SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

Section filed by order 2016-17 Assessee 26.12.2018 143(3) 2017-18 Assessee 25.12.2018 143(3) 2018-19 Assessee 20.04.2021 143(3) r.w.s.144B 2018-19 Revenue 02.10.2019 143(1) 2019-20 Revenue 17.05.2020 143(1) 2019-20 Assessee 17.05.2020 143(1) 2020-21 Revenue 20.12.2021 143(1) 2020-21 Assessee 20.12.2021 143(1) 2. We will first espouse the appeals

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-5, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD., PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

Section filed by order 2016-17 Assessee 26.12.2018 143(3) 2017-18 Assessee 25.12.2018 143(3) 2018-19 Assessee 20.04.2021 143(3) r.w.s.144B 2018-19 Revenue 02.10.2019 143(1) 2019-20 Revenue 17.05.2020 143(1) 2019-20 Assessee 17.05.2020 143(1) 2020-21 Revenue 20.12.2021 143(1) 2020-21 Assessee 20.12.2021 143(1) 2. We will first espouse the appeals

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

Section filed by order 2016-17 Assessee 26.12.2018 143(3) 2017-18 Assessee 25.12.2018 143(3) 2018-19 Assessee 20.04.2021 143(3) r.w.s.144B 2018-19 Revenue 02.10.2019 143(1) 2019-20 Revenue 17.05.2020 143(1) 2019-20 Assessee 17.05.2020 143(1) 2020-21 Revenue 20.12.2021 143(1) 2020-21 Assessee 20.12.2021 143(1) 2. We will first espouse the appeals

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD6(1), PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos.154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the\nassessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA\nNo

1) of section 43 of the Act has\nalready been taken into account the amount of subsidy for\ndetermination of the actual cost of assets for computing the\ndepreciation in the computation of income filed along with\nreturn of income of income for the assessment year under\nconsideration. However, ld. AO was not satisfied with these\narguments and submissions

ACIT, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos.154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the\nassessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA\nNo

1) of section 43 of the Act has\nalready been taken into account the amount of subsidy for\ndetermination of the actual cost of assets for computing the\ndepreciation in the computation of income filed along with\nreturn of income of income for the assessment year under\nconsideration. However, ld. AO was not satisfied with these\narguments and submissions

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(1), PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos.154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the\nassessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA\nNo

1) of section 43 of the Act has\nalready been taken into account the amount of subsidy for\ndetermination of the actual cost of assets for computing the\ndepreciation in the computation of income filed along with\nreturn of income of income for the assessment year under\nconsideration. However, ld. AO was not satisfied with these\narguments and submissions

REXEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

1) and Explanation-2 of Section 43(6) of the IT Act 1961\nestablishes that the depreciation on goodwill as a result of amalgamation is\nnot allowable.\nResultantly, the claims made by the appellant in support of this ground do\nnot have any merit. Therefore, the addition made by assessing officer on\naccount of disallowance

DCIT, SWARGATE PUNE vs. CUMMINS INDIA LTD , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

disallowance on\naccount of the said reason as an incorrect claim envisaged\nu/s 143(1)(a)(ii) is not proper.\n2.2.1 In the present case, the eligibility to claim a deduction\nunder section 10AA per se is not being disputed by the AO\nand the deduction is denied only on account of the fact that\nthe appellant has filed

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

disallowance on\n\naccount of the said reason as an incorrect claim envisaged\nu/s 143(1)(a)(ii) is not proper.\n\n2.2.1 In the present case, the eligibility to claim a deduction\nunder section 10AA per se is not being disputed by the AO\nand the deduction is denied only on account of the fact that\nthe appellant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 7 PUNE, PUNE vs. KOLTE PATIL INTEGRATED TOWNSHIPS LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance is special bench\ndecision in the case of Wall Street Construction (supra) which stands reversed by\nHon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Lokhandwala\nConstruction Industries Limited (260 ITR 579) which holds good even today. The\nproviso to Section 36(1)(iii) does not come into play in the present case as the\nresidential units

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. SAGAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

disallowed the same u/s 37 of the Act. Thus, the Assessing Officer computed the total income of the assessee at Rs.2,22,86,304/-. 6. Before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee submitted that the reasons for reopening were communited to the assessee after 11 months of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act although the assessee

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 giving reference of the generation of goodwill at the time of amalgamation

ADVIK HI TECH PVT LTD,CHAKAN PUNE vs. DY.COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8, PUNE, AKURDI, PUNE

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

section 43(1) of the Act during the appellate proceedings. In view of above discussion, I am of the considered view that the subsidy received by the appellant on expansion of unit by investment in plant & machinery is capital in nature. Therefore, the amount of subsidy needs 6 ITA.No.1156, 1157 & 1203/PUN./2023 to be reduced from the cost

ADVIK HI TECH PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DY.COMM.OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8, PUNE, AKURDI PUNE

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

section 43(1) of the Act during the appellate proceedings. In view of above discussion, I am of the considered view that the subsidy received by the appellant on expansion of unit by investment in plant & machinery is capital in nature. Therefore, the amount of subsidy needs 6 ITA.No.1156, 1157 & 1203/PUN./2023 to be reduced from the cost

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE vs. ADVIK HI-TECH PRIVATE LIMITED , PUNE

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

section 43(1) of the Act during the appellate proceedings. In view of above discussion, I am of the considered view that the subsidy received by the appellant on expansion of unit by investment in plant & machinery is capital in nature. Therefore, the amount of subsidy needs 6 ITA.No.1156, 1157 & 1203/PUN./2023 to be reduced from the cost

VIJAY VYANKATRAO MANE,SADASHIV PEATH vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER , ADDL/JCIT(A)- CHANDIGARH

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

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

disallowance of deduction claimed under [section 10AA or under any of the provisions of Chapter VI-A under the heading "C.—Deductions in respect of certain incomes", if] the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; or (vi)addition of income appearing in Form 26AS or Form 16A or Form 16 which

INDUS BIOTECH LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

43,182/- u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to\nas 'the Act'). The CPC in the order passed u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act proposed\ncertain adjustments, in response to which the assessee filed a response letter dated\n07.02.2020 explaining why the adjustments are unwarranted. However,\ndisregarding the response filed by the assessee

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

disallowance on account of Tax and duties namely Profession Tax of INR 2,68,200, Employers Contribution to Provident Fund of INR 43,55,286, Employers Contribution to ESIC of INR 1,35,555 and Bonus of INR 5,07,95,670 made under the intimation order under section