JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD,, SOLAPUR

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshali

section 14A r.w. Rule 8D disallowance of Rs.2,92,35,663/- and Rs.1,51,22,496; case wise, respectively . 7. We note at this stage that the assessee’s equally identical latter substantive ground in first sole ground in second cross objection Nos. 05 & 06/PUN/2022 also raises the very issue regarding the disallowance made by the AO u/s.14A r.w. Rule

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIAL LTD,, SOLAPUR

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshali

section 14A r.w. Rule 8D disallowance of Rs.2,92,35,663/- and Rs.1,51,22,496; case wise, respectively . 7. We note at this stage that the assessee’s equally identical latter substantive ground in first sole ground in second cross objection Nos. 05 & 06/PUN/2022 also raises the very issue regarding the disallowance made by the AO u/s.14A r.w. Rule

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. CUMMINS INDIA LTD , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

disallowance of deduction claimed under\nsections 10AA, 80-IA, 80-IAB, 80-IB, 80-IC, 80-ID\nor section 80-IE, if the return is furnished beyond\nthe due date specified under sub-section (1) of\nsection 139\"\n6. Given that there is no specific requirement in section 10AA\nto file the return of income within the due date

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

disallowance of deduction claimed under\nsections 10AA, 80-IA, 80-IAB, 80-IB, 80-IC, 80-ID\nor section 80-IE, if the return is furnished beyond\nthe due date specified under sub-section (1) of\nsection 139\"\n\n6. Given that there is no specific requirement in section 10AA\nto file the return of income within the due date

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -5, PUNE vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT LTD.,, PUNE

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

disallowed the same. 34 On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) following the decision of the Tribunal for the assessment year 2008-09 onwards allowed said expenditure is revenue expenditure u/s 35(1)(iv) of the Act. Being aggrieved by the decision of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before

KASPER PIETER TIDEMAN,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandra

108 (8) of the IT Act, the twin conditions of furnishing a declaration before the assessing officer and that too before the due date of filing the original return of income under section 139(1) are to be satisfied and both are mandatorily to be complied with. Accordingly, the question of law is answered in favour of the Revenue

SONAL SANDEEP SATAV,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-2, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) in the context of commission exceeding Re. 18.00 crore paid by the Assessee during the relevant assessment year, even though the TDS on the commission paint was negligible. Paragraph 5 deals with the expenditure incurred fowants research and development Paragraph 6 deals with the issue of depreciation on UPS. Finally, paragraph 7 deals with

M/S. FERROCARE INTERNATIONAL,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 14(3),, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Ferrocare International Vs. Ito, Ward S.No.32/3/8, Yewalewadi Road, 14(3), Pune Kondhwa Budruk, Pune – 411048 Pan: Aaaff5100C Appellant Respondent

Section 14A(2). If in a given case, therefore, the AO is confronted with a figure which, prima facie, is not in accord with what should approximately be the figure on a fair working out of the provisions, he is but bound to reject it. In such circumstances the AO ordinarily would express his opinion by rejecting the disallowance offered

DCIT CIRCLE-1, NASHIK vs. JYOTI PAPER UDYOG LIMITED, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

108, 801A, 801B etc. Thus, it is observed that the payments made by the appellant to the four related parties u/s 40A(2), exceeding Rs.5 crore fell within the scope of Specified Domestic Transactions (SDT\") as defined under clause (i) of section 92BA as existing on the Statute Books during/for the relevant period. The transactions entered with the related parties

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

disallow the claim made u/sec.80IA(4) of the Act in Form-10CCB. Further due to technical glitches the assessee could not upload the Form- 10CCB before the extended due date i.e., on 07.10.2022 and the same was uploaded only on 31.10.2022 after the technical glitch was resolved. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referring to page-47 of the paper book

ATUL SHASHIKANT GARBHE ,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), AURANGABAD , AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

108), clause (11), clause (12) clause (13) or clause (13A) of section 10), due to or received by an assessee from an employer of a former employer or from a provident or other fund, to the extent to which it does 3 not consist of contributions by the assessee or interest on such contributions or any sum received under

ALCOM INVESTMENT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, AURANGABAD

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

section 14A r.w. rule 8D disallowance also includes proportionate interest expenditure which is not allowable under the normal business head. The assessee’s instant first argument is rejected. 4. Next comes assessee’s second argument that it had sufficient interest bearing funds as per as per CIT(A)’s detailed discussion in para 3.5 indicating figures of Rs. 2.29 crores

DEPUTY COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1,, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

108 (P & H) to conclude that the CIT(A)’s direction in issue restricting the impugned section 14A r.w. Rule 8D disallowance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

108 (P & H) to conclude that the CIT(A)’s direction in issue restricting the impugned section 14A r.w. Rule 8D disallowance

DEPUTU COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

108 (P & H) to conclude that the CIT(A)’s direction in issue restricting the impugned section 14A r.w. Rule 8D disallowance

SPRINGER NATURE TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLISHING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

The appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed for\nStatistical Purpose

108-145 of\npaper book)\n4.2 Thus, the only issue for our consideration is whether interest\nearned on fixed deposit kept with RBL Bank in India is eligible\nfor deduction under section 10AA or not! We are reproducing\nhere Section 10AA of the Act, for ready reference as under :\nSpecial provisions in respect of newly established Units in Special\nEconomic

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. BHUJBAL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

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

disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under other sections. The computation under section 29 is to be made under section 145 on the basis of the books regularly maintained by the assessee. If those books are not correct or complete, the Assessing Officer may reject those books and estimate the income to the best

BHUJBAL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

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

disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under other sections. The computation under section 29 is to be made under section 145 on the basis of the books regularly maintained by the assessee. If those books are not correct or complete, the Assessing Officer may reject those books and estimate the income to the best