ITO, WARD-1(1), SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR vs. MS. KSHIRSAGAR FABRICS, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2009-10

2. New Light Trading Company vs. CIT (2002) 256 ITR 391 (Del) 3. M/s. Vaishali Builders & Colonizers vs. Addl.CIT vide ITA No.391/Jodh/2011, order dated 25.07.2012 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee on the other hand heavily relied on the order of CIT(A) / NFAC in quashing the re-assessment proceedings. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ABHAY COTEX PVT. LTD.,, JALNA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1423/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

2 M/s. Abhay Cortex Pvt. Ltd. iv. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the AO be restored and that of the CIT(A)-1 be vacated. v. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter all or any of the grounds of Appeal.” 3. Ground No.1 relates to allowability of depreciation

KAPIL ALCOTECH LLP,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1, AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21

section 68 are absent, the addition made is 9 prima facie unjustified. He submitted that the CIT(A) / NFAC without understanding the evidence on record in a very cryptic order has sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer which is not correct. 16. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer

ASHWINI SAHAKARI RUNGNALAYA & RESEARCH CENTER,,SOLAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS),, PUNE

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 714/Pun/2018 Ashwini Sahakari Rugnalaya & Research Centre 7107/1, Plot No. 180, North Sadar Bazar, Solapur-413003. Pan: Aaaja0041K . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

depreciation thereon. So, the extraneous profits generated from commercial operations were swept out by claiming double deduction so as to portrait that it is a charitable institution made meagre incidental profits. 8.6 Adverting to internal resolution placed at Pg230-to250/PB-1, for instance the Ld. Mr Patel submitted that, the Ld. AR’s contention that pursuant Hon’ble Supreme Court

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita. No.342/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

256 vested in High Court of Bombay and not the High Court of Delhi. It further observed that transfer of assessment cases of the assessee under section 127(1) for some years other than the year in question has no relevance or bearing on territorial jurisdictional competence. In deciding so, it was also observed that the: `decisions of the High

GRUPO ANTOLIN INDIA PVT. LTD., (ERSTWHILE KNOWN AS GRUPO ANTOLIN PUNE PRIVATE LIMITED),PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.299/Pun/2013 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act making an adjustment of ₹ 2.20 crores, against which the assessee is in appeal before us. 9. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that adjustment has been made in the segment of advisory services provided by assessee to its associated enterprises. He further stated that during the course

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE vs. COCA COLA INDIA PVT.LTD,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. COCA-COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

ADDL.CIT RANGE-1, PUNE, PUNE vs. COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. COCA-COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. COCA-COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

COCA COLA INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 1(1) 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Pune Tal Mulshi, Pune Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent : (Assessment Year: 2000-01) : (Assessment Year: 2001-02) : (Assessment Year: 2002-03) : (Assessment Year: 2003-04) : (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit, Circle - 1(1) M/S. Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. Pmt Building 1107-1110, Pirangut Vs. Shankar Seth Road Tal Mulshi, Pune Swargate, Pune 411037 Pan: Aaacb8573G Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri R. Murlidhar Revenue By: Shri Sardar Singh Meena Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022

2,01,90,507/- to the total income. 5.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant vide submission dated 23.10.2003 submitted as under: "19.1 The appellant's business is inextricably linked with the growth of the bottling industry, as the concentrate manufactured by the appellants has no other commercial use, except as raw material in the manufacture of cool drinks

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. RDS CONSTRUCTION CO.,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2731 To 2733/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Kolhapur. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Rds Construction Co., 233/3, Malati Towers, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur-416003. Pan : Aabfr4457M ……""यथ" / Respondent Revenue By : Shri Sanjeev Ghai Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are Three Appeals Under Consideration. Ita Nos.2731 & 2732/Pun/2016 Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Common Orders Of Cit(A)-2, Kolhapur Dated 26.09.2016 U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2010-11 Respectively.

2 raised by the Revenue in both the appeals for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2010-11 relating to the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act which was deleted by the CIT(A). 5. The background facts of the case include that the assessee is engaged in trading in AC Sheets. There was a survey action

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. RDS CONSTRUCTION CO.,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2731 To 2733/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-2, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Kolhapur. बनाम / V/S. M/S. Rds Construction Co., 233/3, Malati Towers, Tarabai Park, Kolhapur-416003. Pan : Aabfr4457M ……""यथ" / Respondent Revenue By : Shri Sanjeev Ghai Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are Three Appeals Under Consideration. Ita Nos.2731 & 2732/Pun/2016 Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Common Orders Of Cit(A)-2, Kolhapur Dated 26.09.2016 U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2010-11 Respectively.

2 raised by the Revenue in both the appeals for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2010-11 relating to the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act which was deleted by the CIT(A). 5. The background facts of the case include that the assessee is engaged in trading in AC Sheets. There was a survey action