DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

rectification of mistake u/s. 154 of the Act. The Assessing Officer rejected the contentions of the assessee and proceeded on to pass order u/s. 154 holding the compensation of Rs.22.50 crores paid by the assessee as capital expenditure. The ld. AR contended that 12 ITA No. 2286/PUN/2014, A.Y. 2005-06 such disallowance

KOTHARI AGRITECH PRIVATE LIMITED,SOLAPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80IA of the Act for the reason that Form 10CCB was not filed within the due date. The assessee being aggrieved by the said intimation order, filed an application for rectification u/s 154

KOTHARI AGRITECH PVT. LTD,,SOLAPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80IA of the Act for the reason that Form 10CCB was not filed within the due date. The assessee being aggrieved by the said intimation order, filed an application for rectification u/s 154

BEED TALUKA DHUD VASAYIK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD,,BEED vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, BEED

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

disallowed the claim of deduction of Rs.50,74,224/- u/s 80P(2)(b) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of AO passed u/s 154 of the Act, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dt.15.03.2017 (in appeal No.ABD/CIT(A)- 2/76/2016-17) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee

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

rectification order passed u/s 154 by the learned CPC was invalid in law. 4 2] The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the action of the learned CPC in computing the tax of the assessee under regular provisions of the Act as against the option exercised by the assessee u/s 115BAA of the Act was totally incorrect

SHRI SANT SENA MAHARAJ NABHIK SAMAJACHI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA, MARYADIT,JALGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WRD-1(4), JALGAON, JALGAON

The appeal of the assessee is DISMISSED

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 841/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Shri Sant Sena Maharaj Nabhik Samajachi Nagari Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit, Behind Shani Mandir, Radhabai Chal, Chalisgaon – 424 101 Pan: Aabas8462N . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer- 1(4), Jalgaon . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Abhay Avachat [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Shri R Y Balawade [‚Ld. Dr] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 10/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01/09/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Instituted U/S 253(1) Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereafter] Challenges Din & Order No. Itba/Nfsc/S/250/2023- 24/1052715471(1) Dt. 10/05/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’ Hereafter].

disallowing and confirming the same. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned ITO has erred in not allowing benefit of deduction u/s 80P while passing rectification order u/s 154

ANAND CONSTRUWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NASHIK -1, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.955/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Anand Construwell Private Vs. Pcit-1, Nashik. Limited, Ramchandra Apartments, Makhmalabad Road, Panchvati, Nashik- 422003. Pan : Aafca7736H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Pcit-1, Nashik [‘Ld. Pcit’] For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Basis Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed U/S. 263 By The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Nashik May Please Be Quashed. 2. On The Basis Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax Is Not Justified In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 By Holding That Provisions Of Section 69C Are Applicable In The Present Case As The Assessee Was Not Able To Explain The Sources Of Expenditure

rectification proceedings u/s 154 of the IT Act and a separate order dated 08.02.2024 to this effect was also passed. Copy of this order is also produced for kind perusal of the Bench in the Paper Book. Ld. AR also submitted that the impugned expenses were entered in the regular audited books of accounts therefore the sources were very well

BRIG. (RETD.) JITENDRA KUMAR NARANG,NOIDA vs. ITO, WARD 11(3), PUNE, PUNE

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

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

disallowance of Rs.5,30,000/- remained to be added to the total income of the assessee. On plain reading of the assessment order dated 23/03/2015 it becomes clear that the A.O. has ruled out an 4 amount of Rs.5,30,000/-, but, the same was not added while computing total income. Consequently, an order u/s 154

HEMANT ENTERPRISES,NASHIK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, NASHIK, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

rectification petition. The ITAT, Bangalore while dealing with a similar matter in the case of Areca Trust ITA NO 433/Bang/2023 dt 26.07.2023 also held a similar view. 10.0 In effect, the assessee cannot use proceedings u/s 154 to file an appeal against the order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act, particularly when remedy sought against the adjustments so made

MAGARAJ MISHRIMAL RATHI,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

rectification order U/s. 154 dated 18.03.2021, without giving any finding on the submission made by the Appellant. 5. The learned CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has failed to appreciate and consider the submissions made by the Appellant without assigning any valid reasons and confirmed the addition inspite of the fact that the appellant has furnished complete details in respect

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

disallowed and added Rs. 2,75,50,640/- Tax and interest now payable Rs.1,42,01,030/- 4. Order u/s 143(3) passed on 27/12/2017 is rectified u/s 154 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Issue DN/Challan accordingly. 6. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC deleted the addition by observing as under: “6. I have carefully considered the case

IMPERIAL HOUSING, PUNE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

disallowed and added Rs. 2,75,50,640/- Tax and interest now payable Rs.1,42,01,030/- 4. Order u/s 143(3) passed on 27/12/2017 is rectified u/s 154 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Issue DN/Challan accordingly. 6. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC deleted the addition by observing as under: “6. I have carefully considered the case

PRAMOD TARADE,RAIGAD vs. CIT ( NFAC ), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.898/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Pramod Tarade, The Commissioner Of A-2, Sai Ameya Chs, Plot V Income Tax,[Nfac]. No.28, Sector-12, Kharghar, S Panvel, Raigad – 410210. Maharashtra. Pan: Aevpt9870L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Tarun G – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2021-22 Passed On 24.06.2023 Emanating From Order Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.12.2022. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : “1. The Order Of The Cit(A) Nfac, Dt. 24-06-2023 For The A.Y. 2021 -22 Is Contrary To Law & Facts & In The Circumstances Of Pramod Tarade [A]

154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 29.12.2022. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under : “1. The Order of the CIT(A) NFAC, dt. 24-06-2023 for the A.Y. 2021 -22 is contrary to law and facts and in the circumstances of Pramod Tarade [A] the case. 2. The CIT(A) NFAC, had erred

MSC SOFTWARE CORPORATION INDIA P.LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

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

154 of the Act for rectification of mistake. However, the said application of the assessee has not been disposed of by the TPO till date. 3.6 In ground No. 13 of the appeal the assessee has impugned non- granting of risk adjustment on the premise that the assessee is a captive service provider. The ld. AR submitted that the risk

SHRI SAINATH SEVABHAVI SANSTHA ,LATUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, NANDED, NANDED

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1319/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Sainath Sevabhavi Vs. Ito, Exemption Ward, Sanstha, Nanded. Akharwai, Harangul Bk, Latur, Harangai Bk, B.O., Latur- 413531. Pan : Aakts9324H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sarang Gudhate Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.04.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-7, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “(Without Prejudice To Each Other) 1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Has Erred In Not Condoning The Delay In Filing Of Appeal. 2. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld Cit(A)/Nfac Has Erred In Denying The Expenditure Incurred & Treating The Gross Receipts As Income In Intimation U/S 143(1).

disallowance of expenditure in the intimation U/s 143(1) as the scope of intimation is limited. 4. The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of appeal if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is registered

ZF STEERING GEAR (INDIA) LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (1),, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14

154/-. Subsequently, the assessee also filed second revised return on 9-12- 2014 declaring total income of Rs. 29,71,88,270/-. The AO has completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act on 28-3-2016 determining the total income at Rs. 31,30,34,893/-. While computing the total income, the A.O has considered total income

RAVINDRA DNYANESHWAR BHUJBAL,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 14(5), PUNE, PUNE

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

rectification u/s 154 of the IT Act\nand consequently the order u/s 154 was passed by CPC on\n12.10.2023 wherein the disallowance

PRABHAT GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PATNSANSTHA MARYADIT TADWADI,RAIGAD vs. ITO, WARD 3, PANVEL

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

rectification application u/s 154 which was rejected by the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) vide order dated 25.04.2024 observing that the disallowance

MR KEDAR JAGDISH MANKAR,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

rectification order u/s 154 of the Act dated 09.01.2023, the Ld. AO disallowed the claim of FTC of Rs.2,56,130/- and also