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

depreciation on\ngoodwill as a result of amalgamation is not allowable in light of sixth\nproviso to Section 32(1) and explanation (3) thereof; read with\nexplanation (7

M/S. VARDHAN NUTRITIONS AND CHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.662/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Vardhan Nutritions & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.535/2, Ershimgathi Road, Old Thana Naka Road, Thana Naka, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Panvel, Dist. Raigad. …. Pan: Aabcv9194J Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Panvel

depreciation and in view of section 50 of the Act, the gain was held to be 7 M/s. Vardhan Nutritions

SATYAM TRANSFORMERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. ITO WARD 2(3), AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1239/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Satyam Transformers Private Limited, Ito, Ward-2(3), Sharadanand, Opposite Telephone Office, Aurangabad Ajabnagar, Aurangabad-431001 Vs. Pan : Aakcs4648D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi Department By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 04-08-2025 Date Of 27-10-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order

7. In view of the above facts and after considering the appellant's submission, request for withdrawal of appeal is hereby accepted and appeal is dismissed being withdrawn.” 3 ITA No.1239/PUN/2025, AY 2015-16 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal : “1. BREACH OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE

DESAI INFRA PROJECTS (I) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. CIT(A), PUNE-11, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

7) [The deduction] under sub-section (1) from profits and gains derived from an [undertaking] shall not be admissible unless the accounts of the [undertaking] for the previous year relevant to the assessment year for which the deduction is claimed have been audited by an accountant, as defined in the Explanation below sub- section (2) of section 288, [before

M/S KOLTE-PATIL INTEGRATED TOWNSHIPS LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2021-22

7 33AB or section 33ABA or sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (iia) or sub-clause (iii) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2AA) or sub-section (2AB) of section 35 or section 35AD or section 35CCC or section 35CCD or under any provisions of 78[Chapter VI-A under the heading "C.—Deductions in respect of certain incomes

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.685/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Section 32 of the Act, would restrict Assessee's claim of depreciation to 50% in case, the assets are acquired by the Assessee during the previous year and put to use for the purposes of business or profession for a period less than 180 days in the said previous year. 7

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 at Rs.11,23,31,000/- and Rs.7,32,38,000/- respectively. In this year, there was positive income of Rs.97,588,084/- and the assessee company set off an amount of Rs. 7,32,38,0001- against the positive income. 1.2] According to the assessee, as per section

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

7 raised by the appellant are ALLOWED.” 29. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting addition of Rs.119,64,11,350/ on account of disallowance of deduction

NAWAB PASHASAHEB JAMADAR,LATUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, LATUR

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपीऱ सं. /Ita No.731/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nawab Pashasaheb Jamadar, Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Global Panacea Hospital, Latur Gross Golden Jubilee, B-Block, Mahaeboob Nagar, Ambajogai Road, Latur – 413 512, Maharashtra Pan : Aaopj3902E Appellant Respondent

7. Section 32(1) deals with the grant of depreciation. Clause (ii) of section 32(1) states that the depreciation

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

Section 32 of the Act, would restrict Assessee's claim of depreciation to 50% in case, the assets are acquired by the Assessee during the previous year and put to use for the purposes of business or profession for a period less than 180 days in the said previous year. 7

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

section 43(1) of the Act and therefore taxable in the hands of assessee u/s.2(24)(xviii). 6. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. So far as the issue of addition made on account of subsidy received under the PSI, 2007, ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to various submissions as well as paper

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

section 43(1) of the Act and therefore taxable in the hands of assessee u/s.2(24)(xviii). 6. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. So far as the issue of addition made on account of subsidy received under the PSI, 2007, ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to various submissions as well as paper

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

section 43(1) of the Act and therefore taxable in the hands of assessee u/s.2(24)(xviii). 6. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. So far as the issue of addition made on account of subsidy received under the PSI, 2007, ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to various submissions as well as paper

ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, 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

section 43(1) of the Act and therefore taxable in the hands of assessee u/s.2(24)(xviii). 6. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. So far as the issue of addition made on account of subsidy received under the PSI, 2007, ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to various submissions as well as paper

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

section 43(1) of the Act and therefore taxable in the hands of assessee u/s.2(24)(xviii). 6. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. So far as the issue of addition made on account of subsidy received under the PSI, 2007, ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to various submissions as well as paper

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

depreciation @ 25% amounting to Rs.1,38,62,500/- Sr No Description of asset Amt. (Rs.) 1 Non compete fees 1,42,00,000 2 Distribution Network rights 4,17,00,000 3 Customer list 4,17,00,000 4. The learned CIT(A)-1, Pune & the learned AO failed to appreciate that the appellant has duly discharged the consideration

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

depreciation @ 25% amounting to Rs.1,38,62,500/- Sr No Description of asset Amt. (Rs.) 1 Non compete fees 1,42,00,000 2 Distribution Network rights 4,17,00,000 3 Customer list 4,17,00,000 4. The learned CIT(A)-1, Pune & the learned AO failed to appreciate that the appellant has duly discharged the consideration

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

7 years and\nIndustrial Promotion Subsidy and the same has been granted\nto encourage the business by giving various exemptions which\ninturn will yield more profits to the assessee and subsidy is\nnot related to any fixed asset therefore the subsidy granted is\ntaxable u/s.2(24)(xviii) of the Act. Ld. AO has referred to\nplethora of decisions