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

section 143(3) order, by observing as under : “Ground 03: In this ground of appeal the appellant objected the addition made by the Assessing Officer (CPC) is Rs. 5,80,64,205/- towards disallowance of 801A for the A.Y. 2018-19. The contention of the appellant has been considered. I have gone through the facts and found that

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED ( SUCCESSOR OF ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS LIMITED),PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 270A(6)(a). 9. The Appellant craves leave to add to, withdraw or modify any of the grounds of objections at the time of hearing.‖ 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of providing software engineering services and solutions for the communication industry. For AY 2020-21, the assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. MANORAMA COOP BANK LTD, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2157/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Cricle-2, Solapur. Vs. Manorama Co-Op. Bank Ltd., Plot 4, 5, 6 Vijapur Road, Indiranagar S.O., Maharashtra- 413004. Pan : Aajfm6823C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Shilpa N. C. Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) The Ld Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred In Admitting This Exemption U/S 194A (3)(V) To The Assessee For Non-Deduction Of Tds On Interest Credits Of Nominal Members Who Are Not Actual Member As Per Definition Of Person Who Is Eligible For Membership As Per Clause

50,548/- but did not file its return of income. Acting on this information, the AO initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 26-03-2018. Meanwhile, the assessee had filed its return of income on 20-03-2018 declaring total income at Rs.1,22,45,510/-, notice

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

50,00,000/-\n12.10.2010\n1,75,00,000/-\n23.10.2010\nDivyadrishti Merchants Pvt Ltd\n40,00,000/-\n23.11.2010\nParmeshwar Merchandise Pvt Ltd\n1,04,00,000/-\n23.11.2010 Sampark Advisory Services Pvt Ltd\n51,00,000/-\n25.11.2010 | Abhilasha Exports Pvt Ltd\n40,00,000/-\n25.11.2010\n30,00,000/-\n29.11.2010\nPushpanjali Commotrade Pvt Ltd\n30,00,000/-\n29.11.2010\n30,00,000/-\n29.11.2010

MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

50,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act, we\nwould first like to adjudicate the grounds raised by the assessee in the CO\nchallenging the validity of re-assessment proceedings. It is an admitted fact that\nthe original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 21.03.2014 and the\nAssessing Officer in the order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 8 PUNE, PUNE vs. ALFA LAVAL INDIA PVT LTD, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1723/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

section 37(1), provided data is systematically maintained by assessee - Held, yes. Without prejudice to above, if Your Honour considers to disallow the deduction claimed on account of Estimated project cost Rs. 3,97,50

AIDS SOCIETY OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE

section 12AB of the Act. Ld. Counsel for the assessee while raising the issue of challenging the powers available in section 12AB of the Act made threefold contentions and the same are :\n(a)\nthat in absence of express powers provided u/s.12AB of the Act for cancelling the registration u/s.12A of the Act, notice issued on 21.03.2023 u/s.12AB

SHRI ISHWARLAL GULABCHAND VARDHAMANTAP AYAMBIL TRUST,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 7(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

disallowance has been made for not applying set apart accumulation funds during F.Y. 2016-17 within the period of five years as provided u/s.11(2) of the Act. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that issue in Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of Yashwantrao Chavan Maharashtra Open University Vs. CIT – ITA No.505/PUN/2025 order dated 23.06.2025 wherein

SHRI VASUPUJYA SWAMI MAHARAJ TEMPLE TRUST,PUNE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD 1(2), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

disallowance has been made for not applying set apart accumulation funds during F.Y. 2016-17 within the period of five years as provided u/s.11(2) of the Act. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that issue in Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of Yashwantrao Chavan Maharashtra Open University Vs. CIT – ITA No.505/PUN/2025 order dated 23.06.2025 wherein

AGRA OBSTETRICAL AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,AGRA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PUNE

disallowance u/s 37(1) of the Act, the pharmaceutical company i.e\nEmcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. has routed the expense of providing of\nfreebies through the assessee trust as it enables the Emcure\nPharmaceuticals Ltd. to claim an otherwise inadmissible expense as\ndeduction. Such act of the assessee trust of carrying the activity of\nproviding freebies at the behest of the pharmaceutical

PRECISION CAMSHAFTS LTD.,SOLAPUR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT (NFAC), SOLAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1962/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Precision Camshafts Ltd., V Assessment Unit, Income Tax E-102/103, Akkalkot Road, S Department (National Midc, Solapur – 413006. Faceless Assessment Center), Maharashtra. Jurisdiction Details : Pne- C(1), Range 63, Circle-1, Solapur. Pan: Aabcp1086B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(3) Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21 Dated 25.07.2024, Emanating From Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel U/S.144C(5) Of The Act For A.Y.2020-21

section 14A of the IT Act cannot be more than the exempt income earned by the Assessee during the assessment year in question. In this case, there is no dispute that the dividend i.e. the exempt income earned by the Assessees during the relevant Assessment Year, was only Rs. 45,371/-. Accordingly, the disallowance in this case could not have

M/S. PIAGGIO VEHICLES PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.868/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Piaggio Vehicles Private Ltd., V The Assistant Sky One Corporate Park, S Commissioner Of Income Ground Floor, Survey Tax, Circle-4, Pune. No.239/02, Near Pune Airport, Pune – 411032. Pan: Aabcp1225G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Siddhesh Chaugule – Ar Revenue By Shri Vidya Ratan - Dr Date Of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-13, Pune For Assessment Year 2015-16 Dated 06.10.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Refund Of Excess Taxes Paid On Dividend Distributed On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Hon'Ble Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Granting The Benefit Of Article 11 Of The India-

3) The tax on distributed profits so paid by the company shall be treated as the final payment of tax in respect of the amount declared, distributed or paid as dividends and no further credit therefor shall be claimed by the company or by any other person in respect of the amount of tax so paid. (4) No deduction under

BANSILAL RAMNATH AGARWAL CHARITABLE TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21 Bansilal Ramnath Agarwal Charitable Trust Cit (Exemption), 251, Budhwar Peth, City Post Chowk, Vs. Pune Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaatb4383K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-01-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, V.P:

3) of the Act, etc. Thus, a perusal of various details furnished by the assessee clearly shows that the Assessing Officer in the instant case has passed the assessment order after a detailed scrutiny with multiple pointed queries on the very same payments to the specified persons. Further, the assessee has also filed detailed replies on account of the payment

UTTAM ENERGY LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT CIRCLE-12, PUNE

Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2033/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Uttam Energy Limited, The Acit, Circle-12, Mahendra Chamber, Mayfair V Pune. Co-Op Housing Society, S A-4, Dhole Patil Road, Pune – 411001. Pan: Aabcu4100H Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Ch Naniwadekar & Kiran Sanmane – Ar;S Revenue By Shri Deepak Garg – Cit Date Of Hearing 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Of The Learned Acit, Circle-12, Pune Passed U/Sec. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") After Giving Effect To The Learned Drp’S Order Dated 24.09.2019. 1.1 The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

50) and 3(51) respectively in the General Clauses Act and held that Section 6 only applies to Central Act and regulations. The Court further stated that — “When the Legislature by clear and unambiguous language has extended the provision of Section 6 to cases of repeal of a ‘Central Act’ or ‘regulation’, it is not possible to apply the provision

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

50% of INR 17,49,170) which has been claimed by the Appellant. 5. The learned AO erred in not appreciating the submissions made by the Appellant in its proper perspective. Disallowance of delayed contribution of employees contribution to ESIC under section 36(1) (va) of the Act 6. The learned AO has erred in confirming the disallowance on account

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

50% of INR 17,49,170) which has been claimed by the Appellant. 5. The learned AO erred in not appreciating the submissions made by the Appellant in its proper perspective. Disallowance of delayed contribution of employees contribution to ESIC under section 36(1) (va) of the Act 6. The learned AO has erred in confirming the disallowance on account

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

3) read with section 144C (13) of the Act dated 29.07.2022 is\nprejudicial to the interests of revenue. Thus, both the conditions specified under\nsection 263 of the Act are satisfied in this case and it is a fit case to invoke\nprovisions of the said section. In view of the above, the assessment order dated\n29.07.2022

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

3), notice for reopening under material. 21. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Smt. Renu Agarwal (2023) 153 taxmann.com 578 (Allahabad), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that where AO disallowed exemption claimed by assessee under section 10(38) and made

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

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

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

3), notice for reopening under material. 21. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Smt. Renu Agarwal (2023) 153 taxmann.com 578 (Allahabad), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that where AO disallowed exemption claimed by assessee under section 10(38) and made