DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,, PUNE

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

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

depreciation on UPS to the extent of 60%. Similar view was taken by the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s own case in assessment year 2010-11. Thus, the ground No. 5 of the appeal is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid. 8. The ground No. 6 of the appeal is : “6. In the facts and circumstances of the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA,, PUNE

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

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

depreciation on UPS to the extent of 60%. Similar view was taken by the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee’s own case in assessment year 2010-11. Thus, the ground No. 5 of the appeal is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid. 8. The ground No. 6 of the appeal is : “6. In the facts and circumstances of the case

SONAI GLOBAL FOUNDATION,SANGLI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

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

80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated\n15.01.2025. These Two Appeals were heard together and are being\ndisposed of by this common order. We treat appeal in ITA\nNo.614/PUN/2025 as \"lead case\". The Assessee in ITA\nNo.614/PUN/2025 has raised the following grounds of appeal :\n“1. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) (hereinafter referred to\nas \"the learned

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLIGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No 1

depreciation in the fight of provisions of section 43(1) [explanation 10]. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC deleted the addition and the Revenue is not in appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, we are not concerned with the same. 45. Further, on perusal of return of income the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s.35

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No 1

depreciation in the fight of provisions of section 43(1) [explanation 10]. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC deleted the addition and the Revenue is not in appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, we are not concerned with the same. 45. Further, on perusal of return of income the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s.35

SHREE MAHAVEER RESEARCH FOUDATION,PUNE vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION) (HQ), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.792/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shree Mahaveer Research V The Dcit(Exemption) Foundation, S (Hq), Pune. 1183/ C/O.Vijayraj Ranka, G C Jewellers, Raviwar Peth, Pune – 411002. Maharashtra. Pan: Aadts7800B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.Cit(Dr) – Virtual Hearing. Date Of Hearing 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/05/2025

Section 11 of the Act. Assessee is eligible for depreciation and ld.CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the same. Submission of ld.DR : 3. Ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer(AO) and ld.CIT(A). Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed before us. In this case, Assessing Officer

DATTAKALA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,PUNE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT , I.TAX DEPT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

80G of the Act. The assessee is engaged in running various educational colleges imparting diploma and degree courses in the field engineering, management, pharmacy etc. For AY 2020-21, the assessee filed its return of income on 18.02.2021 declaring income at Rs. Nil. The return was filed after the expiry of the due date which was 15.02.2021 for the relevant

DATTAKALA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,PUNE vs. A.D.I.T, CPC, BANGALURU, BANGALURU

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

80G of the Act. The assessee is engaged in running various educational colleges imparting diploma and degree courses in the field engineering, management, pharmacy etc. For AY 2020-21, the assessee filed its return of income on 18.02.2021 declaring income at Rs. Nil. The return was filed after the expiry of the due date which was 15.02.2021 for the relevant

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, PUNE

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

80G of the Act. However, in the computation of income, the assessee has disallowed only Rs.1,65,88,790/-. The Assessing Officer therefore, asked the assessee to explain as to why the differential amount of Rs.28,08,900/- should not be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. In absence of any satisfactory explanation given

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

80G approval (Pg-57-58/PB-2) & claim of exemption under scrutiny assessment and withdrawing 12A registration arbitrarily on other hand. Underscoring this contradictory stance, the appellant demands this infirm action of the Revenue is fit case to be quashed and resultantly prayed for necessary direction to restore back the 12A registration with immediate effect. 8. Counter arguments & pleadings

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA ,PUNE vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2016-17

80G of the Act. However, in the computation of income, the assessee has disallowed only Rs.1,65,88,790/-. The Assessing Officer therefore, asked the assessee to explain as to why the differential amount of Rs.28,08,900/- should not be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee. In absence of any satisfactory explanation given

YASHWANTRAO MOHITE KRISHNA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.,,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeals of assessees and the Department are partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

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

depreciation. vi. Ceremony Expenses 13. The issues mentioned at Sl. No. i to iv were considered by the Tribunal in bunch of appeals decided on 13-06-2019 lead case being ITA No. 382/PUN/2014 in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Shankar SSK Ltd. for assessment year 2010-11. Both the sides fairly admitted that the above four additions/disallowances

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LOKNETE BALASAHEB DESAI SAHAKARI, SATARA

In the result, the appeals of assessees and the Department are partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

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

depreciation. vi. Ceremony Expenses 13. The issues mentioned at Sl. No. i to iv were considered by the Tribunal in bunch of appeals decided on 13-06-2019 lead case being ITA No. 382/PUN/2014 in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Shankar SSK Ltd. for assessment year 2010-11. Both the sides fairly admitted that the above four additions/disallowances

SAHAKAR MAHARSHI SHANKARRAO MOHITE PATIL SSK LTD.,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeals of assessees and the Department are partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

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

depreciation. vi. Ceremony Expenses 13. The issues mentioned at Sl. No. i to iv were considered by the Tribunal in bunch of appeals decided on 13-06-2019 lead case being ITA No. 382/PUN/2014 in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Shankar SSK Ltd. for assessment year 2010-11. Both the sides fairly admitted that the above four additions/disallowances

SHREE ADINATH SSK LTD.,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeals of assessees and the Department are partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

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

depreciation. vi. Ceremony Expenses 13. The issues mentioned at Sl. No. i to iv were considered by the Tribunal in bunch of appeals decided on 13-06-2019 lead case being ITA No. 382/PUN/2014 in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Shankar SSK Ltd. for assessment year 2010-11. Both the sides fairly admitted that the above four additions/disallowances

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI VITTHAL S.S.K. LTD.,, SOLAPUR

In the result, the appeals of assessees and the Department are partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

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

depreciation. vi. Ceremony Expenses 13. The issues mentioned at Sl. No. i to iv were considered by the Tribunal in bunch of appeals decided on 13-06-2019 lead case being ITA No. 382/PUN/2014 in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Shankar SSK Ltd. for assessment year 2010-11. Both the sides fairly admitted that the above four additions/disallowances

MAJALGAON S.S.K. LTD.,,BEED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeals of assessees and the Department are partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

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

depreciation. vi. Ceremony Expenses 13. The issues mentioned at Sl. No. i to iv were considered by the Tribunal in bunch of appeals decided on 13-06-2019 lead case being ITA No. 382/PUN/2014 in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Shankar SSK Ltd. for assessment year 2010-11. Both the sides fairly admitted that the above four additions/disallowances

DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3, NANDED vs. BHAURAO CHAVAN SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD.,, NANDED

In the result, the appeals of assessees and the Department are partly allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

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

depreciation. vi. Ceremony Expenses 13. The issues mentioned at Sl. No. i to iv were considered by the Tribunal in bunch of appeals decided on 13-06-2019 lead case being ITA No. 382/PUN/2014 in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Shankar SSK Ltd. for assessment year 2010-11. Both the sides fairly admitted that the above four additions/disallowances