DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, MAN,SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

vii). further restricts the type of society\nwhich can avail of the deductions contained in those two sub-clauses, unlike any\nsuch restrictive language in Section 80P(2)(a)(i). Once it is clear that the co-\noperative society in question is providing credit facilities to its members, the fact\nthat it is providing credit facilities to non-members does

SH PRAVINCHANDRA WALCHAND SHAH,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -1, NASHIK

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.296/Pun/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Pravinchandra Walchand The Pr.Cit, Nashik-1. Shah, Vs 19, Sumati Society, Sharanpur . Road, Shastri Nagar, Nashik – 422002. Pan: Acmps 2997L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Sardar Singh Meena – Ar Date Of Hearing 14/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y. 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Nashik-1’S Order Dated 12.03.2021 Passed In Case No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2020- 21/1031448193(1), In Proceedings U/S.263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act, and referred to 1st and 2nd proviso thereunder his case is that the corresponding addition could not exceed stamp duty value of the asset in any case under clause (ii) thereof. And that the authorities concerned may also adopt stamp duty value on the date of agreement provided that the considerations payment

DNYANESHWAR MARUTI GAIKWAD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 14(3), PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.36/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dnyaneshwar Maruti The Income Tax Officer, Gaikwad, Vs Ward-14(3), Pune. B-110, Salunke Vihar Road, . Oxford Village, Pune. Pan: Adtpg 0777 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y.2014-15 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-7, Pune’S Order Dated 21.02.2020 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-7/Wd-14( 3)/10887/2016-17, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, In Short “The Act”.

section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act since statutory tolerance margin of 10% in very terms. ITA No.36/PUN/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 Dnyaneshwar Maruti Gaikwad Vs. ITO, Ward-14(3), Pune (A) 4.1 Delay of 291 days is condoned

NASHIK DISTRICT PRIMARY TEACHERS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

vii) While section 194A(3)(v) has been so amended, Section 8OP(2)(d) has not been amended to include co-operative banks explicitly viii) Provisions relating to exemption and deduction need to be strictly construed and no liberal interpretation on intendment can be inferred in such provisions. An interest income not allowed as deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) cannot

SHRI MAHADEV TUKARAM KANCHAN,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-14(3), PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1674/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2014-15 | Shri Mahadev Tukaram Kanchan, 45, Mahadev Niwas, Parivartan Society, Ashram Road, Urali Kanchan, Pune-412202. PAN : AWXPK5330Q | Vs. | ITO, Ward-14(3), Pune. | | Appellant | | Respondent | Assessee by : Shri B. C. Malakar, Shri Yuvraj V. Bhandare Revenue by : Shri Bharat Andhale Date of hearing : 04.12.2025 Date of pronouncement : 05.01.

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred dismissing the appeal of the appellant ignoring and without appreciating the facts that

AJINATH SANTRAM KHARAT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purpose

vii)(b)(ii) were not attracted\nand that all evidences relied upon were before the ld AO and no\nadditional evidences were filed before Hon CIT(A) and therefore\ndismissal of this ground by the Hon CIT(A) was not justified and\nconsequent addition be kindly deleted.\n2. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and or vary\nthe

PANDIT DINDAYAL UPAHYEY NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LTD,SHAHADA vs. ITO, WARD 1, DHULE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1409/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Pandit Dindayal Upahyey V The Income Tax Officer, Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., S Ward -1, Dhule. Near Bohari Market Dondaicha Road, Shahade – 425409. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaald0407C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Pawan Bharti –Dr(Virtual Hearing) Date Of Hearing 12/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/11/2025 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 24.02.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 25.11.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

56 as income from other sources without appreciating that the said addition was not justified on facts and in law 2] The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant society was engaged in the activity of providing credit facilities to its members and therefore, the interest earned from FDRs placed with nationalized banks was intrinsically connected with

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

SHRI GANADHIPATI GANDHARACHARYA KUNTIUSAGAR VIDYA SODH SONSTHA,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, PUNE, KOLHAPUR

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

condoned by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) upheld the decision of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal for the reason that the assessee filed the income tax return beyond the due date of filing of the return, by observing as under : “6.3 In this context, it's important to note that according

SHRI GANADHIPATI GANDHARACHARYA KUNTIUSAGAR VIDYA SODH SONSTHA,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, PUNE, KOLHAPUR

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

condoned by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) upheld the decision of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal for the reason that the assessee filed the income tax return beyond the due date of filing of the return, by observing as under : “6.3 In this context, it's important to note that according

SHRI GANADHIPATI GANDHARACHARYA KUNTIUSAGAR VIDYA SODH SONSTHA,PUNE vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

condoned by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) upheld the decision of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal for the reason that the assessee filed the income tax return beyond the due date of filing of the return, by observing as under : “6.3 In this context, it's important to note that according

SHRI GANADHIPATI GANDHARACHARYA KUNTIUSAGAR VIDYA SODH SONSTHA,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, PUNE, KOLHAPUR

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

condoned by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) upheld the decision of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal for the reason that the assessee filed the income tax return beyond the due date of filing of the return, by observing as under : “6.3 In this context, it's important to note that according

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

UMESH BHIMRAO CHIPRIKAR,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, , KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1297/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Umesh Bhimrao Chiprikar, Vs The Income Tax Officer, Shanti Dental Hospital, Ward-1, Ichalkaranji. Harshwardhan Complea, Kolhapur Road, A/P.Jaysingpur, Jaysingpur – 416101. Maharashtra. Pan: Afkpc9558C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Umeshkumar M. Mali – Ar Revenue By Shari Sandeep P Sathe – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 21/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/08/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax-(Appeal)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 13.02.2024 For The Assessment Year 2013- 14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) Ground No. 1 On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Ao Umesh Bhimrao Chiprikar, Kolhapur [A]

condonation of delay of 23 days. Submission of ld.DR : 5. The ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of AO and ld.CIT(A). Findings &Analysis : 5 Umesh Bhimrao Chiprikar, Kolhapur [A] 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is observed that AO had reopened Assessee’s case on account of cash deposits of Rs.12

SANJAY VASANTRAO PATIL,SATANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - MALEGAON

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

Bench: SHRI R.K. PANDA (Vice President), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

condone the said delay and proceed to decide the appeal. 3. Although, a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC confirming the addition of Rs.51,47,000/- u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) on account

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. VISTA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

delay in filing of the CO is condoned and the CO is admitted for adjudication. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a private company, engaged in the business of trading in shares and securities. It filed its return of income on 23.12.2011 declaring total loss of Rs.26,873/-. The assessment was completed

SHRI AJINKYA MAHADEV KANCHAN,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-43(3), PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred dismissing the appeal of the appellant for non-compliance to the notices

AMOL PRAMOD MAHAJAN,JALGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

vii) The computation interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C will be a part of the assessment order itself. (viii) Wherever, the AO found the provisions of section 269SS/269T are violated, separate proposal for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271D/271E should be submitted. (ix) Wherever necessary, the AO shall forward 3rd party information to the AO of such party. (x) That