THE DEOLA MERCHANTS CO-OP. BANK LTD.,,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee for assessment year 2010-11 is allowed and for assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1560 & 1561/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 The Deola Merchants Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Bhagyodaya, At Post – Deola, Tal-Deola, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Dist. Nashik – 423102 …. Pan: Aaaat4787E Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle – 1, Nashik

delay of 14 days in filing the appeals late before the Tribunal is condoned. 4. The assessee in ITA No.1560/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2010-11 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, 1. Without considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Assessing Officer has erred

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

condone the delay of 445\ndays in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and\nadmit the appeal for adjudication.\n4. Since most of the grounds raised in these two appeals are\ncommon, we proceed to dispose of these appeals by way of\nconsolidated order for the sake of convenience.\n5. We will first take up ITA No.1183/PUN/2023 relating

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

condone the delay of 445\ndays in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and\nadmit the appeal for adjudication.\n\n4. Since most of the grounds raised in these two appeals are\ncommon, we proceed to dispose of these appeals by way of\nconsolidated order for the sake of convenience.\n\n5. We will first take

MR. CHITTARANJAN TRIMBAK GAIKWAD,PUNE vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeal. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. He filed his return of income for AY 2010-11 on 16.10.2010 2 ITA No.759/PUN/2024, AY 2010-11 declaring total income of Rs.7,12,450/-. Subsequently, he revised his return by filing revised return

MAHESH URBAN CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -2, SOLAPUR

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.583/Pun/2020 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mahesh Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., 128, Near Old Faujdar, Shukruwar Peth, Solapur – 413 002. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaaam0511H

1,64,515/-. 10.2 The appellant claimed that the cooperative banks have been made taxable with effect from AY 2007-08 and they were also in section 36(l)(vii)(a). In view of cooperative banks being governed by the Banking 4 A.Y. : 2011-12 Mahesh Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Regulation Act, it was making provisions for NPAs even

SUVARNYUG SAHKARI BANK LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in the following paragraphs. 4. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under :- “1. The learned CIT Appeal IV Pune has aid in law as well as in facts while confirming the order of assessing officer Dy. CIT Circle 6 levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) upon

SUVARNYUG SAHKARI BANK LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in the following paragraphs. 4. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under :- “1. The learned CIT Appeal IV Pune has aid in law as well as in facts while confirming the order of assessing officer Dy. CIT Circle 6 levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) upon

S T CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 5(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2136/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 S T Co-Operative Credit V The Income Tax Officer, Society, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Swargate S T Depo, Veer Savarkar Nagar, Swargate Bus Stand, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aabas6856L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 09.08.2024 For A.Y.2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant By Refusing To Condone The Delay Of 108 Days In Filing The Appeal Without Appreciating That The Said Delay Was Due To Reasonable Cause As Explained In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Filed Before Cit(A) & Therefore, The Said Delay Ought To Have Been Condoned In The Interest Of Justice & The Appeal Should Have Been Adjudicated On Merits. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Ought To Have Appreciated That The Deduction U/S 80P Was Allowable In Respect Of Interest Earned From Deposits Made By Cooperative Banks As Consistently Held By Honorable

1. The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant by refusing to condone the delay of 108 days in filing the appeal without appreciating that the said delay was due to reasonable cause as explained in the application for condonation of delay filed before CIT(A) and therefore, the said delay ought to have been condoned

GOLDEN CHARITABLE TRUST,SANGLI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.933/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :- Golden Charitable Trust, The Cit Exemption, 2349, Guruwar Peth, Miraj, V Pune. Maharashtra – 416410. S Pan: Aactg0998H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/04/2024 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(Exemption), Pune Under Section 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Passed On 30.06.2023.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Learned Cit (Exemption) Has Erred In Fact & In Law In Rejecting The Application For The Registration Of The Trust U/S. 12A(1) (Ac) Despite The Fact That Appellant Trust Is Engaged In Pursuing Purely Charitable Objects Such As Providing Medical & Educational Aid To Needy Beneficiaries & The Trust Activities Are Genuine & There Is No Contrary Finding To It. Thus The Rejection Order Is Patently Illegal & Golden Charitable Trust [A]

delay could have been condoned by CIT ( exemption) asper provisions of section 119(2)(b). 5. Learned CIT (Exemption) has erred in fact in law in passing rejection order for Registration u/s. 12(A) (1) (ac) despite the fact that, there is no violation of any of the provisions of Income Tax Act and the trust is pursuing charitable objects

MALEGAON MAHANAGAR PALIKA KARMCHARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1 MALEGAON, MALEGAON, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

36. The original source of the investments made by the petitioners in nationalised banks is admittedly the income that the petitioners derived from the activities listed in sub-clauses (i) to (vii) of clause (a). The character of such income may not be lost, especially when the statute uses the expression "attributable

RAJIV YASHWANT BHALE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.27 & 279/Pun/2017 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

delay of 16 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is taken up for adjudication. II. ON MERITS OF THE ADDITIONS OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL 5. Facts : Brief facts of the case include that the assessee is an individual and is engaged in the Property Developers and Builder. Assessee filed the return of income declaring total income

RAJIV YASHWANT BHALE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.27 & 279/Pun/2017 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

delay of 16 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is taken up for adjudication. II. ON MERITS OF THE ADDITIONS OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL 5. Facts : Brief facts of the case include that the assessee is an individual and is engaged in the Property Developers and Builder. Assessee filed the return of income declaring total income

THE PRAKASHCHAND JAIN MULTI STATE CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,JAMNER vs. ITO WARD 1(4) JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1791, 1801 & 1802/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2014-15 & 2018-19 The Prakashchand Jain Multi V The Income Tax Officer, State Co-Operative Credit S Ward-1(4), Jalgaon. Society Ltd., Mayur Complex, Bajrangpura Road, Jamner, Jalgaon – 424206. Pan: Aaaap4677K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vinay Kawdia – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Bunch Of Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Dated 10.07.2024, A.Y.2014-15 & A.Y.2018-19 Dated 09.07.2024 Respectively. Since The Issue Involved Is Common & Facts Are Identical, All The Three Appeals

1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A), NFAC has erred in not condoning the delay in filing appeal and dismissing the appeal in-limine without going into the merits of the case. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO, NFAC has erred

THE PRAKASHCHAND JAIN MULTI STATE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,JAMNER vs. ITO WARD 1(4), JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1791, 1801 & 1802/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2014-15 & 2018-19 The Prakashchand Jain Multi V The Income Tax Officer, State Co-Operative Credit S Ward-1(4), Jalgaon. Society Ltd., Mayur Complex, Bajrangpura Road, Jamner, Jalgaon – 424206. Pan: Aaaap4677K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vinay Kawdia – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Bunch Of Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Dated 10.07.2024, A.Y.2014-15 & A.Y.2018-19 Dated 09.07.2024 Respectively. Since The Issue Involved Is Common & Facts Are Identical, All The Three Appeals

1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A), NFAC has erred in not condoning the delay in filing appeal and dismissing the appeal in-limine without going into the merits of the case. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO, NFAC has erred

PRAKASHCHAND JAIN MULTI STATE CO.OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,JAMNER vs. ITO WARD 1(4), JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1791, 1801 & 1802/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2020-21, 2014-15 & 2018-19 The Prakashchand Jain Multi V The Income Tax Officer, State Co-Operative Credit S Ward-1(4), Jalgaon. Society Ltd., Mayur Complex, Bajrangpura Road, Jamner, Jalgaon – 424206. Pan: Aaaap4677K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vinay Kawdia – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Bunch Of Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Dated 10.07.2024, A.Y.2014-15 & A.Y.2018-19 Dated 09.07.2024 Respectively. Since The Issue Involved Is Common & Facts Are Identical, All The Three Appeals

1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A), NFAC has erred in not condoning the delay in filing appeal and dismissing the appeal in-limine without going into the merits of the case. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO, NFAC has erred

WALWA PANCHAYAT SAMITTEE SALARY EARNERS SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LTD,ISLAMPUR vs. ITO WARD 5, SANGLI, AAYKAR BHAVAN, SANGLI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3064/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Walwa Panchayat Samittee V The Income Tax Officer, Salarayearners Sahakari S Ward-5, Sangli. Patsanstha Ltd., Urun Islampur, Sangli – 415409. Pan: Aaaaw0459L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ajitesh Kumar Meena – Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 27/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026

condoned. Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard ld.DR and perused the records. In this case, Assessing Officer has disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction u/s.80P of Rs.30,82,722/-, on the ground that Assessee failed to file details. Aggrieved by the assessment order, Assessee filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) who has confirmed the assessment order. 3. In this case, Assessing

VISHAY INTERTECHNOLOGY ASIA P LTD,SINGAPORE vs. ACIT(IT), CIR-2, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.27/Pun/2021 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vishay Intertechnology Asia Pte Ltd., 37A Tampines Street 92, #7-01, Singapore – 528886 .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaecv5885F बनधम / V/S.

36,46,092/- are chargeable to tax in India as Fees for technical services. It is thus clear that the learned assessing authority has assessed to the assessee’s reimbursement receipts; without any mark-up, as it’s deemed income u/s. 9(1) (Vii) of the Act. 7. It is in light of the foregoing clinching fact of reimbursement element

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

36,38,812/as the appellant's income under Section 69A, categorizing these as "unexplained deposits" The sequence of proceedings in this case is as under : Notice u/s 148 07/04/2021 (This notice was subsequently withdrawn vide communication dated 16/01/2023) Proceedings u/s 148A(b) 24/05/2022 Notice u/s 148A(d) 26/07/2022 Notice u/s 148 27/07/2022 Order u/s 147 read with 22/05/2023 section 144B

THE SATARA DCC BANK STAFF CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,SATARA vs. ACIT, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.633/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Satara Dcc Bank Staff V The Asst. Commissioner Co-Op Credit Society Ltd., S. Of Income Tax, Satara S.No.523 A/1, Vijay Circle, Satara. Millenium, Shop No.2, Satara, Maharashtra – 415001. Pan: Aaaat0953G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms. Renuka Arunrao Ghatge Fca– Ar Revenue By Shri Vinodpawar,Irs – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commssioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, 1961, For The A.Y.2018-19, Dated 06.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Nfac-Cit (A), Delhi, Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer (A.O.) In Making Addition Of Rs. 93,91,184/- On

condone the delay on technical ground that the appellant failed to provide any supporting documentary evidence or any admissible reason to substantiate the claim of sufficient cause, though, it was very well explained before Id. CIT (A) and there is a resonable cause which has prevented in filing the appeal belatedly, thus the delay was not deliberate or as result