AHMEDNAGAR ZILLA GRAMSEVAKANCHI SAHAKAR PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,AHILYANAGAR vs. PCIT, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

5. There are concurrent findings recorded by CITA, ITAT and\nthe High Court that the respondent/Assessee_cannot be termed as\nBanks/Cooperative Banks and that being a credit society, they are\nentitled to exemption under section 80(P)(2) of the Income-tax Act.\nSuch finding of fact is not required to be interfered with by this Court\nin exercise of powers

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

disallowed / taxed accordingly as per computation as under: Particulars Amount (in Rs.) Redeemed Value of MF on 29.01.2015 8,99,93,198/- Add: Dividend Received 2,06,68,835/- Business Loss claimed 1,00,06,802/- 10 IT(SS)A Nos.23 to 25/PUN/2024 Total Receipts 12,06,68,835/- Less: Initial Investment Cost 10,00,00,000/- Income earned 2

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

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

5 GP-44 Sangli 31/03/2012 2976463/- A.Y.2015-16 6 GP-45 Sangli 21/03/2012 3700598/- A.Y.2015-16 Total 2,84,42,603/- 19. He further noted that the above claim is supported by an Audit report from the Chartered Accountant. He, therefore, asked the assessee to justify the claim of deduction made u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given

SHRI SWAMI VIVEKANAND NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PANDHARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 PANDHARPUR , PANDHARPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

disallowed assessee’s claim for deduction u/s.80P(2) relying on Section 80A(5) of the Act. Assessing Officer assessed the total

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, TAL. MAN SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

5), Pune v. M/s. Shiroli Budruk Krishak Seva\nSahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, ITAT, Pune.\n6.2 In respect of ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue, the Ld. AR submitted\nthat the principle of mutuality will not be applicable in case of the assessee\nearning interest income from deposits with co-operative bank considering the\nprovisions of section 80P(2)(d) which

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, MAN,SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

5), Pune v. M/s. Shiroli Budruk Krishak Seva\nSahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, ITAT, Pune.\n6.2 In respect of ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue, the Ld. AR submitted\nthat the principle of mutuality will not be applicable in case of the assessee\nearning interest income from deposits with co-operative bank considering the\nprovisions of section 80P(2)(d) which

KOTHARI AGRITECH PRIVATE LIMITED,SOLAPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

5,80,64,205 under section 80-IA of the Act to the Appellant, Invalidity of order passed under section 143(3) read with section 154 of the Act dated 3 July 2023: 2. erred in upholding the order under section 143(3) read with section 154 of the Act dated 3 July 2023 holding that it is not crystal

KOTHARI AGRITECH PVT. LTD,,SOLAPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

5,80,64,205 under section 80-IA of the Act to the Appellant, Invalidity of order passed under section 143(3) read with section 154 of the Act dated 3 July 2023: 2. erred in upholding the order under section 143(3) read with section 154 of the Act dated 3 July 2023 holding that it is not crystal

MAHATMA GANDHI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MYDT UDGIR,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 1 -LATUR, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowed the\ndeduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80P(2)(a)(i)/80P(2)(d) of the Act\namounting to Rs.3,04,88,392/- treating the same as other income'.\nAccordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment on 28.09.2021 u/s\n143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act by making an addition of Rs.3,04,88,392/- as\nincome from other sources

VIRENDRA SINGH SAINI,HARYANA vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE, BENGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1483/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

disallowance is called for because of the per se late deposit of the employees’ share beyond the due date under the respective Act and section 43B is of no assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received

SHETH CHIMANLAL GOVINDDAS MEMORIAL TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

2)(h), as well as the\nprescribed modes of investment under Section 11(5). Therefore, the\nFAO was required to disallow

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

2(24)(xviii) inserted by Finance Act, 2015 effective from 01.04.2016 assessee in accordance with the provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (1) of 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

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

2(24)(xviii) inserted by Finance Act, 2015 effective from 01.04.2016 assessee in accordance with the provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (1) of 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

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

2(24)(xviii) inserted by Finance Act, 2015 effective from 01.04.2016 assessee in accordance with the provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (1) of 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

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

2(24)(xviii) inserted by Finance Act, 2015 effective from 01.04.2016 assessee in accordance with the provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (1) of 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