EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(2),, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.3075/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Cluster C, Wing 1, Eon Free Zone, Plot No.1, Sr. No.77, Midc Kharadi Knowledge Park, Kharadi ,Pune- 411 014. .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aabce4323Q बनधम / V/S. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune Assessee By : Shri Vishal Karla Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe

133 TTJ 308) has considered the matter in detail and held that the reduction of eligible profits of an assessee as done by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of section 80-IA(10) read with section 10B(7), in the context of the Transfer Pricing Officer's order is unsustainable. The Tribunal has held that the Assessing Officer

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

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.

133 TTJ 308) has considered the matter in detail and held that the reduction of eligible profits of an assessee as done by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of section 80-IA(10) read with section 10B(7), in the context of the Transfer Pricing Officer's order is unsustainable. The Tribunal has held that the Assessing Officer

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

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.

133 TTJ 308) has considered the matter in detail and held that the reduction of eligible profits of an assessee as done by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of section 80-IA(10) read with section 10B(7), in the context of the Transfer Pricing Officer's order is unsustainable. The Tribunal has held that the Assessing Officer

EATON TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

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

133/- he made disallowance u/s.40(a)(i) at Rs.26,39,84,698/-. 3.1 Subsequently, the PCIT examined the record and noted that the AO has allowed deduction u/s.10AA of the Act at Rs.263,46,37,168/-. He noted that in the earlier years, i.e. for A.Y. 2013-14 to A.Y. 2016-17 such claim of deduction u/s.10AA was disallowed

DCIT-CIRCLE 7 PUNE, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK PUNE vs. TRIO CHEMSUCROTECH ENG. PROJECTS PVT. LTD, PUNE

disallowing it in the hands of the assessee would amount to double taxation. The CIT(A) had correctly deleted the major portion of the addition, sustaining only 2% as commission income.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "143(3)", "133A", "133

PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT LTD ,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 4, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowance of expenditure under Section 14A of the Act. These decisions, therefore, limited their observations to the applicability of Section 14A of the Act on dividend income. Also, the G&B HC decision and the G&B SC decision have not laid down any principle contrary to those laid down by the Hon'ble SC in Tata Tea decision

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

133 (Guj.) and connected matters, a Division Bench of this Court had touched on the aspect of what can be termed as scientific research. In the context, certain observations made by the Bench may be of some relevance. "25. It can thus be seen that the term scientific research in the context of the deduction allowable under section

SETH RAMDAS NATHUBHAI DHARMADAYA VISHWASTA NIDHI,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,(EXEMPTIONS) -1,, PUNE

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Seth Ramdas Nathubhai Dharmadaya Vs. Ito Vishwasta Nidhi, (Exemptions)-1, C/O. Shah Khandelwal Jain & Pune Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, Near Rto, Pune 411 001 Pan : Aaatr6805N Appellant Respondent

disallowed. The Revenue has already established that there has been a violation with regard to section 13(2) r.w.s.13(1)(c) of the Act and we have also examined in the preceding paras justifying the stand of the Revenue for denial of exemption u/s.11 of the Act to the assessee trust. We are of the considered view therefore that

ARISTON GROUP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE ASSESSEMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC AND THE DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1680/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Ariston Group India Private The Assessment Unit, Limited, Income Tax Department, 1St Floor, Office No.103, V National Faceless Mayfai Tower, Wakdewadi, S. Assessment Centre, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411005. Delhi(“Nfac”), The Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Pan: Aaoca7042D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Ketan Ved – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(3) Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 18.06.2024 For A.Y.2020- 21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ariston Group India Private Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ariston India' Or 'The Appellant) Prefers An Appeal For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Against

section 37 of ITA No.1680/PUN/2024 [A] the Act. Further, accrual of benefit to assessee or the commercial expediency of any expenditure incurred by the assessee cannot be the basis for disallowing the same, as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of EKL Appliances Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 241 (Del.). 24. We further find that

ARMED FORCES EX OFFICERS MULTI SERVICES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFCIER, ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEP, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2344 To 2348/Pun/2024 & "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 To 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21 & 2017-18 Armed Forces Ex Officers Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Multi Services Co-Operative Nfac. Soc, 364, Likmanya Tilak Sabha Griha, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aaaaa1185H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shweta Joshi - Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr

disallowing the claim of deduction made under section 80P(2)(d) of INR 1,88,32,471 The Learned Assessing Officer erred in not considering the Co-operative Banks as Co-operative Societies for the purpose of this section. The learned assessing officer erred in not taking cognisance of clarification published by CBDT vide circular no. 133

ARMED FORCES EX OFFICERS MULTI SERVICES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2344 To 2348/Pun/2024 & "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 To 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21 & 2017-18 Armed Forces Ex Officers Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Multi Services Co-Operative Nfac. Soc, 364, Likmanya Tilak Sabha Griha, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aaaaa1185H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shweta Joshi - Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr

disallowing the claim of deduction made under section 80P(2)(d) of INR 1,88,32,471 The Learned Assessing Officer erred in not considering the Co-operative Banks as Co-operative Societies for the purpose of this section. The learned assessing officer erred in not taking cognisance of clarification published by CBDT vide circular no. 133

ARMED FORCES EX OFFICERS MULTI SERVICES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTR, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2344 To 2348/Pun/2024 & "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 To 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21 & 2017-18 Armed Forces Ex Officers Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Multi Services Co-Operative Nfac. Soc, 364, Likmanya Tilak Sabha Griha, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aaaaa1185H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shweta Joshi - Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr

disallowing the claim of deduction made under section 80P(2)(d) of INR 1,88,32,471 The Learned Assessing Officer erred in not considering the Co-operative Banks as Co-operative Societies for the purpose of this section. The learned assessing officer erred in not taking cognisance of clarification published by CBDT vide circular no. 133

ARMED FORCES EX OFFCIERS MULTI SERVICES CO OPERATIVE SOC,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFCIER, NFAC, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2344 To 2348/Pun/2024 & "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 To 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21 & 2017-18 Armed Forces Ex Officers Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Multi Services Co-Operative Nfac. Soc, 364, Likmanya Tilak Sabha Griha, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aaaaa1185H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shweta Joshi - Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr

disallowing the claim of deduction made under section 80P(2)(d) of INR 1,88,32,471 The Learned Assessing Officer erred in not considering the Co-operative Banks as Co-operative Societies for the purpose of this section. The learned assessing officer erred in not taking cognisance of clarification published by CBDT vide circular no. 133

ARMED FORCES EX OFFICERS MULTI SERVICES CO OPERATIVE SOC,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFCIER, NFAC, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2344 To 2348/Pun/2024 & "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 To 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21 & 2017-18 Armed Forces Ex Officers Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Multi Services Co-Operative Nfac. Soc, 364, Likmanya Tilak Sabha Griha, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aaaaa1185H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shweta Joshi - Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr

disallowing the claim of deduction made under section 80P(2)(d) of INR 1,88,32,471 The Learned Assessing Officer erred in not considering the Co-operative Banks as Co-operative Societies for the purpose of this section. The learned assessing officer erred in not taking cognisance of clarification published by CBDT vide circular no. 133

ARMED FORCES EX OFFICERS MULTI SERVICES CO OPERATIVE SOC,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2344 To 2348/Pun/2024 & "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 To 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21 & 2017-18 Armed Forces Ex Officers Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Multi Services Co-Operative Nfac. Soc, 364, Likmanya Tilak Sabha Griha, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aaaaa1185H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shweta Joshi - Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr

disallowing the claim of deduction made under section 80P(2)(d) of INR 1,88,32,471 The Learned Assessing Officer erred in not considering the Co-operative Banks as Co-operative Societies for the purpose of this section. The learned assessing officer erred in not taking cognisance of clarification published by CBDT vide circular no. 133

ARMED FORCES EX-OFFICERS MULTISERVICES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS NFAC, PUNE

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

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

disallowing the claim of deduction made under section 80P(2)(d) of INR 1,65,02,105. The Learned Assessing Officer erred in not considering the Co-operative Banks as Co-operative Societies for the purpose of this section. The learned assessing officer erred in not taking cognisance of clarification published by CBDT vide circular no. 133

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 NASSHIK, NASHIK vs. HARSH CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 1, Harsh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Nashik Sanskruti, Murkute Colony, Vs. New Pandit Colony, Sharanpur Road, Nashik – 422002 Pan: Aacch2277H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dhiraj S. Dandgaval Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-07-2024 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.12.2023 Of The Cit(A) / Nfac, Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue In The Grounds Of Appeal Has Challenged The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Restricting The Disallowance To Rs.2,24,191/- As Against Rs.1,25,51,607/- Proposed By The Assessing Officer In The Remand Report As Against Rs.4,38,96,880/- Added By Him In The Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

133(6) is not served by postal SADDA MANSARl 2554157 remark "Not traceable” 13 4,41,21,079/- 5.3 From the above discussion, facts and circumstances of the ease, I have disallowed the sub-contract expenses of Rs.4,43,21,079/- as bogus and non- genuine under the provision of section

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

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

133(6) of the Act. Replies received from those companies were placed on record. After examining those details the Assessing Officer has passed the order. Referring to the copy of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer which were supplied to the assessee and placed at pages 39 and 40 of the paper book, he submitted that in the reasons