm6844A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Smt Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commisioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Dated 28.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

condoned if the appellant has a just cause on merits. 2 ITA No.2291/PUN/2025 [A] 8] The appellant craves leave to add/ alter/ amend any of the grounds of appeal.” Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Ld.AR appeared virtually and submitted that ld.CIT(A) has not decided the legal grounds and hence appeal

BALAJI GRAMIN SAHKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(5), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2141/Pun/2024 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Balaji Gramin Sahkari Pat Vs Ito, Ward Sanstha Maryadit, 1 Kodoli 1(5), Kolhapur Shivaji Chouk Panhala, Kolhapur-416201 Maharashtra Pan-Aabab9500E Appellant Respondent

condoning the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) even though sufficient cause was demonstrated beyond doubt. 2. Whether CIT (A), NFAC is correct in dismissing the case limine without going into the merits 2 3. The impugned notice under section 148 has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing officer, which is outside the faceless mechanism as provided under

DR HEDGEWAR SMRUTI RUGNA SEVA MANDIR, HINGOLIE,HINGOLI vs. DCIT, CIR-AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1531/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Vs Dcit Dr Hedgewar Smruti Rugna Seva Mandal, 01 Exemption Akola Road, Hingoli S.O Circle, Basamba, Hingoli-431513 Aurangabad Maharashtra Pan-Aabtd5118M Appellant Respondent

condoned considering communication gaps and lack of knowledge about I-T proceedings and ITBA portal. 3. The learned jurisdictional AO (JAO) erred in law and on facts in assuming jurisdiction by issuing notice u/s 148 of the ITA, 1961 as the same is not in accordance with provisions of section 151A of ITA, 1961. Appellant contends that, as per CBDT

THE MERCHANTS CO-OP BANK LTD. ( IN LIQUIDATION),DHULE vs. THE ITO, WARD- -1, DHULE

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1927/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Merchants Co-Op Bank V The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., (In Liquidation), S. Ward-1, Dhule. Cs No.2111, Lane No.6, Near Old Amnalner Stand, Nagarpatti, Dhule-424001. Pan: Aaabt0123H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke Revenue By Smt Indira R. Adakil-Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19, Dated 11.03.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order 147 R.W.S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.03.2023. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Appellant Contends That The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Ought To Have

151A of the ITA, 1961. 3. Appellant contends that the addition made by the learned AO and confirmed by the learned CIT(A), NFAC of Rs. 11,15,220/-on account of interest received on fixed deposits with Banks is uncalled for. Appellant contends that the total interest received of Rs. 33,70,270/- on fixed deposits with Banks

RAJESH BABURAO SHINDE,PARBHANI vs. ITO, WARD- HINGOLI, HINGOLI

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.781/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rajesh Baburao Shinde, Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Sayala Khating, Tq. Dist. Tax Department, Nfac, Parbhani- 431402. Delhi. Pan : Czcps6546Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.08.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. THE CHALLENGE TO REASSESSMENT 1.1 The Learned Income Tax Officer, Ward Hingoli ['the Ld. JAO'] has erred in initiating the reassessment proceedings u/s 145 of the Income tax Act, 1961 ["the Act'] without serving notice under section

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3, SATARA, INCOME TAX OFFICE SATARA vs. NANDKUMAR DATTATRAY KHOT, DAHIWADI MAN

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

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. /Ita No.1562/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Income Tax Officer, V Nandkumar Dattatray Khot, Ward-3, Satara S Shri Agencies Dahiwadi, Dahiwadi, Man Satara. Maharashtra – 415508. Pan: Aatpk8947P Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee Cross Objection No.11/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Nandkumar Dattatray Khot, V The Income Tax Officer, Shri Agencies Dahiwadi, S Ward-3, Satara. Dahiwadi, Man Satara. Maharashtra – 415508. Pan:Aatpk8947P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Kulkarni - Ar Shri Vidya Ratna Kishor – (Dr)(Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 25/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) (Nfac) Under Section 250 Of

151A of the Act read with the Scheme dated 29th March 2022, without properly interpreting the scope provided in Sec. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the context in which it was used in the Scheme notified by the CBDT on 28th March 2022. 3) On the facts and circumstances of the case

AMIT SURESH AGRAWAL,SATARA vs. ITO WARD-2, SATARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2225/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Amit Suresh Agrawal, V The Income Tax Officer, Amit Trading Co, Plot No.35, S Ward-2, Satara. Satara – 415002. Maharashtra. Pan: Abgpa2925D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Kulkarni – Advocate Revenue By Shri Eknath Abhang – Add.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 30/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2016-17 Dated 02.04.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 10.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the impugned notice under Section 147 is issued by the JAO without having the jurisdiction to issue such notice. 5. The learned Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) have proceeded in a mechanical manner without considering the submissions made by the appellant and without conducting any independent 2 ITA No.2225/PUN/2025

KESARINATH RAM GAIKWAD,RAIGAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, PANVEL, PANVEL

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

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. Because, the ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the entire reassessment proceedings were void ab initio since the notice issued u/s 148 was issued by the JAO and not by the FAO in gross violation of section 151A

MUKUNDA PANDIT CHAUGULE,PANDHURLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3194/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mukunda Pandit Chaugule, V The Income Tax Officer, 471A, Shimpi Lane, Pandurli S Nashik. B.O., Pandhurli, Nashik – 422502 Pan: Atepc5427G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Sadananda – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11/02/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 26.09.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The I.T.Act, 1961 Dated 20.04.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

section 151A is unsustainable in view of the law consistently laid down by Hon'ble Courts and hence, the reassessment order u/s 147 may be declared as null and void in law. 6] Without prejudice to the above grounds, the appellant submits that the application sent by the A.O. to the higher authority for obtaining approval