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

depreciation on the reduced amount of Fixed Assets. 30. Now against the adjustment made by CPC assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) and was able to succeed as ld.CIT(A) on one hand has held that the contention of the appellant that it was not an incorrect claim as defined u/s.143(1) of the Act is accepted and has also

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

depreciation on the reduced amount of Fixed Assets. 30. Now against the adjustment made by CPC assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) and was able to succeed as ld.CIT(A) on one hand has held that the contention of the appellant that it was not an incorrect claim as defined u/s.143(1) of the Act is accepted and has also

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

depreciation on the reduced amount of Fixed Assets. 30. Now against the adjustment made by CPC assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) and was able to succeed as ld.CIT(A) on one hand has held that the contention of the appellant that it was not an incorrect claim as defined u/s.143(1) of the Act is accepted and has also

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE ,, PUNE vs. THE BISHOPS EDUCATION SOCIETY,, PUNE

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

30 to section 43C. That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE ,, PUNE vs. SHIVNAGAR VIDYA PRASARAK MANDAL,, PUNE

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

30 to section 43C. That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery

NIHILENT TECHNOLOGIES P.LTD.,PUNE vs. ITO, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

depreciation, whichever is lower.‖ 8. We find that the decision rendered by AAR in the case of Rastriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. (supra) and the order of Tribunal in the case of Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd. (supra) are unanimous in the manner of computation of book profits, as provided in clause (iii) to Explanation 1 of section 115JB

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

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

30 to 36 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Since there is specific provision 36(1)(v) of the I.T. Act, 1961 in respect of amount in question, provisions of section 37 will not apply. Accordingly, ground No.2 and 3 are dismissed.” 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us. 6. Before

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

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

30 to 36 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Since there is specific provision 36(1)(v) of the I.T. Act, 1961 in respect of amount in question, provisions of section 37 will not apply. Accordingly, ground No.2 and 3 are dismissed.” 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us. 6. Before

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD6(1), PUNE

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

depreciation. Please refer submissions in\nAnnexure 'A' to Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18.\n\n(B) The adjustment made is outside the scope of the specific items of\nadjustments permitted u/s 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act.\n\nhas (ii) The reasons given in the adjustments made under section\n143(1)(a) made under

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 45 of the Act. Therefore, we are of the view that\nthese provisions have no relevance to the facts of the present case.\n26. The Revenue, vide its written submissions, has relied upon certain\njudicial pronouncements, which have been dealt with hereunder: -\n(a) We find that the decision in Borkar Packaging (P.) Ltd. v.\nAssistant Commissioner of Income

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(1), PUNE

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

depreciation. Please refer submissions in\nAnnexure 'A' to Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18.\n(B) The adjustment made is outside the scope of the specific items of\nadjustments permitted u/s 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act.\nhas (ii) The reasons given in the adjustments made under section\n143(1)(a) made under the Act can neither

ACIT, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

depreciation. Please refer submissions in\nAnnexure 'A' to Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18.\n(B) The adjustment made is outside the scope of the specific items of\nadjustments permitted u/s 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act.\nhas (ii) The reasons given in the adjustments made under section\n143(1)(a) made under the Act can neither

SATARA ENGINEERING PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2450/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2024-25

depreciation" shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (b) of sub-section (7) of section 72A.” 6. Now before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that in compliance to section 115BAB(7) assessee has first time opted for this concessional rate of tax u/s.115BAB of the Act in the return filed

M/S. FIAT INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

30 November 2014, the interest under section 234A cannot be levied. The Appellant prays that the interest levied under section 234A be deleted.  The assessee prays that the interest under section 234B, being purely consequential to the impugned denial of set off of loss of Rs. 138 crore, the same may be directed to be consequently deleted. In relation

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1) , PUNE vs. FIAT INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

30 November 2014, the interest under section 234A cannot be levied. The Appellant prays that the interest levied under section 234A be deleted.  The assessee prays that the interest under section 234B, being purely consequential to the impugned denial of set off of loss of Rs. 138 crore, the same may be directed to be consequently deleted. In relation

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3),, SOLAPUR vs. SHRI. ULHAS MALLIKARJUN PATIL,, SOLAPUR

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.1751/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, Shri Ulhas Mallikarjun Patil, Ward-2(3), Solapur, Vs Block No.3, Sunandan . Complex, Near Dayanand College, Ravivar Peth, Solapur – 413004. Pan: Akepp 1943 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Krishna V Gujarathi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 05/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 06/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-7, Pune’S Order Dated 31.08.2018 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-7/Wd- 2(3)/10434/2016-147, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

30,25,000/-. The assessee submitted copy of balance sheet in and expenditure account with return of income. The AO had information that the assessee has sold immovable property of Rs. 3,39,00,000/-(stamp valuation). The AO sought details of sale and the assessee submitted that he had purchased property on 06.12.2014 and construction commenced

AYOKI FABRICON PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

30-09-2008 declaring total income of Rs.4.56 crore, which was subsequently revised on 11-01-2009 to total income of Rs.3.30 crore. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 29-12-2010. On examination of the depreciation schedule, the AO noticed that additional depreciation of Rs.1,04,80,668/- was claimed

AYOKI FABRICON PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

30-09-2008 declaring total income of Rs.4.56 crore, which was subsequently revised on 11-01-2009 to total income of Rs.3.30 crore. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 29-12-2010. On examination of the depreciation schedule, the AO noticed that additional depreciation of Rs.1,04,80,668/- was claimed