SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

E) dated 31st March, 2015 after wide public consultations. The ICDS-VII relating to Government grants provides that all Government grants except relating to depreciable asset shall be recognised as income in accordance with the provisions of the said ICDS. The existing provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (2) of section 43 of the Income-tax Act already contained

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-5, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD., PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

E) dated 31st March, 2015 after wide public consultations. The ICDS-VII relating to Government grants provides that all Government grants except relating to depreciable asset shall be recognised as income in accordance with the provisions of the said ICDS. The existing provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (2) of section 43 of the Income-tax Act already contained

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

E) dated 31st March, 2015 after wide public consultations. The ICDS-VII relating to Government grants provides that all Government grants except relating to depreciable asset shall be recognised as income in accordance with the provisions of the said ICDS. The existing provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (2) of section 43 of the Income-tax Act already contained

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -5, PUNE vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

13,379/-. (e) Disallowance of depreciation on certain items of stainless steel tables, stools, trollies used in the laboratory as Plant & Machinery of Rs.1,38,153/-. (f) Disallowance of Product Development Expenditure u/s 35(1)/37 of Rs.14,37,06,712/-. (g) Disallowance of donation u/s 37(1) of Rs.5,50,000/-. (h) Disallowance of repairs to building, plant

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

E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 12.06.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has filed the CO against the appeal filed by the Revenue. For the sake of convenience, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed

SUN INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

E Revenue by : Shri M.G. Jasnani सुिवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 14-06-2023 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 15-06-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 27-03-2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (“NFAC”) for assessment year 2017-18. 2. We find

REXEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

Section 32(1) of the Act. The Ld. AO\ncompleted the assessment by passing the assessment order u/s 143(3) of\nthe Act dated 20.12.2018 disallowing the claim of depreciation of Rs.\n14,98,78,251/- on the Goodwill of Rs.59,95,13,004/-.\n4.\nAggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)\nagainst the said disallowance

ASHOK NARAYAN BHOSALE,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1501/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ashok Narayan Bhosale, The Deputy Commissioner Of Ashok Narayan Bhosle Bunglow At Vs Income Tax, Kaveri Nagar, Pratham Housing Cirlce-8, Pune. Society, Wakad, Pune – 411057. Pan: Aaspb 3588 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S.P.Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 10/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14/03/2022

e overall impact of this transaction is Rs.85,47,189/- as an additional expenditure of current year debited to Profit and Loss Account.” unquote 4. Ground No.1: The brief facts pertaining to Ground No.1 are that the appellant had purchased certain assets on 30/09/2011.As per clause (iia) of sub-section 1 of Section 32 of the Act, assessee is eligible

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

e portal on or before 28/03/2024.\nSANTOSH KUMAR\n6.\nRejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, he set aside the\norder dated 13.12.2021 passed by the Assessing Officer disposing of the objections\nof the assessee to the notice dated 31.03.2021 issued u/s 148 of the Act for proper\nverification of fact and to re-examine the issues. The relevant

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -11,, PUNE vs. CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED , (FORMERLY IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD.),, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

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

e-return was filed declaring total income at Rs.6,98,02,52,640/- as per the normal computation and book profit u/s.115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) at Rs.7,08,45,55,209/-. Thereafter, the return was revised twice. The assessee claimed deduction u/s.10AA. The assessment was completed by determining the total income, under

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

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

e-return was filed declaring total income at Rs.6,98,02,52,640/- as per the normal computation and book profit u/s.115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) at Rs.7,08,45,55,209/-. Thereafter, the return was revised twice. The assessee claimed deduction u/s.10AA. The assessment was completed by determining the total income, under

MAHLE ANAND THERMAL SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : ITA No.127/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue and ITA No.333/PUN/2024 filed by the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the order dated 28.11.2023 of the Ld. CIT(A), Pune – 13 relating to assessment year 2014-15. ITA No.96/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated

DCIT CIRCLE 8 , PUNE vs. MAHLE ANAND THERMAL SYSTEMS PVT. LTD, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : ITA No.127/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue and ITA No.333/PUN/2024 filed by the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the order dated 28.11.2023 of the Ld. CIT(A), Pune – 13 relating to assessment year 2014-15. ITA No.96/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated

DCIT,CIRCLE-8 , PUNE vs. MAHALE ANAND THERMAL SYSTEMS PVT. LTD. , PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : ITA No.127/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue and ITA No.333/PUN/2024 filed by the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the order dated 28.11.2023 of the Ld. CIT(A), Pune – 13 relating to assessment year 2014-15. ITA No.96/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , PANVEL vs. EPYGEN BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

e-filed on 28.11.2018. Case selected for complete scrutiny on two issues, namely, business loss and large deduction claimed on account of scientific research u/s. 35(1)(iv) of the Act. Valid statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act duly served upon the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, Ld.AO observed that assessee has claimed

AIR CONTRAL INDIA PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

e) Sales and Purchase spare part of air-conditioning equipments. f) We also engaged in generation of power by windmills. We have four windmills Since we are engaged in manufacturing we have claimed additional depreciation U/S 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act at 20%. For the Windmill installed at STARA during the year. We have claimed normal depreciation

ZF STEERING GEAR (INDIA) LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (1),, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14

E return of income for A.Y. 2007-08 on 7/11/2007. The assessee declared total income at Rs. NIL as per the normal provisions of the I.T. Act 1961 (for short “the Act”) and Rs. 21,86,10,387/- u/s 115JB of the Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and order u/s 143(3) of the Act, was passed

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

depreciation allowance in respect of a block of asset which has not been given full effect to prior to the assessment year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2020, corresponding adjustment shall be made to the written down value of such block of assets as on the 1st day of April, 2019 in the prescribed manner, if the option