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

M/S GIRIRAJ ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

disallowed / taxed accordingly as per computation as under: Particulars Amount (in Rs.) Redeemed Value of MF on 29.01.2015 8,99,93,198/- Add: Dividend Received 2,06,68,835/- Business Loss claimed 1,00,06,802/- 10 IT(SS)A Nos.23 to 25/PUN/2024 Total Receipts 12,06,68,835/- Less: Initial Investment Cost 10,00,00,000/- Income earned 2

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

SHRI SWAMI VIVEKANAND NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PANDHARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 PANDHARPUR , PANDHARPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction u/s.80P(2) relying on Section 80A(5) of the Act. Assessing Officer assessed the total

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, MAN,SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

5), Pune v. M/s. Shiroli Budruk Krishak Seva\nSahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, ITAT, Pune.\n6.2 In respect of ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue, the Ld. AR submitted\nthat the principle of mutuality will not be applicable in case of the assessee\nearning interest income from deposits with co-operative bank considering the\nprovisions of section 80P(2)(d) which

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, TAL. MAN SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

5), Pune v. M/s. Shiroli Budruk Krishak Seva\nSahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, ITAT, Pune.\n6.2 In respect of ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue, the Ld. AR submitted\nthat the principle of mutuality will not be applicable in case of the assessee\nearning interest income from deposits with co-operative bank considering the\nprovisions of section 80P(2)(d) which

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

disallowing the exemption u/s.11 invoking the provisions of section 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(2) of the Act. 15. There was even an expenditure incurred on account of Foreign Tour both by Mr. Vikram Chavan, Managing Trustee and Ms. Pratima Chavan, Trustee Secretary respectively amounting to Rs.3,77,238/- as observed by the ld. AO in para

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

5,80,64,205 under section 80-IA of the Act to the Appellant, Invalidity of order passed under section 143(3) read with section 154 of the Act dated 3 July 2023: 2. erred in upholding the order under section 143(3) read with section 154 of the Act dated 3 July 2023 holding that it is not crystal

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

5,80,64,205 under section 80-IA of the Act to the Appellant, Invalidity of order passed under section 143(3) read with section 154 of the Act dated 3 July 2023: 2. erred in upholding the order under section 143(3) read with section 154 of the Act dated 3 July 2023 holding that it is not crystal

MAHATMA GANDHI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MYDT UDGIR,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 1 -LATUR, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowed the\ndeduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80P(2)(a)(i)/80P(2)(d) of the Act\namounting to Rs.3,04,88,392/- treating the same as other income'.\nAccordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment on 28.09.2021 u/s\n143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act by making an addition of Rs.3,04,88,392/- as\nincome from other sources

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

disallowance is called for because of the per se late deposit of the employees’ share beyond the due date under the respective Act and section 43B is of no assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received

MANGILAL LAKAHJI CHOWDHARY,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(1),, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr.Dipak P.Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2791/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14

disallowance of Rs.1,20,000/- in these peculiar circumstances. 4. The assessee does not press for his third substantive ground of challenging section 41(1) - cession of liability addition of Rs.50,000/- representing deposits received from M/s. Shubha Associates keeping in mind the smallness of the amount. Rejected accordingly. 5. Lastly comes the long term capital gains addition issue

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

5. Sub section (3) of section 70 is reproduced below: Where the result of the computation made for any assessment year under sections 48 to 55 in respect of any capital asset (other than a short-term capital asset) is a loss, the assessee shall be entitled to have the amount of such loss set off against the income

DEPUTU COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

5. Sub section (3) of section 70 is reproduced below: Where the result of the computation made for any assessment year under sections 48 to 55 in respect of any capital asset (other than a short-term capital asset) is a loss, the assessee shall be entitled to have the amount of such loss set off against the income

DEPUTY COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1,, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

5. Sub section (3) of section 70 is reproduced below: Where the result of the computation made for any assessment year under sections 48 to 55 in respect of any capital asset (other than a short-term capital asset) is a loss, the assessee shall be entitled to have the amount of such loss set off against the income