PRAFULLA SHANTILAL KOTHARI ,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.922/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Prafulla Shantilal Kothari, Vs. Acit, Circle-7, Pune. Flat No.1, Akshay Plaza, Ramnagar, Wadgaonsheri, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aahhp4593E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora, Shri Saukhya Lakade & Miss Riya Oswal Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 30.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per R. K. Panda, Vp : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.02.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Visakhapatnam [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Huf & Is Carrying On Business Of Online Trading In Lottery Tickets Under The Name & Style ‘J.K. Lottery’. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 24.10.2017 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.51,25,350/-. The Case

disallowed 30% of the expenses claimed by the assessee as salary expenditure, amounting to Rs 19,11,790/- and added back to the total income of the assessee. 6.1.2 During the course of assessment proceedings, AO observed that the assessee had claimed an amount of Rs 2,73,627/- as advertisement expenditures. Vide notice under section

E-ALLY SECURITIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,RAIGAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE, PANVEL, PANVEL

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2018-19

Disallowance under Section 14A of Rs.2,48,85,000/- as expenses to earn exempted Dividend income of Rs.1,80,30

SPRINGER NATURE TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLISHING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

30,47,876 claimed in the return of income and processed in the intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act, without assigning any reason whatsoever. Levy of Interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act 12. The learned AO has erred in levying interest under section 234A of the Act of INR 2,13,902, without assigning

SPRINGER NATURE TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLISHING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

30,47,876 claimed in the return of income and processed in the intimation order under section 143(1) of the Act, without assigning any reason whatsoever. Levy of Interest under section 234A and 234B of the Act 12. The learned AO has erred in levying interest under section 234A of the Act of INR 2,13,902, without assigning

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE vs. HONEYWELL AUTOMATION INDIA LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

30 to 36 of the Act, for computing income under the head, “Income from Business and Profession”. 16. For claiming benefit under section 80G, deductions are considered at the stage of computing “Total taxable income”. Even if any payments under section 80G forms part of CSR payments ( keeping in mind ineligible deduction expressly provided u/s.80G), the same would already stand

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

sections": [ "263", "143(3)", "135", "37(1)", "142(1)", "80G", "80G(5)", "80G(1)", "37", "30", "36", "144C(13)", "143(2)", "115JB", "115JJB" ], "issues": "Whether CSR expenditure, even if disallowed

DCIT, CIRCLE 8 PUNE, PUNE vs. ALFA LAVAL INDIA PVT LTD, PUNE

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

30% of Rs.4,29,41,308/- u/s 40(a)(ia)\nof the Act and disallowance of Rs.49,93,112/- u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act in the ITR\nfiled for assessment year 2018-19. However, in computation of total income the\nassessee made disallowance of Rs.67,00,054/- only instead of Rs.1

RAVINDRA DNYANESHWR BHUJBAL,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(5), PUNE, PUNE

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

disallowance of expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 8. Sub-section (1) of section 143 states that a return shall be processed to compute total income by making six types of `adjustments’ as set out in sub-clauses (i) to (vi). As noted

M/S. SHIVAMM INDUSTRIES,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.393/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S.Shivamm Industries, The Dy.Commissioner Of Plot 76, Arihant Heights, Sector Vs Income Tax, Circle-8, No.25, Pradhikaran Nigdi, Pune. Pune – 411044. Pan: Aaefs 0458 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 15/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee I.E. Shivamm Industries For A.Y. 2013-14 Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Of Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Dated 21.03.2023 Emanating From Assessing Officer’S Order Under Section 154 Of The Act Dated 22.03.2021. The Ground Of Appeal Are As Under : “1. The Order Dated 21/03/2023 Bearing No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1051048828[L] Passed Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 By The Hon’Ble Cit[Appeals], National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Is Excessive, M/S.Shivamm Industries [A]

disallowance of expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 8. Sub-section (1) of section 143 states that a return shall be processed to compute total income by making six types of `adjustments’ as set out in sub-clauses (i) to (vi). As noted

GORIBI ABDUL KARIM NADAF,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ADDL JCIT (A) 1 - AHMEDABAD, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ADDL/JCIT (A) AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamore

disallowance of expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 8. Sub-section (1) of section 143 states that a return shall be processed to compute total income by making six types of `adjustments’ as set out in sub-clauses (i) to (vi). As noted

GORIBI ABDUL KARIM NADAF,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ADDL JCIT (A) -1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamore

disallowance of expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 8. Sub-section (1) of section 143 states that a return shall be processed to compute total income by making six types of `adjustments’ as set out in sub-clauses (i) to (vi). As noted

M/S. THE KOTHARI WHEELS ,PUNE vs. DCIT, CPC,BANGALORE, BANGLORE

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

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)

disallowance of expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 8. Sub-section (1) of section 143 states that a return shall be processed to compute total income by making six types of `adjustments’ as set out in sub-clauses (i) to (vi). As noted

SURIA STEELTECH PRIVATE LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS TMS ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED),PUNE vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD-9(4), PUNE, PUNE

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

disallowance of expenditure or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return’ 12 ITA.No.547/PUN./2023 8. Sub-section (1) of section 143 states that a return shall be processed to compute total income by making six types of `adjustments’ as set out in sub-clauses

PUNE ZILHA MADHYAWATI SAKAKAK PUNE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 6(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.322/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Pune Zilla Madhyawati V The Income Tax Officer, Sakakak, S Ward-6(3), Pune. 92 Ranjan Co-Op Society, Shukrawar Peth, Shukrawar Peth S.O., Pune – 411002. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaatp6962E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue

section 143(1). Therefore, CPC has erred in disallowing the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(c) of the Act. Even otherwise, assessee is eligible for said deduction being Credit Co- operative Society duly registered under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. In these facts and circumstances of the case, the AO is directed

DANA ANAND INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, AKURDI,PUNE

30 to 36 of the Act, for computing income under the head,\n“Income from Business and Profession”.\n16. For claiming benefit under section 80G, deductions are considered at\nthe stage of computing “Total taxable income". Even if any payments\nunder section 80G forms part of CSR payments ( keeping in mind ineligible\ndeduction expressly providedu/s.80G), the same would already stand

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. GRIHUM HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

30% as against 25% is outside the scope of 143(1) of the Act since it is not falling under the prima facie adjustment covered within section 143(1) of the Act. In his alternate ground the assessee has stated that no proper opportunity was granted to the assessee and therefore, the order is bad in law. 10. Referring

RAVINDRA DNYANESHWAR BHUJBAL,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 14(5), PUNE, PUNE

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

disallowance of expenditure or increase in income indicated\nin the audit report but not taken into account in computing the\ntotal income in the return'\n8. Sub-section (1) of section 143 states that a return shall be\nprocessed to compute total income by making six types of\n`adjustments' as set out in sub-clauses

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

disallowance of Rs.3,92,050/- being (30% of interest expenses of Rs.13,06,800/-) u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of failure to deduct TDS thereon contending that the case of the assessee is covered under proviso to section