CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED ( SUCCESSOR OF ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS LIMITED),PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

155 before it came into force w.e.f. 01.04.2022, the petitioner-company is entitled for immunity from imposition of penalty under Section 270A of the Act though the proceedings against it were initiated for imposition of penalty. Moreover, while initiating the said proceedings vide order dated 22.09.2022, the Assessing Officer has failed to specify that which part of sub-Section

SHRI GANESH SSK LTD,AHMEDNAGAR vs. D.C.I.T, AHMEDNAGAR, CIRCLE-AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

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

section 155(19) of the Act which reads as under: AYs 2009-10 and 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 “(19) Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the purchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co- operative society engaged in the business of manufacture of sugar, and such deduction has been disallowed

SHRI GANESH SAHAKARI SAKHAR KHARKHANA LIMITED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DCIT AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE, AHMEDNAGAR

section 155(19) of the Act which reads as under:\n“(19) Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the\npurchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co-\noperative society engaged in the business of manufacture of sugar, and such\ndeduction has been disallowed

SHRI GANESH SSK LTD,AHMEDNAGAR vs. D.C.I.T, AHMEDNAGAR, CIRCLE-AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

section 155(19) of the Act which reads as under:\n4\nITA Nos.119/PUN/2025 and 2510, 2511 & 2512/PUN/2024,\nAYs 2009-10 and 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14\n“(19) Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the\npurchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co-\noperative society engaged in the business of manufacture

SHRI GANESH SSK LTD,AHMEDNAGAR vs. D.C.I.T, AHMEDNAGAR, CIRCLE-AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

section 155(19) of the Act which reads as under:\n\n4\nITA Nos.119/PUN/2025 and 2510, 2511 & 2512/PUN/2024,\nAYs 2009-10 and 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14\n\n“(19) Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the\npurchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co-\noperative society engaged in the business

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGALI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.78/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Krantiagrani Dr G D Bapu Lad The Acit, Sangli. Sahakarisakharkarkhana Ltd., V Gat No.514, Kundal S.O. S Sangli – 416309. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaak1277C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.67 & 68/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Krantiagrani Dr G D Bapu Lad The Acit, Sangli. Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., V Gat No.514, Kundal S.O. S Sangli – 416309.Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaak1277C Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Shubhada A Koppa – Ca Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 02/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax

section 155 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 : [(19) Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the purchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co-operative society engaged in the business of manufacture of sugar, and such deduction has been disallowed

KRANTIAGRANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGLI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.78/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Krantiagrani Dr G D Bapu Lad The Acit, Sangli. Sahakarisakharkarkhana Ltd., V Gat No.514, Kundal S.O. S Sangli – 416309. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaak1277C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.67 & 68/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Krantiagrani Dr G D Bapu Lad The Acit, Sangli. Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., V Gat No.514, Kundal S.O. S Sangli – 416309.Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaak1277C Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Shubhada A Koppa – Ca Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 02/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax

section 155 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 : [(19) Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the purchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co-operative society engaged in the business of manufacture of sugar, and such deduction has been disallowed

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGLI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.78/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Krantiagrani Dr G D Bapu Lad The Acit, Sangli. Sahakarisakharkarkhana Ltd., V Gat No.514, Kundal S.O. S Sangli – 416309. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaak1277C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.67 & 68/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Krantiagrani Dr G D Bapu Lad The Acit, Sangli. Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., V Gat No.514, Kundal S.O. S Sangli – 416309.Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaak1277C Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Shubhada A Koppa – Ca Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 02/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax

section 155 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 : [(19) Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the purchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co-operative society engaged in the business of manufacture of sugar, and such deduction has been disallowed

SHRI GANESH SSK LTD,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DCIT AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE , AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Ganesh Ssk Ltd. Dcit, Ahmednagar Circle A/P Ranjangaon Khurd, Vs. Tal. Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar – 413719 Pan: Aaeas0636H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hanmant Dattatray Dhavle Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R

Section 155(19) inserted in the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is read as follows” (19) Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the purchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co- operative society engaged in the business of manufacture of sugar, and such deduction has been disallowed

SHRI CHHATRAPATI SSKLTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE -14, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1923 & 1924/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Shri Chhatrapati Sahakari Vs. Dcit, Circle-14, Pune. Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., A/P. Bhavaninagar, Tal. Indapur, Dist. Pune- 413104. Pan : Aaaas3869G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Hanmant D. Dhavale Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 07.08.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1923/Pun/2024 For Assessment Year 2008-09 As A Lead Case For Adjudication.

disallowance of Rs.12,84,77,005/- on account of excess purchase price paid by the assessee has simply directed the assessee to file an application u/s 154 of the IT Act in the light of section 155(19

SHRI CHHATRAPATI SSKLTD,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE-14, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1923 & 1924/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Shri Chhatrapati Sahakari Vs. Dcit, Circle-14, Pune. Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., A/P. Bhavaninagar, Tal. Indapur, Dist. Pune- 413104. Pan : Aaaas3869G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Hanmant D. Dhavale Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 07.08.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1923/Pun/2024 For Assessment Year 2008-09 As A Lead Case For Adjudication.

disallowance of Rs.12,84,77,005/- on account of excess purchase price paid by the assessee has simply directed the assessee to file an application u/s 154 of the IT Act in the light of section 155(19

SHRI GANESH SSK LTD,AHMEDNAGAR vs. D.C.I.T, AHMEDNAGAR, CIRCLE-AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2509/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Ganesh Ssk Ltd., V The Dcit, A/P. Ranjangaon Khurd, Tal. S Ahmednagar Circle, Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar – Ahmednagar. 413719. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaeas0636H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hanmant Dattatray Dhavle – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr Date Of Hearing 22/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/04/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 25.10.2024 For Assessment Year 2007-08. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

section 155 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 granting relief to cooperative sugar factories, which is reproduced as follows: 155(19) - Where any deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred for the purchase of sugarcane has been claimed by an assessee, being a co-operative society engaged in the business of manufacture of sugar, and such deduction has been disallowed

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGLI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

disallowance of alleged excess sugarcane price paid to sugarcane growers/members of the sugar Co-operative wherein the Revenue’s case is that the same very well exceeds the relevant fair remunerative price (supra). We note the legislature has inserted section 155(19

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGLI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

disallowance of alleged excess sugarcane price paid to sugarcane growers/members of the sugar Co-operative wherein the Revenue’s case is that the same very well exceeds the relevant fair remunerative price (supra). We note the legislature has inserted section 155(19

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGALI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

disallowance of alleged excess sugarcane price paid to sugarcane growers/members of the sugar Co-operative wherein the Revenue’s case is that the same very well exceeds the relevant fair remunerative price (supra). We note the legislature has inserted section 155(19

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGLI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

disallowance of alleged excess sugarcane price paid to sugarcane growers/members of the sugar Co-operative wherein the Revenue’s case is that the same very well exceeds the relevant fair remunerative price (supra). We note the legislature has inserted section 155(19

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,SANGALI vs. ACIT, SANGALI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

disallowance of alleged excess sugarcane price paid to sugarcane growers/members of the sugar Co-operative wherein the Revenue’s case is that the same very well exceeds the relevant fair remunerative price (supra). We note the legislature has inserted section 155(19

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGLI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

disallowance of alleged excess sugarcane price paid to sugarcane growers/members of the sugar Co-operative wherein the Revenue’s case is that the same very well exceeds the relevant fair remunerative price (supra). We note the legislature has inserted section 155(19

KRANTIAGANI DR G D BAPU LAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LIMITED,KUNDAL vs. ACIT, SANGLI

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

disallowance of alleged excess sugarcane price paid to sugarcane growers/members of the sugar Co-operative wherein the Revenue’s case is that the same very well exceeds the relevant fair remunerative price (supra). We note the legislature has inserted section 155(19