ITO, WARD-1(1), SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR vs. MS. KSHIRSAGAR FABRICS, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2009-10

reopened the assessment, the reasons of which are already reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. In the order passed u/s 143(3) / 147 of the Act, the Assessing Officer made disallowance

JAIBHAGWAN BANARASIDAS JINDAL,JALNA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

reopening of the assessment. Since the re-assessment proceedings have been initiated on borrowed satisfaction and without independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer, such re-assessment proceedings are invalid. Even on merit also, it is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee has filed bank statements reflecting the payments made for purchase

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

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

reopened the assessment\nfor disallowance of interest expenditure. He held that the reopening was beyond\nthe provisions of section 149. He accordingly

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. SAGAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

disallowed the same u/s 37 of the Act. Thus, the Assessing Officer computed the total income of the assessee at Rs.2,22,86,304/-. 6. Before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee submitted that the reasons for reopening

AADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

disallowed by the Assessing Officer meaning thereby the Assessing Officer has accepted the genuineness of the loan on which the interest has been paid. 11. Referring to the additional information forwarded by the DDIT (Inv), Kolkata, which is the basis for reopening

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. VISTA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

reopened the assessment to disallow the deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, since reasons not having alleged / particularized any failure

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

Assessing Officer to disallow the exemption claimed, for breach of the requirement of section 54E of the Act. 7. What thus emerges from the above discussion is that the reasons on which the notice for reopening

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

Assessing Officer to disallow the exemption claimed, for breach of the requirement of section 54E of the Act. 7. What thus emerges from the above discussion is that the reasons on which the notice for reopening

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

Assessing Officer to disallow the exemption claimed, for breach of the requirement of section 54E of the Act. 7. What thus emerges from the above discussion is that the reasons on which the notice for reopening

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

reopening of the assessment, the Assessing Officer in a speaking order rejected the objections raised by the assessee and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) / 147 wherein he disallowed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

reopening of the assessment, the Assessing Officer in a speaking order rejected the objections raised by the assessee and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) / 147 wherein he disallowed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

reopening of the assessment, the Assessing Officer in a speaking order rejected the objections raised by the assessee and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) / 147 wherein he disallowed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

reopening of the assessment, the Assessing Officer in a speaking order rejected the objections raised by the assessee and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) / 147 wherein he disallowed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

reopening of the assessment, the Assessing Officer in a speaking order rejected the objections raised by the assessee and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) / 147 wherein he disallowed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

reopening of the assessment, the Assessing Officer in a speaking order rejected the objections raised by the assessee and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) / 147 wherein he disallowed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ASHISH OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

reopening of the assessment, the Assessing Officer in a speaking order rejected the objections raised by the assessee and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) / 147 wherein he disallowed

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

reopening the assessment to the assessee as requested.\nSubsequently, notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on\nthe assessee, in response to which the AR of the assessee filed the requisite details\nfrom time to time. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) /\n147 of the Act on 20.12.2018 determining

MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

reopening the assessment to the assessee as requested.\nSubsequently, notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on\nthe assessee, in response to which the AR of the assessee filed the requisite details\nfrom time to time. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) /\n147 of the Act on 20.12.2018 determining