M/S. CHAKRABARTY MEDICAL CENTRE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1137/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Chakrabarty Medical Centre, C-802, Palmdale, California Apartments, Nibm, Undri Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411060 …. Pan: Aabfc5809Q Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 1, Ahmednagar अऩीऱाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Nikhil Pathak प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Sanjeev Ghei

271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. Briefly, in the facts of the case, for the year under consideration the assessee had furnished return of income showing loss of ₹ 6,480/-. The assessee was partnership firm and was carrying on medical profession. The return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer recorded

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLHPAUR vs. RBL BANK LTD, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 02.02.2024 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Id.CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty of Rs.50,95,69,294/- levied by AO u/s 271 (l)(c

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

271/[1996] 89 Taxman 311 , while interpreting the section 80-O of the Act considered. The question whether the commission retained out of the gross premium payable in foreign exchange would be eligible for deduction under section 80-C. In that context, the Apex Court has held as under: .. "The appellant instead of remitting the entire amount to the foreign

SKODA AUTO INDIA PVT. LTD.,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.714/Pun/2011 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad. .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Skoda Auto India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.A1/1, Shendra Five Star Industrial Area, Midc, Aurangabad-431 201 Pan :Aaecs3749M ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

C” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.714/PUN/2011 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad. .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. Skoda Auto India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.A1/1, Shendra Five Star Industrial Area, MIDC, Aurangabad-431 201 PAN :AAECS3749M ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent प्रत्याक्षेप सं./CO.No.41/PUN/2011

ACIT,CIR.-1,, AURANGABAD vs. SKODA AUTO INDIA PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.714/Pun/2011 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad. .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Skoda Auto India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.A1/1, Shendra Five Star Industrial Area, Midc, Aurangabad-431 201 Pan :Aaecs3749M ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

C” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA No.714/PUN/2011 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aurangabad. .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. Skoda Auto India Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.A1/1, Shendra Five Star Industrial Area, MIDC, Aurangabad-431 201 PAN :AAECS3749M ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent प्रत्याक्षेप सं./CO.No.41/PUN/2011

ALI AKBAR JAFRI,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1842 To 1844/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2001-02 To 2003-04 Ali Akbar Jafari, Akbar Radiant Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Above Abn Amro Bank, 321, M.G. Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aaspj7119F Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 4, Pune

depreciation on cars and proportionate disallowance of interest. After making the aforesaid disallowances, the Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction that the assessee has concealed income and also furnished inaccurate particulars of income and initiated penalty proceedings. 10. Penalty under section 271(1)(c

ALI AKBAR JAFRI,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1842 To 1844/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2001-02 To 2003-04 Ali Akbar Jafari, Akbar Radiant Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Above Abn Amro Bank, 321, M.G. Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aaspj7119F Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 4, Pune

depreciation on cars and proportionate disallowance of interest. After making the aforesaid disallowances, the Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction that the assessee has concealed income and also furnished inaccurate particulars of income and initiated penalty proceedings. 10. Penalty under section 271(1)(c

ALI AKBAR JAFRI,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1842 To 1844/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2001-02 To 2003-04 Ali Akbar Jafari, Akbar Radiant Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Above Abn Amro Bank, 321, M.G. Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aaspj7119F Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 4, Pune

depreciation on cars and proportionate disallowance of interest. After making the aforesaid disallowances, the Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction that the assessee has concealed income and also furnished inaccurate particulars of income and initiated penalty proceedings. 10. Penalty under section 271(1)(c

SAKAL PAPER LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.347 & 348/Pun/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09 Sakal Papers Ltd., ………. अपीलाथ" / 595, Budhwar Peth, Appellant Pune – 411 002. Pan : Aaccs7605Q. बनाम V/S

271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer. Assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80IA(4) without setting off the unabsorbed depreciation and losses of earlier years which is not intended by section

INTERVALVE POONAWALLA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14 Intervalve Poonawalla Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle 1(1), Fin Div. 16/B-1, Sarosh Bhavan, Pune Vs. 2Nd Floor, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Opp. Niv, Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaaci3917P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Vishnu Bhutada Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 14-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025 O R D E R

depreciation of Rs.89,42,896/- which is the subject matter for levy of penalty. 3. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC restricted the disallowance u/s 14A to Rs.1,82,234/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. He noted that the assessee

MANAV PACKAGING INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

section 271(1)(c), whereas, penalty has been levied without mentioning any specific Charge or Limb in penalty order.” 8. Brief facts of the case as emanating from record are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in Corrugated Boxes and filed return of income declaring at Nil. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings determining

MANAV PACKAGING INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

section 271(1)(c), whereas, penalty has been levied without mentioning any specific Charge or Limb in penalty order.” 8. Brief facts of the case as emanating from record are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in Corrugated Boxes and filed return of income declaring at Nil. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings determining

MANAV PACKAGING INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

section 271(1)(c), whereas, penalty has been levied without mentioning any specific Charge or Limb in penalty order.” 8. Brief facts of the case as emanating from record are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in Corrugated Boxes and filed return of income declaring at Nil. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings determining

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

depreciation on goodwill amounting to Rs. 83,30,821 on the contention that goodwill is not in the nature of "any other business or commercial rights of similar nature" as stated in the definition of intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 18 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. Initiation of penalty under section 271(1

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS (I) PVT. LTD.,, RAIGAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

depreciation on goodwill amounting to Rs. 83,30,821 on the contention that goodwill is not in the nature of "any other business or commercial rights of similar nature" as stated in the definition of intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 18 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. Initiation of penalty under section 271(1

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS (I) PVT. LTD.,, RAIGAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

depreciation on goodwill amounting to Rs. 83,30,821 on the contention that goodwill is not in the nature of "any other business or commercial rights of similar nature" as stated in the definition of intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 18 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. Initiation of penalty under section 271(1

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

depreciation on goodwill amounting to Rs. 83,30,821 on the contention that goodwill is not in the nature of "any other business or commercial rights of similar nature" as stated in the definition of intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 18 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. Initiation of penalty under section 271(1

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

depreciation on goodwill amounting to Rs. 83,30,821 on the contention that goodwill is not in the nature of "any other business or commercial rights of similar nature" as stated in the definition of intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 18 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. Initiation of penalty under section 271(1

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.

section 271(1)(c). Consequently, the penalty has been levied under wrong charge for concealment of income. It is a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and not concealment of income. Since, the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) has been levied on wrong charge, the same is unsustainable. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal