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

disallowance—Whether, transactions in question fell within definition of speculative transaction as per section 43 (5)— Held, in impugned judgment

DIMPLE ALNESH SOMJI,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 43(5) of the I.T. Act. 18 ITA.No.973/PUN./2024 23. In view of the above, the grievance of the assessee is found to be justified and is accepted as such. The Grounds raised are, hence, accepted. The addition made by the Assessing Officer, as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), is cancelled. 24. In the result, the appeal

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 43 of the Act has already been taken into account the amount of subsidy for determination of the actual cost of assets for computing the depreciation in the computation of income filed along with return of income of income for the assessment year under consideration. However, ld. AO was not satisfied with these arguments and submissions

ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, 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 43 of the Act has already been taken into account the amount of subsidy for determination of the actual cost of assets for computing the depreciation in the computation of income filed along with return of income of income for the assessment year under consideration. However, ld. AO was not satisfied with these arguments and submissions

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 43 of the Act has already been taken into account the amount of subsidy for determination of the actual cost of assets for computing the depreciation in the computation of income filed along with return of income of income for the assessment year under consideration. However, ld. AO was not satisfied with these arguments and submissions

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 43 of the Act has already been taken into account the amount of subsidy for determination of the actual cost of assets for computing the depreciation in the computation of income filed along with return of income of income for the assessment year under consideration. However, ld. AO was not satisfied with these arguments and submissions

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 43 of the Act has already been taken into account the amount of subsidy for determination of the actual cost of assets for computing the depreciation in the computation of income filed along with return of income of income for the assessment year under consideration. However, ld. AO was not satisfied with these arguments and submissions

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

disallowance u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act, 1d. CIT(A) affirmed\nthe action of the Assessing Officer placing reliance on the\njudgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate\nServices Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC). So far as\nthe issue raised by the assessee against the addition made by\nld. AO treating

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

disallowance u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act, 1d. CIT(A) affirmed\nthe action of the Assessing Officer placing reliance on the\njudgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate\nServices Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC). So far as\nthe issue raised by the assessee against the addition made by\nld. AO treating

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

disallowance u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act, 1d. CIT(A) affirmed\nthe action of the Assessing Officer placing reliance on the\njudgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate\nServices Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC). So far as\nthe issue raised by the assessee against the addition made by\nld. AO treating

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

43 (Bombay) wherein the jurisdictional High Court held that deduction under section 80-IA has to be computed unit-wise and not for business as a whole; therefore, assessee-company was to be allowed deduction under section 80-IA in respect of its two eligible units even if it had claimed loss under head of its total business income

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

43 (Bombay) wherein the jurisdictional High Court held that deduction under section 80-IA has to be computed unit-wise and not for business as a whole; therefore, assessee-company was to be allowed deduction under section 80-IA in respect of its two eligible units even if it had claimed loss under head of its total business income

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

43 (Bombay) wherein the jurisdictional High Court held that deduction under section 80-IA has to be computed unit-wise and not for business as a whole; therefore, assessee-company was to be allowed deduction under section 80-IA in respect of its two eligible units even if it had claimed loss under head of its total business income

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

43 (Bombay) wherein the jurisdictional High Court held that deduction under section 80-IA has to be computed unit-wise and not for business as a whole; therefore, assessee-company was to be allowed deduction under section 80-IA in respect of its two eligible units even if it had claimed loss under head of its total business income

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

43 (Bombay) wherein the jurisdictional High Court held that deduction under section 80-IA has to be computed unit-wise and not for business as a whole; therefore, assessee-company was to be allowed deduction under section 80-IA in respect of its two eligible units even if it had claimed loss under head of its total business income

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

43 (Bombay) wherein the jurisdictional High Court held that deduction under section 80-IA has to be computed unit-wise and not for business as a whole; therefore, assessee-company was to be allowed deduction under section 80-IA in respect of its two eligible units even if it had claimed loss under head of its total business income

SHRI SUNIL MANAKCHAND KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL-NAGPUR, NAGPUR

Appeals of the assessee are disposed of as 14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1675 To 1679/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12 Sunil Manakchand Kotecha, 4, Vardhaman Nagar, Near Sagar Park, Jalgaon-425001. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Abppk2141Q बनाम / V/S. Acit, Circle-1, ……""यथ" / Respondent Nashik. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1680 To 1684/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12 Sunil Manakchand Kotecha, 4, Vardhaman Nagar, Near Sagar Park, Jalgaon-425001. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Abppk2141Q बनाम / V/S. Pr.Cit, Central-Nagpur Nagpur. Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan & Smt. Arrchena Shetty Revenue By : Shri Deepak Garg सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2020 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 13.02.2020 आदेश / Order Per Bench : There Are 10 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2011-12 (I.E. Five Assessment Years). Out Of 10 Appeals Of The Assessee, 5 Appeals Pertain To The Revision Order Passed By The Pr.Cit (Central), Nagpur U/S 263 Of The Act Dated 11.03.2016 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2010-11 & 18.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Rest Of 5 Appeals Pertain To The Fresh Assessment Order Made U/S 263 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act. 2. The Pr.Cit Passed The Revision Order Dated 11.03.2016 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2010-11 & 18.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Whereas The Cit(A) Passed A Combined Appellate Order Commonly Dated 30.07.2018 Involving The Common Issues For All The Five Assessment Years. Otherwise, The Error Of Making A Revision Order By The Pr.Cit Is More Or Less Similar To All The 10 Appeals Under Consideration.

section 43(5) of the Act, we are of the opinion that the CIT(A) erred in treating the same as speculative losses and, therefore, the decision of the CIT(A) requires to be set-aside. The said retrospective amendments allow the impugned losses as the business losses only. Accordingly, the relevant grounds no.4, 5 and 6 raised

SUNIL MANAKCHAND KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, NASHIK

Appeals of the assessee are disposed of as 14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1675 To 1679/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12 Sunil Manakchand Kotecha, 4, Vardhaman Nagar, Near Sagar Park, Jalgaon-425001. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Abppk2141Q बनाम / V/S. Acit, Circle-1, ……""यथ" / Respondent Nashik. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1680 To 1684/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12 Sunil Manakchand Kotecha, 4, Vardhaman Nagar, Near Sagar Park, Jalgaon-425001. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Abppk2141Q बनाम / V/S. Pr.Cit, Central-Nagpur Nagpur. Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan & Smt. Arrchena Shetty Revenue By : Shri Deepak Garg सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2020 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 13.02.2020 आदेश / Order Per Bench : There Are 10 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2011-12 (I.E. Five Assessment Years). Out Of 10 Appeals Of The Assessee, 5 Appeals Pertain To The Revision Order Passed By The Pr.Cit (Central), Nagpur U/S 263 Of The Act Dated 11.03.2016 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2010-11 & 18.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Rest Of 5 Appeals Pertain To The Fresh Assessment Order Made U/S 263 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act. 2. The Pr.Cit Passed The Revision Order Dated 11.03.2016 For The Assessment Years 2007-08 To 2010-11 & 18.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Whereas The Cit(A) Passed A Combined Appellate Order Commonly Dated 30.07.2018 Involving The Common Issues For All The Five Assessment Years. Otherwise, The Error Of Making A Revision Order By The Pr.Cit Is More Or Less Similar To All The 10 Appeals Under Consideration.

section 43(5) of the Act, we are of the opinion that the CIT(A) erred in treating the same as speculative losses and, therefore, the decision of the CIT(A) requires to be set-aside. The said retrospective amendments allow the impugned losses as the business losses only. Accordingly, the relevant grounds no.4, 5 and 6 raised