PRITAM SHRIKANT PARVATKAR,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIR-12, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2525 & 2526/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pritam Shrikant Parvatkar, Vs. Dcit, Circle-12, Pune. 19, Jaydeo Nagar, Sinhgad Road, Pune- 411030. Pan : Abqpp3304F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Shri Vishvjeet Nagda Revenue By : Shri Manoj Tripathi Date Of Hearing : 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 08.08.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.2526/Pun/2025 For Adjudication.

condonation of delay for filing of appeal by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) without considering the facts of the case is not justified and the same leads to injustice in the case of the appellant. 1.5 The appellant, therefore, prays that the case of the appellant may please be decided on merits of the case or the case be restored before

M/S. CHHEDA ELECTRICALS AND ELECTRONICS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee in its appeal is against restricting the deduction u/s.80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) on the profits of Roorkee undertaking to Rs.3,11,49,011/- instead of profits from eligible undertaking at Rs.7

M/S. CHHEDA ELECTRICALS AND ELECTRONICS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee in its appeal is against restricting the deduction u/s.80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) on the profits of Roorkee undertaking to Rs.3,11,49,011/- instead of profits from eligible undertaking at Rs.7

PARNER VIPASSANA SAMITI,AHMEDNAGAR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 80C(5) of the Act, which ratio has been subsequently followed in various decisions including the recent decision of the Hon'ble Co- ordinate Bench of Chennai in case of Hosur Integrated Development Society (ITA 217 CHY/2024 dated 17 April 2024). b) That the Hon'ble Tribunal has power to condone the delay

SOLAPUR DIST M S K SAMITI H MASTER T AND N T PATH MYDT PANDHARPUR,PANDHARPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2, PANDHARPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.804/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Solapur Dist M S K Samiti H The Income Tax Officer, Master T & N T Path V Ward-2, Pandharapur. Mydtpandharpur, S 3980, Station Road, Pandharpur. Maharashtra – 413304. Pan: Aanas9890E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 11.05.2023 Emanating From Assessment Order Dated 30.07.2019Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S 144A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Assessee Was In Presumption That Co Operative Societies Income Is Exempt Under 80P Generally Maximum Co Solapur Dist M S K Samiti H Master T & N T Path Mydt Pandharpur [A]

condoned, 2. The provisions of Section 8OA (5) of the Act are directory and not mandatory and therefore deduction under Section MOP cannot be denied by making the provision section 80A (5) of the Act We relied upon decision of ITAT Delhi in case of the Fibre fill Engineers Vs. CIT (2017) 177 TTJ 556 (Del.) wherein it was held

PARNER VIPASSANA SAMITI,AHMEDNAGAR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) , PUNE

80C(5) of the Act, which ratio has been subsequently followed in\nvarious decisions including the recent decision of the Hon'ble Co-\nordinate Bench of Chennai in case of Hosur Integrated Development\nSociety (ITA 217 CHY/2024 dated 17 April 2024).\nb) That the Hon'ble Tribunal has power to condone the delay in filing the\napplication the final registration