DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIR 1(1), PUNE vs. EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE
Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms
ITA 43/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2022AY 2016-17
Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.42 & 43/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 16-17 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. M/S.Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs Cluster C Wing-1, Eon Zone, Midc Kharadi, Knowledge Park, Plot No.1, Survey No.77, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Pan: Aabce 4323 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vishal Kalra & Shri Ss Tomar -Ar Revenue By Shri Sunil Kumar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: These Revenue’S Twin Appeals For The Assessment Years 2015- 16 & 2016-17 Arise Against The Cit(A)-13, Pune’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 29.05.2020, Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/02, Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle- 1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/03 Respectively, Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused.
Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 9(1)(vi)
25. We have carefully examined the aforesaid contentions of the Ld. CIT-DR. In our considered opinion, the import of the expression “arranged” in section 80-
IA(10) of the Act is not to be understood in its plain language but the same has to be understood in the context in which it is placed in the section. Notably, section
