GARWARE TECHNICAL FIBRES LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), PUNE

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 292C and the nature of the transaction mentioned, the documents found cannot be considered as "Dumb Documents". 3.10. The next argument taken by the assessee is that if the receipts are taken for taxation, it cannot be said that the entire cash receipts is income of the respective assessment year. The assessee has further submitted that in the said

GARWARE TECHNICAL FIBRES LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), PUNE

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 292C and the nature of the transaction mentioned, the documents found cannot be considered as "Dumb Documents". 3.10. The next argument taken by the assessee is that if the receipts are taken for taxation, it cannot be said that the entire cash receipts is income of the respective assessment year. The assessee has further submitted that in the said

GARWARE TECHNICAL FIBRES LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), PUNE

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 292C and the nature of the transaction mentioned, the documents found cannot be considered as "Dumb Documents". 3.10. The next argument taken by the assessee is that if the receipts are taken for taxation, it cannot be said that the entire cash receipts is income of the respective assessment year. The assessee has further submitted that in the said

GARWARE TECHNICAL FIBRES LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), PUNE

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 292C and the nature of the transaction mentioned, the documents found cannot be considered as "Dumb Documents". 3.10. The next argument taken by the assessee is that if the receipts are taken for taxation, it cannot be said that the entire cash receipts is income of the respective assessment year. The assessee has further submitted that in the said

GARWARE TECHNICAL FIBRES LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), PUNE

292C by the Finance\nAct 2007 w..e.f. 01.10.1975. Hence the contention of the assessee is\nnot found acceptable and is rejected. It is not a case of conjectures\nand surmises of AO. There is adequate material or details about the\nnature and ownership of the documents. Hence in the light of Section\n292C and the nature of the transaction

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), PUNE, INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. GARWARE TECHNICAL FIBRES LIMITED, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly\nallowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

292C by the Finance\nAct 2007 w..e.f. 01.10.1975. Hence the contention of the assessee is\nnot found acceptable and is rejected. It is not a case of conjectures\nand surmises of AO. There is adequate material or details about the\nnature and ownership of the documents. Hence in the light of Section\n292C and the nature of the transaction

GARWARE TECHNICAL FIBRES LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), PUNE

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly\nallowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

292C by the Finance\nAct 2007 w..e.f. 01.10.1975. Hence the contention of the assessee is\nnot found acceptable and is rejected. It is not a case of conjectures\nand surmises of AO. There is adequate material or details about the\nnature and ownership of the documents. Hence in the light of Section\n292C and the nature of the transaction

DECCAN OVERSEAS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripotedeccan Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Asstt. Commissioner Of 1507, Ford Corner, Bhoopal Income Tax, Circle – 2, Towers, 1St Floor, Laxmipuri, Kolhapur Kolhapur Vs. Pan : Aabcd2301H

disallowance of Rs.1,75,27,892/- as unexplained cash payments made outside the books. The CIT(A) detailed discussion upholding the AO’s action to this effect reads as under : “5.1 Grounds 1, 2 & 3: This is against the addition of Rs.1,75,27,892 made by the AO. The facts have been narrated in detail by me. The point

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2),, PUNE vs. M/S SINHGAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY (TRUST), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl. It(Ss)A No./ Name Of Appellant Name Of Respondent Asst. No.

section 11 should be taken away. XVI. As regard to the salary paid to Shri U.Y. Pawar, ld. CIT-DR submitted that the action of recovery was initiated only after search action and the ld. CIT(A) rightly confirmed the addition. XVII. As regards to the prior period expenses, ld. CIT- DR submitted that ld. CIT(A) rightly confirmed

ANAND DEVELOPERS,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), SANGLI

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

disallowances, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) contesting inter alia that the profits of Rs.3,58,69,978/- on sale of immovable property had not accrued to the appellant. The Assessing Officer ought not to have made addition of Rs.8,47,00,000/- being the alleged receipt of on-money on sale of the said property

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SANGLI CIRCLE,, SANGLI vs. ANAND DEVELOPERS, SANGLI

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

disallowances, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) contesting inter alia that the profits of Rs.3,58,69,978/- on sale of immovable property had not accrued to the appellant. The Assessing Officer ought not to have made addition of Rs.8,47,00,000/- being the alleged receipt of on-money on sale of the said property

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

disallowances in assessment u/s 153A in the absence of any incriminating material and without appreciating the fact that original assessment made u/s 143(1)(a) which is completed on the date of initiation of search get abated. 3) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law. the learned Assessing Officer erred in adding

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

disallowances in assessment u/s 153A in the absence of any incriminating material and without appreciating the fact that original assessment made u/s 143(1)(a) which is completed on the date of initiation of search get abated. 3) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law. the learned Assessing Officer erred in adding

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

disallowances in assessment u/s 153A in the absence of any incriminating material and without appreciating the fact that original assessment made u/s 143(1)(a) which is completed on the date of initiation of search get abated. 3) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law. the learned Assessing Officer erred in adding

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

disallowances, the assessee had filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) contenting inter alia that the Assessing Officer ought not to have treated the unsecured loans of Rs.13,27,54,925/- as bogus loans, are merely accommodation entries since the interest was paid on such loans after deducting the TDS and the loans were accepted through the mode