VIRENDRA SINGH SAINI,HARYANA vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE, BENGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1483/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

143(1)(a) by means of disallowance made in these cases for late deposit of employees’ share to the relevant funds beyond the date prescribed under the respective Acts.” 11 11. The ratio of above decision by this Tribunal (supra) is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the grounds

R&DE (ENGRS) EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 7(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed under section 143 (1) by the CPC while processing the return. To that extent the arguments of the appellant is found to be correct. Hence The AO is also directed to re compute the taxable income after allowing the eligible claim of the applicant under section 80P(2

AHMEDNAGAR ZILLA GRAMSEVAKANCHI SAHAKAR PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,AHILYANAGAR vs. PCIT, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961\nPAN: AAAAA6582G\nJA777436326IN\nName: AHMEDNAGAR ZILLA GRAMSEVAKANCHI\nSAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT\nAHMEDNAGAR\nAddress: 1 OPP SARDAR PATEL KARYALAY,\nBEHIND DR.KETKAR HOSPITAL AHMEDNAGAR\nAHMEDNAGAR 414001, Maharashtra\nDIN: ITBA/AST/S/143(2)/2021-22/1033764253(1)\nDate: 29/06/2021\n Assessment Year: 2020-21\nFinancial Year: 2019-20\nआपको यह संचार क्यों मिल रहा है?\nWhy are you getting this

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. RAJMAL LAKHICHAND,,

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was issued to the assessee on 23-09-2011. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer made additions/disallowances on various counts which inter alia includes : i. Addition u/s. 2(22)(e) Rs.10,16,06,967/-. ii. Disallowance of interest

M/S. RAJMAL LAKHICHAND vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was issued to the assessee on 23-09-2011. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer made additions/disallowances on various counts which inter alia includes : i. Addition u/s. 2(22)(e) Rs.10,16,06,967/-. ii. Disallowance of interest

KOTHARI AGRITECH PRIVATE LIMITED,SOLAPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

143(1)(a) of the Act. However, no disallowance under section 80IA was made by the Ld. FAO while passing the assessment order. With regard to assessee’s claim of deduction under section 80IA, the order of the Ld. FAO merely states as under: “2

KOTHARI AGRITECH PVT. LTD,,SOLAPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

143(1)(a) of the Act. However, no disallowance under section 80IA was made by the Ld. FAO while passing the assessment order. With regard to assessee’s claim of deduction under section 80IA, the order of the Ld. FAO merely states as under: “2

SAPRE AUTO ANCILLARIES,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE -1, KOLHAPUR

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

SR FIBREGLASS AUTO PRIVATE LIMITED,NASHIK vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

WONDER CARS P LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

ZAWARE CREATIVE ENTERPRISES P LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

SIXSIGMA MEDICARE AND RESEARCH LTD.,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC,, BENGALURU

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

SARIKA VIKRAM WARPE,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 7(3), , PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

SWARAJ EXCELLENT MANPOWER FACILITIES P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE, 10, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

RAJDEEP INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

SUBHASH SAKHARAM MORE,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE /DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CPC), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

SWARAJ EXCELLENT MANPOWER FACILITIES P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE, 10, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

M/S. THAKKER DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD,,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2

SEEMA SANTOSH GHONE,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC,, BENGALURU

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowed by the Revenue under section 36(1)(va) of the Act while processing the return of income under secretion 143(1)of the Act. 2