KUDALE AGRO FOODS,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-14, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

293 ITR 226 (SC) support of its claim, the assessee submitted that the benefit of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) r.w. first proviso to section 201(1) should be granted to the assessee in respect of the aforementioned three parties. So far as M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. is concerned, the assessee submitted two documents requesting

EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowed the deduction of Rs.15,96,293/- under section 80JJAA of the Act merely on account of late filing of Form

EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1 AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowed the deduction of Rs.15,96,293/- under section 80JJAA of the Act merely on account of late filing of Form

SHREE GARUDA PLANT PRODUCTS LTD,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (2),, NASHIK

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.492/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shree Garuda Plant Products The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Vs Ward-1(2), Nashik. B-26, Additional Midc Area, Ambad, Nashik. Pan: Aaacg 0563 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nishint Gandhi – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2022 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, Nashik For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Dated 19.02.2019, Emanating Out Of Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 1, Nashik ["The Cit (A)" For Short] Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Learned Income Tax Officer - 1 (2), Nashik, ["The Ao" For Short] Which Was Passed In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice Without Affording A Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Appellant. 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Invoking Section 14A R.W.R. 8D Of The Act, Whereby A Disallowance Of Rs.12,81,831/- Was Made In The Hands Of The Appellant.

disallowance u/s 14A is called for. Accordingly Ground No.2 of the Assessee is allowed. ITA No.492/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2015-16 Shree Garuda Plant Products Ltd.[A] Ground Number 3 - Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) : 3. As per the Assessment order, the assessee has received Loan of Rs.1,00,00,000/- from Trenton Investment Company Pvt Ltd and Rs.11

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. CUMMINS INDIA LTD , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Section\n143(1) of the Act.”\n12. We further find that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court\nhas decided the above referred questions of law holding as\nunder:-\n“10 In our view, the Tribunal has entirely misread the law as\nlaid down in Magneti Marelli (Supra). It is correct that in that\ncase also Assessee had paid royalty

CUMMINS INDIA LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Section\n143(1) of the Act.”\n\n12. We further find that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court\nhas decided the above referred questions of law holding as\nunder:-\n\n“10 In our view, the Tribunal has entirely misread the law as\nlaid down in Magneti Marelli (Supra). It is correct that in that\ncase also Assessee had paid royalty

GOEL EISHA CAPITALS,PUNE vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

disallow the same during the\nassessment proceedings for the year under consideration.\n04. In view of the above, it is found that the no verification on the aforesaid issues\nhas been done in the assessment proceedings by the AO. As per explanation (2) to\nsection 263(1) of the Act an order without making inquiries or verification which\nshould have

NALINI TUKARAM NIKAM,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 2(3), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2747/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. 4.2. During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that interest of Rs. 48,08,119/ was credited in Escrow account, does not belong to me as the agreement was cancelled by us giving the notice. The bank has also given confirmation letter to the Id. AO that income

DCIT-CIRCLE 7 PUNE, BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK PUNE vs. TRIO CHEMSUCROTECH ENG. PROJECTS PVT. LTD, PUNE

disallowing the above expenditure of Rs.26.55,05,907/- as bogus which included provision for such expenditure of Rs.2,31,13,761/-.\n2. 6. In the meantime, there were various development which brought to light the involvement of one Mr. Ajit Satam. Before the CIT(A), the assessee made submissions as regards to the true nature of transaction along with supporting

T AND T INFRA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 T & T Infra Limited Acit, Circle – 7, Pune A-1, Vishnu Vihar, Bibwewadi Vs. Kondhwa Road, Market Yard, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aaect3902H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tarun Ghia Department By : S/Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 10-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-10-2024 O R D E R Per Astha Chandra, Jm :

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IA(4) of the Act by observing as under: 7 “5.9. It is also required to be examined as to whether the assessee can be called as 'developer' within the meaning of section 80IA(4) or is only a works contractor. The words 'developer' and 'contractor' have not been defined

RAJESH MOHANLAL BORA,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (1),, NASHIK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1609/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rajesh Mohanlal Bora, 401, Rushiraj House, Thatte Nagar, College Road, Nashik – 422 005 Pan : Abcpb5526F . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Ito Ward- 1(1) Nashik . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा/ Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/10/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 20/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Assessee Is Assailed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 23/08/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] Which Dove Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 29/12/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Income Tax Officer 1(1), Nashik [For Short “Ao”] For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2014-15. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 8

section 201(1A), the Ld. AO disallowed the aforesaid amount of finance charges and culminated the assessment with a solitary addition. 2.3 Aggrieved with the aforesaid impugned disallowance, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Ld. FAA, who finding no force in the submission of the appellant, reverberated the views of Ld. AO and confirmed the impugned disallowance

MESSUNG SYSTEMS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2585/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

293 (SC) wherein it has been held that where an assessee claims deduction the onus on him to bring all material facts on record to substantiate his claim. In the instant case the appellant has failed to substantiate its claim with documentary evidence the nature of services rendered by the M/s. Microlog System while affecting sales to M/s. Manugraph India

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1,, AURANGABAD vs. M/S. M.B. PATIL CONSTRUCTION LTD,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

disallowance of deduction hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A) in this regard and produce additional documents/evidences in support of his claim regarding deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act without taking adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate

M/S. M.B.PATIL CONSTRUCTIONS LTD,,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

disallowance of deduction hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A) in this regard and produce additional documents/evidences in support of his claim regarding deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act without taking adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate

DESIMUS FINANCIALS LIMITED,MOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Desimus Financials Limited, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(3), Moga Road, Opp. Punjab Kesari, Pune Bagha Purana, Dist. Maoga, Punjab – 142 038 Pan Aaack9547K Appellant Respondent

disallowance on two counts, firstly, by considering that the first proviso to section 201(1) was inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 01-07-2012 and hence interest for the 5 Decimus Financials Limited period from 01-04-2012 to 30-06-2012 was uncovered by the proviso. The second reasoning of the AO was that the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE vs. IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

section (4) to mean the amount which bears to the profits of the business of the undertaking, the same proportion as the export turnover in respect of such articles or things or computer software bears to the total turnover of the business carried on by the undertaking. 11 ITA Nos.2395 & 2624/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2011-12 The Co-ordinate Bench opined when

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED, (EARLIER KNOWN AS IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD),,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

section (4) to mean the amount which bears to the profits of the business of the undertaking, the same proportion as the export turnover in respect of such articles or things or computer software bears to the total turnover of the business carried on by the undertaking. 11 ITA Nos.2395 & 2624/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2011-12 The Co-ordinate Bench opined when

CPI GERA REALTY INDIA PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(3), PUNE

The appeals of the assessee are DISMISSED

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.64 & 65/Pun/2023 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2015-16 Gera Reality India Pvt. Ltd., 200, Gera Plaza, Boat Club Road, Pune – 411 001 Pan : Aaccg6818R . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनधम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(3), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. K. Tyagi & Ramesh Soniminde Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/03/2023 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By The Present Twin Appeals, The Assessee Challenges The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 11, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 23/12/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”].

section 37(1) of the Act, the absence of supportive bills, invoices, vouchers and failure on the part of appellant to demonstrate the impugned balance expenditure was indeed incurred during the course of conduct of its business leaves no scope for allowance merely on the proposition that such expenditure were indeed transacted through banking channel or were subjected