INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 8(2),, PUNE vs. JAGTAP PATIL PROMOTERS & BUILDERS ,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is Allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.35/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer, Jagtap Patil Promoters & Ward-8(2), Pune. Vs Builders, S.No.152, Pimple Gurav, Pune – 411061. Pan: Aagfj 0403 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suniol Ganoo – Ar Revenue By Shri M.M.Chate – Dr Date Of Hearing 29/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24/11/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue I.E. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Pune For The A.Y. 2014-15 Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)- 6, Pune Dated 04.10.2017 Emanating From The Assessment Order Dated 30/12/2016 Passed By The Ito Ward 8(2) Pune U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Not Appreciating That It Was Only After Scrutiny Proceedings Started That The Assessee Paid The Mat. Thus By Filing Nil Return & Not Claiming Deduction U/S 80Ib(10) The Assessee Was Trying To Evade Payment Of Taxes. The Claim Of The Assessee That Filing Of Nil Return Was Clerical Error Does Not Hold Ground? 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Not Appreciating The Ratio Laid

D were not complete as certified by the Registered Valuer, the Club House was not complete, ITA No.35/PUN/2018for A.Y. 2014-15 Jagtap Patil Promoters & Builders [A] therefore, the Project was not complete. The local authority had approved the project on 29/03/2007, there for to be eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) the project should have been completed before 31/03/2012

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

5 ITA No.762/PUN/2024, AY 2021-22 Co-op. Rules, 1960, the assessee in mandatorily required to maintain 25% to 30% of working funds as investment in banks in the form of fixed deposits with co-operative banks to meet any adverse situation. It is a part and parcel of the regular business activity of the assessee and interest earned

DNYANESHWAR SHINDE,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1) , AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed the relief under section 89 and held that the amount/ compensation received by the assessee in full and final settlement on voluntary retirement is taxable as profits in lieu of salary under the provisions of section 17(3)(i) of the Act. Perusal of the CIT(A)’s order reveals that the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE vs. LB KUNJIR, PUNE

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

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

17. The only grievance of the assessee in the grounds raised is regarding the order of the Assessing Officer in not considering the closing work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- as on 31.03.2015 as the opening work in progress as on 01.04.2015 i.e. assessment year 2016-17. Since while deciding the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

DCIT CIRCLE 7, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK vs. L B KUNJIR, PUNE

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

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

17. The only grievance of the assessee in the grounds raised is regarding the order of the Assessing Officer in not considering the closing work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- as on 31.03.2015 as the opening work in progress as on 01.04.2015 i.e. assessment year 2016-17. Since while deciding the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

DCIT, PUNE vs. L B KUNJIR, PUNE

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

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

17. The only grievance of the assessee in the grounds raised is regarding the order of the Assessing Officer in not considering the closing work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- as on 31.03.2015 as the opening work in progress as on 01.04.2015 i.e. assessment year 2016-17. Since while deciding the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

M/S. L.B. KUNJIR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE, PUNE

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

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

17. The only grievance of the assessee in the grounds raised is regarding the order of the Assessing Officer in not considering the closing work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- as on 31.03.2015 as the opening work in progress as on 01.04.2015 i.e. assessment year 2016-17. Since while deciding the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

M/S. L.B. KUNJIR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7, PUNE, PUNE

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

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

17. The only grievance of the assessee in the grounds raised is regarding the order of the Assessing Officer in not considering the closing work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- as on 31.03.2015 as the opening work in progress as on 01.04.2015 i.e. assessment year 2016-17. Since while deciding the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 28.02.2025 of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A)-5, Delhi relating to different assessment years as mentioned therein. Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore, these were heard together and are being disposed

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 28.02.2025 of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A)-5, Delhi relating to different assessment years as mentioned therein. Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore, these were heard together and are being disposed

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 28.02.2025 of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A)-5, Delhi relating to different assessment years as mentioned therein. Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore, these were heard together and are being disposed

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 28.02.2025 of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A)-5, Delhi relating to different assessment years as mentioned therein. Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore, these were heard together and are being disposed

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 28.02.2025 of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A)-5, Delhi relating to different assessment years as mentioned therein. Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore, these were heard together and are being disposed

DIMPLE ALNESH SOMJI,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

d) Carried out in a recognized association (e) Chargeable to commodities transaction tax under Chapter VII of the Finance Act, 2013. 10. Let us see if the assessee fulfills all the conditions prescribed by section 43(5) first proviso (e). 11.1 Explanation 2(ii) to clause (e) of the first proviso defines "eligible transaction" as follows: "eligible transaction" means

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

5. There are concurrent findings recorded by CITA, ITAT and\nthe High Court that the respondent/Assessee_cannot be termed as\nBanks/Cooperative Banks and that being a credit society, they are\nentitled to exemption under section 80(P)(2) of the Income-tax Act.\nSuch finding of fact is not required to be interfered with by this Court\nin exercise of powers

MARUTI KESHAVRAO DIDHORE,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia). It postulates that while qualifying the\namount to be made out of own sweet will, it had claimed the same\nas expenditure. In such a situation, failure to bring this\ncompensation to tax and granting total exemption treating it as a\ncapital receipt would result in double jeopardy to the exchequer. This\ntest of applicability

YASHWANTRAO CHAVAN MAHARASHTRA OPEN UNIVERSITY,NASHIK vs. EXEMPTION CIRCLE,A BAD, AURANGABAD

disallow the\nappellant's claim when processing the return under Section 143(1) of the Act.\n7. Hence, I find no merit in the current appeal and, as a result, dismiss the\nappeal.\"\n5.\nAggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A), the assessee is in\nappeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:\n1)\nThe

WOCKHARDT LIMITED,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTAMT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is partly allowed, the appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and the CO filed by assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.775/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Circle-3, Aurangabad .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Wockhardt Ltd., R&D Centre, D-4, Midc, Chikalthana, Aurangabad. Pan: Aaacw2472M ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.758/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Wockhardt Ltd., R&D Centre, D-4, Midc, Chikalthana, Aurangabad. Pan: Aaacw2472M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिधम / V/S. Acit, Circle-3, Aurangabad ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Co No.43/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Wockhardt Ltd., R&D Centre, D-4, Midc, Chikalthana, Aurangabad. Pan: Aaacw2472M .......Cross Objector बिधम / V/S. Acit, Circle-3, Aurangabad ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Co No.43/Pun/2019

5. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the 'addition of Rs. 1.60 crore on account of interest to be charged from AEs by accepting benchmarking CO No.43/PUN/2019 carried out by the assessee on the basis of rates given in SBI quote and by Swiss

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

D-II Block, MIDC, of Income Tax, 5 55/PUN/2022 Chinchwad, Pune – 411 019. CPC. A.Y. 2019-20 PAN: AAACW 2784 N Vs. The Asst.Director Seema Santosh Ghone, Flat 102, Tower 25, Lodha of Income Tax, ITA No. Belmondo, Gahunje, CPC, Bengaluru. 6 116/PUN/2022 Pune – 412101. A.Y. 2019-20 PAN: AEHPG 9169 B Vs. The Asst.Director Rajdeep Info Techno