THE SATARA DCC BANK STAFF CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,SATARA vs. ACIT, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.633/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Satara Dcc Bank Staff V The Asst. Commissioner Co-Op Credit Society Ltd., S. Of Income Tax, Satara S.No.523 A/1, Vijay Circle, Satara. Millenium, Shop No.2, Satara, Maharashtra – 415001. Pan: Aaaat0953G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms. Renuka Arunrao Ghatge Fca– Ar Revenue By Shri Vinodpawar,Irs – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commssioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, 1961, For The A.Y.2018-19, Dated 06.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Nfac-Cit (A), Delhi, Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Assessing Officer (A.O.) In Making Addition Of Rs. 93,91,184/- On

184/- on ITA No.633/PUN/2025 [A] account of disallowance of deduction under section 80P to the total income of the assessee

C R JAISWAL AND K B JAISWAL,VILLAGE KINGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(5), JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.732/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 C R Jaiswal & K B Jaiswal, The Income Tax Officer, Retail Country Liquor Shop, V Jalgaon. Village Kingaon, Taluka S Yawal – 425503 Maharashtra. Pan: Aaefc 8278 J Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod Shingte – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 12/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 14/09/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 21.04.2023 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Dated 29.11.2018 For A.Y.2016-17. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee As Under : C.R.Jaiswal & K.B.Jaiswal [A]

disallowance can only be made when the payments are genuine. In the present case the payments were genuine and supported by ledger abstract duly confirmed by the seller J K Wines which was sent by the seller to the learned AO. Hence it is requested to direct the learned CIT [Appeals] to drop the initiation of penalty proceedings against

SILVER OAK BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT-6, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

184) (Rajasthan) has held that where during scrutiny assessee realized aspect of merging GST Input Credit with expenses and same was suo-moto surrendered by assessee by revising its return, however revenue imposed penalty under section 270A and thereafter, rejected application of assessee under section 270AA, since revenue wasn't sure whether it was a case of misrepresentation or suppression

SHARADA ELECTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-3, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

184/- towards provision to gratuity. Further, the assessee has made a disallowance of Rs.4,30,432/- and added it to the total income. In respect of the balance amount of Rs. 1,06,752/- it is submitted that the amount was actually paid to the employees towards gratuity. The FAO has failed to verify the amount of gratuity actually paid

M/S. PRINCIPAL GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 482/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Principal Global Services Private Limited. Tower 6, Cybercity, Magarpatta City, अऩीऱाथी / Appellant Hadapsar, Pune-411 028. … Pan : Aadcp7369P बिाम / V/S. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, … प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle-4, Pune.

184/- as determined by the Appellant and accordingly made an upward adjustment of Rs.32,196,321/- and determining the arm’s length price of international transaction pertaining to back office support services provided by the appellant to its AE’s as Rs.200,216,996/- against Rs.185,497,012/- as determined by the Appellant and accordingly made an upward adjustment

VARVADE PANCHKROSHI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,RATANAGIRI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2349/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Varvade Panchkroshi Shikshan Vs. Acit, Circle-1 Prasarak Mandal, Kolhapur At Post Varawade, Waravade, Ratnagiri – 415620 Maharashtra Pan : Aaatv7973M Appellant Respondent

184) (Gujarat HC) 3. National Horticulture Board v. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (176 Taxman 167) (Punjab HC) 4. Al Jamia Mohammediyah Education Society v. CIT (Exemptions) (162 taxmann.com 114) (Bombay HC) 5. CIT (Exemption) v. Anjana Foundation (168 taxmann.com 462) (Gujarat HC) 6. S.M.K.R Vashi High School v. ITO (Exemption) (157 taxmann.com 702) (ITAT Surat) 7. Shri

M/S. KOMAL AGENCY,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (3),, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

184/- were debited. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to furnish details of such expenses, which led to the disallowance of entire expenses. The ld. CIT(A) echoed the assessment order on this point. The assessee is aggrieved by the sustenance of disallowance of full expenses. 4. We have heard both the sides through Virtual Court

ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PUNE, PUNE vs. BHIKSHU GRANIMART, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 7. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC deleted all the additions made by the Assessing Officer. So far as the addition of Rs.1 crore made by the Assessing Officer is concerned, he deleted the same by observing as under: 5 “6.1 On perusal of the submission made by the appellant

M/S. BITWISE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.756/Pun/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bitwise Solutions Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Bitwise World, Off International Vs Convention Centre, Shivaji Nagar, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune – 411 016. Pan: Aaacb 4239 K Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 27/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Pune, Dated 15.12.2016 For The Assessment Year 2011-12.The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Cit(A)-1, Pune Erred In Law & On Facts In Sustaining The Addition U/S.36(1)(Iii) Of The Ita, 1961 Of Rs.69,51,455/- Made By Learned Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune(Hereinafter Referred To As The Learned Ao). 2. The Learned Cit(A)-1 & The Learned Ao Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Appreciating That, Share Purchase Transaction For Which Loan Was Availed Was A Business Transaction I.E. After Buying Shares, Bitwise Inc., Usa, Became 100% Subsidiary Of The Appellant Company. 3. The Learned Cit(A)-1 & The Learned Ao Further Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Appreciating That Appellant Company Benefitted From Share Purchase Transaction In Terms Of Direct Control Over Bitwise Inc., Usa & Assurance As To Getting Business In Future Years.

section 57, the basic premise of case is same. In this case interest on loan taken for purchasing shares for acquiring controlling interest in the company cannot be held to be expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for business. In the case of CIT vs Phil Corporation Ltd. (supra) it was never contended that investment in shares is not a business

VENTURA INDIA PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TP-2)2, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

disallowance, without appreciating the facts that, proposed transfer pricing adjustment to the international transactions of theAssessee are on account of difference of opinion as to application of selection criterion for selection of comparable companies, interpretation of the provisions, etc. 4 Ventura (India) P. Ltd. A.Y. 2016-17 13. Proposed levy of interest under section 234B of the Act on account

M/S GERA DEVELOPMENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

disallowance u/s.14A r.w. Rule 8D at ₹3,82,623, and assessed the income at ₹1,83,60,35,564. 5. Subsequently, ld. PCIT (Central) invoked provisions of section 263 of the Act regarding the claim of depreciation on intangible assets at ₹1,86,95,184

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. AJANTA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

184/-. In this connection, the ld. A.O had asked the assessee as to why proportionate interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act should not be disallowed and added to the total income. The assessee has not given satisfactory reply and finally, the ld. A.O made an addition of Rs. 7,71,40,818/- on account of disallowance of interest

SAKHARAM BHONDVE,,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD -9 (1),, PUNE

disallowed the claim of deduction from the sale consideration of Rs.48 lakhs and restricted the claim of deduction u/s 54F of the Act to the extent of Rs.5,44,184/- on account of re-invested in his residential house. In fact, the reinvestment claimed in the names of both the sons, wife are not in accordance with the law. Another

SIARA ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1101 & 1102/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 वष"

184 (Del.) 2. Modern Info Technonology Pvt. Ltd. – ITA No.4294/Del/2012 3. Interglobe Enterprises Ltd. Vs. DCIT – 40 CCH 0022 (Delhi Tribunal) 4. ACIT Vs. Bharat Hotels Ltd. – 42 CCH 0074 (Delhi Tribunal) 5. Oriental Structural Engineers Pvt. Ltd. – ITA No.605/Del/2012 6. JM Financial Limited Vs. ACIT – ITA No.4521/Mum/2012 7. Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. Vs. ACIT – ITA Nos.5408/Mum/2012 Decisions relied

SAKAL PAPER LTD.,,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIR.-6,, PUNE

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.498/Pun/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06

disallowance of claim U/s.80IA could be inferred as conscious concealment of the particulars of income or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars attracting provisions of Sec. 271(1)(c) and levying penalty of Rs.23,27,607/- under the said section. It is prayed that the contention be rejected and the penalty be deleted. The appellant named above craves leave

SAKAL PAPERS LTD.,,PUNE vs. DY. CIT, CIRCLE 6, PUNE

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.498/Pun/2010 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06

disallowance of claim U/s.80IA could be inferred as conscious concealment of the particulars of income or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars attracting provisions of Sec. 271(1)(c) and levying penalty of Rs.23,27,607/- under the said section. It is prayed that the contention be rejected and the penalty be deleted. The appellant named above craves leave

LEEBA CONSTRUCTION,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

184/-. In this case assessment was re-opened u/s 147 of the Act. Subsequently, the case was taken up for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 10.12.2014 and the total income was determined at Rs.40,94,012/- inter-alia by making addition of Rs.18,47,828/- on account

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, PUNE, PUNE

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

disallowance of the claim of\ndeficit holding that there is no merit in the addition(s) made by the Ld. AO\nfor the reasons recorded in pars 5.1 to 5.5.2 of his impugned appellate\norder.\n5.\nDissatisfied, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the\ngrounds of appeal relate thereto.\n6. The Ld. DR contended that