ASHOK DHANRAJ CHORDIA ,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-1, PUNE

seizure action\nu/s 132 of the Act in the case of Shri Sachin M. Nahar on 01.08.2017 it was\ngathered from the seized record that the assessee had borrowed an amount of\nRs.1,40,00,000/- from Sachin Nahar in cash and an amount of Rs.15,22,200/- was\npaid in cash towards interest payment. It was informed that Shri

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. SAGAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year and for which a prior notice under Section 148 would be required to be issued. Section 147 does not contemplate an eventuality which Section 153A or Section 153C contemplates, the basis of which is inter alia a search action under Section 132 being resorted as noted hereinabove. Thus

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PRIVAT LIMITED, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

depreciation earlier not claimed in original return of income. 17. Thus, the law is clear that for an unabated assessment year, completed assessment attains finality which cannot be disturbed except on the basis of any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search action. In other words, an assessee cannot make fresh claims in the returns filed u/s 1534, particularly

RAJDEEP BUILDCOM PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

depreciation earlier not claimed in original return of income. 17. Thus, the law is clear that for an unabated assessment year, completed assessment attains finality which cannot be disturbed except on the basis of any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search action. In other words, an assessee cannot make fresh claims in the returns filed u/s 1534, particularly

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PVT LTD, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

depreciation earlier not claimed in original return of income. 17. Thus, the law is clear that for an unabated assessment year, completed assessment attains finality which cannot be disturbed except on the basis of any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search action. In other words, an assessee cannot make fresh claims in the returns filed u/s 1534, particularly

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD., AURANGABAD. vs. TAPADIYA CONSTRUCTION LTD, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

seizure operations were carried out against Tapadia Group at Aurangabad, which covered the Assessee. The search lasted for four consecutive days and was concluded on 24.08.2018 at 10:45 pm. 3.2 In course of the search, a diary was seized (Annexure A, Item No. 3), which included two pages in which certain 8 ITA.No.1375/PUN./2024 (Tapadiya Construction Ltd.) details

LALIT SAKALCHAND GANDHI,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE ,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

search and seizure action certain documents and records were seized. The AO completed assessment to the best judgment u/s. 144 of the Act vide its order dated 27-03-2015. 6. As matter stood thus, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271B of the Act by observing that the assessee failed to get its accounts audited u/s. 44AB

LALIT SAKALCHAND GANDHI,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE ,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

search and seizure action certain documents and records were seized. The AO completed assessment to the best judgment u/s. 144 of the Act vide its order dated 27-03-2015. 6. As matter stood thus, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271B of the Act by observing that the assessee failed to get its accounts audited u/s. 44AB

LALIT SAKALCHAND GANDHI,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE ,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

search and seizure action certain documents and records were seized. The AO completed assessment to the best judgment u/s. 144 of the Act vide its order dated 27-03-2015. 6. As matter stood thus, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271B of the Act by observing that the assessee failed to get its accounts audited u/s. 44AB

LALIT SAKALCHAND GANDHI,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE ,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

search and seizure action certain documents and records were seized. The AO completed assessment to the best judgment u/s. 144 of the Act vide its order dated 27-03-2015. 6. As matter stood thus, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271B of the Act by observing that the assessee failed to get its accounts audited u/s. 44AB

LALIT SAKALCHAND GANDHI,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE ,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

search and seizure action certain documents and records were seized. The AO completed assessment to the best judgment u/s. 144 of the Act vide its order dated 27-03-2015. 6. As matter stood thus, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271B of the Act by observing that the assessee failed to get its accounts audited u/s. 44AB

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ISMT LIMITED,, PUNE

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2751 & 2752/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Central Circle- 2(1), .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pune. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Ismt Limited, 2Nd Floor, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan : Aaacj9917A आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2783 & 2784/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S. Ismt Limited, 2Nd Floor, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaacj9917A बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 2(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Revenue By : Shri Deepak Garg Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora Shri Rajendra Agiwal सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As By The Assessee Directed Against The Common Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income

seizure action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) in the business premises of the appellant on 09.08.2011. During the course of search proceedings, certain documents and papers were seized and based on such documents and papers, the statement of the CEO of the assessee’s company, namely, Shri Salil Taneja was recorded

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ISMT LIMITED,, PUNE

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2751 & 2752/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Central Circle- 2(1), .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pune. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Ismt Limited, 2Nd Floor, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan : Aaacj9917A आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2783 & 2784/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S. Ismt Limited, 2Nd Floor, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaacj9917A बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 2(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Revenue By : Shri Deepak Garg Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora Shri Rajendra Agiwal सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As By The Assessee Directed Against The Common Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income

seizure action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) in the business premises of the appellant on 09.08.2011. During the course of search proceedings, certain documents and papers were seized and based on such documents and papers, the statement of the CEO of the assessee’s company, namely, Shri Salil Taneja was recorded

ISMT LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2751 & 2752/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Central Circle- 2(1), .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pune. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Ismt Limited, 2Nd Floor, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan : Aaacj9917A आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2783 & 2784/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S. Ismt Limited, 2Nd Floor, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaacj9917A बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 2(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Revenue By : Shri Deepak Garg Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora Shri Rajendra Agiwal सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As By The Assessee Directed Against The Common Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income

seizure action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) in the business premises of the appellant on 09.08.2011. During the course of search proceedings, certain documents and papers were seized and based on such documents and papers, the statement of the CEO of the assessee’s company, namely, Shri Salil Taneja was recorded

ISMT LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2751 & 2752/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Central Circle- 2(1), .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pune. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Ismt Limited, 2Nd Floor, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan : Aaacj9917A आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2783 & 2784/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S. Ismt Limited, 2Nd Floor, Lunkad Towers, Viman Nagar, Pune-411014. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaacj9917A बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Central Circle- 2(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Revenue By : Shri Deepak Garg Assessee By : Shri Rajan Vora Shri Rajendra Agiwal सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As By The Assessee Directed Against The Common Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income

seizure action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) in the business premises of the appellant on 09.08.2011. During the course of search proceedings, certain documents and papers were seized and based on such documents and papers, the statement of the CEO of the assessee’s company, namely, Shri Salil Taneja was recorded

SHRI VITTHAL SAHKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, SOLAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

depreciation on inflated bills. The CIT(A) confirmed the same. Having aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is before us. 6. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that there was a search and seizure

SHRI VITTHAL SAHKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, SOLAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

depreciation on inflated bills. The CIT(A) confirmed the same. Having aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is before us. 6. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that there was a search and seizure

SHRI VITTHAL SAHKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, SOLAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

depreciation on inflated bills. The CIT(A) confirmed the same. Having aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is before us. 6. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that there was a search and seizure

M/S GIRIRAJ ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

seizure action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) was conducted in the Malpani Group of cases of Sangamner on 17.02.2021 by the Investigation Wing, Pune. The case of the assessee was also covered during the search. The assessee filed its original return of income on 23.11.2015 declaring total loss of Rs.77