JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 43B of the Act. He similarly noted that the assessee had also made payment of Rs.6.40 crores to LIC on account of employees’ gratuity fund from the date of its incorporation till 31.03.2003 whereas the expenses for the year was only Rs.1.10 crores. Thus the assessee has made additional claim of Rs.5.30crores. According to the Assessing Officer since

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

119(2)(b) of the Act, which, if granted, would pave way for reconsideration of the appellant's claim of exemption under sections 11 and 12.” 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: Grounds in ITA No.761/PUN/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) 1] The learned

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

119(2)(b) of the Act, which, if granted, would pave way for reconsideration of the appellant's claim of exemption under sections 11 and 12.” 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: Grounds in ITA No.761/PUN/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) 1] The learned

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

119(2)(b) of the Act, which, if granted, would pave way for reconsideration of the appellant's claim of exemption under sections 11 and 12.” 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: Grounds in ITA No.761/PUN/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) 1] The learned

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

119(2)(b) of the Act, which, if granted, would pave way for reconsideration of the appellant's claim of exemption under sections 11 and 12.” 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: Grounds in ITA No.761/PUN/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) 1] The learned

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

119(2)(b) of the Act, which, if granted, would pave way for reconsideration of the appellant's claim of exemption under sections 11 and 12.” 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: Grounds in ITA No.761/PUN/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) 1] The learned

GURU KRIPA SEVA ASHYRAM,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD 1(2), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

section 139 of the Act is condoned. (ii) In all other cases of belated applications in filing Form no. 10B for years prior to AY 2018-19, the Commissioners of Income-tax are authorized to admit such applications for condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. The Commissioners will while entertaining such belated applications in filing Form

PUNE MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAK SAHKARI PATAPEDHI MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,PUNE 4, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21

disallowance from the interest paid may be made. (ii) High Creditors/liabilities: Assessee has shown high liabilities in balance sheet as compared to low income/receipt declared in ITR, Genuineness of liabilities declared may be verified. (iii) Deduction from Total Income under Chapter VI-A: The assessee has claimed large deduction under chapter VI-A (excluding deduction claimed

SHAHU SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, LATUR,LATUR vs. ACIT (EXMP.) CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

sections": [ "10(23C)(iiiab)", "57", "142(1)", "143(2)", "144B", "119(2)(b)" ], "issues": "Whether the disallowance of expenses claimed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -3, NASHIK vs. WINDSOR MACHINES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

b by Finance Act, 2001. And once the Circular No. 14 of 2001 clarified that the restriction of 8 4 ITA No. 915/PUN/2022, A.Y. 2011-12 years for carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation had been dispensed with, the unabsorbed depreciation from A.Y. 1997-98 upto the A. Y. 2001-02 got carried forward to the assessment year

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BODHI TOWER vs. KUMAR BUILDERS PROJECT PUNE PRIVATE LIMITED, BUND GARDEN

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

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

b. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. JT.CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that when the original return of income itself has 3 been declared as defective, all the consequences of the assessee being treated as non-filer will be attracted and therefore the loss claimed by the assessee will not be carried forward

GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CONTROS LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 8, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside, and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

119(2)(b) of the Act, hereby directs that:- The delay in filing of Form No. 10-IC as per Rule 21AE of the Rules for previous year relevant to A.Y. 2021-22 is condoned in cases where the following conditions are satisfied: 1) The return of income for relevant assessment year has been filed on or before

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD, KOLHAPUR , KOLHAPUR vs. THE NEW MIRAJ EDUCATION SOCIETY, MIRAJ, DIST. SANGLI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance which is not in line with the provisions of section 143(1) of the Act. The moot question now is whether furnishing of audit report u/s 12A(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act 1961 beyond the specified date but before the completion of assessment will disentitle the assessee from the benefits of section 5 ITA.No.928/PUN/2025

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLHAPUR vs. SARVODAY SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, SANGLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2265/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Income Tax Officer, Sarvoday Shikshan Sanstha, Kolhapur A/P Umadi Tal Jath, Vs. Dist. Sangli-416413 Pan : Aaets2962D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent

disallow the benefits of section 11 of the Act in the appellant's case is late filing of audit report in form 10B view provisions of section 12A(1)(b) ofthe I.T. Act, 1961, read with 1st Proviso to Rule 12(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. However, from the records, I find that the application for condonation