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

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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

GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CONTROS LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 8, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside, and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

condone the delay in filing Form No.10-IC is with ld.CCIT and ld.Pr.CIT. Findings & Analysis : 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, vide order u/sec.143(1), Assessee’s claim for benefit of ITA No.38/PUN/2025 [A] lower tax as per section 115BBA was denied on the ground that Form No.10-IC was not filed electronically

ADVANSYS (INDIA) P. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO 1(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.396/Pun/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Advansys (India) P. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Pune. Plot No.5-7, Raisoni Industrial, Plot No.5-7, Raisoni Industrial Park, Phase-Ii, Mann, Hinjewadi, Pune- 411057. Pan : Aadca3607P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am : This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Pune Dated 20.11.2018. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Pune Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Appellant In Liminie Against The Assessment Order Passed Making Addition Of Rs.

depreciation thereby rejecting the appellant’s prayer for condonation of delay in filing the appeal for days for cogent and sufficient

PASHANKAR AUTO INDIA PVT LTD,PUNE vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

condone the delay in both the AYs. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- AY 2013-14 “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, assessee could receive hard copy of the appellate order on only 17/07/2023 for the reasons A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 beyond its control. An affidavit explaining the circumstances is enclosed

PASHANKAR AUTO INDIA PVT LTD,PUNE vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

condone the delay in both the AYs. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- AY 2013-14 “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, assessee could receive hard copy of the appellate order on only 17/07/2023 for the reasons A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 beyond its control. An affidavit explaining the circumstances is enclosed

PARAG MILK FOODS PVT. LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (1), , PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

delay in assessee‟s appeals is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. ITA No. 756 & 757/PUN/2019 (Assessee) 3. That, on perusal of the grounds of appeals, the first issue emerges from ground No.1 is with regard to disallowance u/sec. 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii). The other issue is with regard to direction of the ld.CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE vs. PARAG MILK FOODS PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

delay in assessee‟s appeals is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. ITA No. 756 & 757/PUN/2019 (Assessee) 3. That, on perusal of the grounds of appeals, the first issue emerges from ground No.1 is with regard to disallowance u/sec. 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii). The other issue is with regard to direction of the ld.CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4, , PUNE vs. PARAG MILK FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

delay in assessee‟s appeals is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. ITA No. 756 & 757/PUN/2019 (Assessee) 3. That, on perusal of the grounds of appeals, the first issue emerges from ground No.1 is with regard to disallowance u/sec. 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii). The other issue is with regard to direction of the ld.CIT

PARAG MILK FOODS PVT. LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (1), , PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

delay in assessee‟s appeals is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. ITA No. 756 & 757/PUN/2019 (Assessee) 3. That, on perusal of the grounds of appeals, the first issue emerges from ground No.1 is with regard to disallowance u/sec. 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii). The other issue is with regard to direction of the ld.CIT

D.Y. PATIL EDUCATION SOCIETY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकरअपऩलसं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2016 निर्धारणवषा / Assessment Year: N.A. D.Y.Patil Education Society, V The Commissioner Of 2126, „E‟ Tarabai Park, S Income Tax(Central), Kolhapur – 416003. Pune. Pan: Aaatd8919M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta, Dharmesh Shah & S R Kabra – Cas Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 04/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 01/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax(Central), Pune Under Section 12Aa R.W.S 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 24.02.2016. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(Central) In Deciding The Issue Of Registration Of The Education Society Under 5. 12Aa Of The Act Vide His Order Dt. 24-02-2016 Erred In

condonation of delay back to the file of the Commissioner is no reflection on the merits which the Commissioner shall adjudicate appropriately in accordance with law. 16. In so far as the plea of the assessee that it had been granted registration earlier, the same in our view has been rightly rejected by the Commissioner and no fault

SRI PROJECTS,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), PUNE

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

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

condoning the delay of appeal filed without specifically directing to substantiate the reasons for delay in filing the appeal and hence erred in not providing the opportunity of being heard 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in not passing the order by adjudicating the legal ground and merits of the case. Ground challenging the validity of the assessment order

RUKMINI SAHAKARI BANK LTD,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE, , AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.229/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Rukmini Sahakari Bank Ltd., Vs. Acit, Ahmednagar Circle, A/P. Shirgonda, Ahmednagar. Daund-Jamkhed Road, Tal. Shirgonda, Dist.: Ahmednagar- 411002. Pan : Aaaas5122Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Abhay Avchat Revenue By Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav : Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Pune [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 06.09.2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “The Following Grounds Are Taken Without Prejudice To Each Other— On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, 1. Without Considering Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Assistant Commissioner Of Income, Ahmednagar Circle, Ahmednagar, Has Erred In Making Aggregate Addition Of Rs. 4,20,858/- On Account Of Entrance Fees & Nominal

condone the delay of 24 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a cooperative bank engaged in the business of banking. The return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 was filed on 17.09.2014 declaring total income of Rs.1,64,40,394/-. Against the said return

GARVE MOTORS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 9,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.776/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Garve Motors Pvt. Ltd., S.No.136/1A 46, B P Road, Pune – 411016 . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan:Aadcg4391A बनाम / V/S. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Circle – 9, Pune द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mrs. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 26/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 07/10/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Extant Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 06/12/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Climbed Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 15/03/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-9, Pune [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2013-14. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

depreciation thereon. 6. The learned departmental representative [for short “DR”] expressing no objection for condonation of delay, Au contraire, rebutted