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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

55 of Maharashtra state co-operative societies Rule 1961, Society\ncompulsorily invest its funds in District Central Co-operative Bank or State Co-operative Bank\nTherefore it is a statutory requirement of the provisions of Maharashtra co-operative societies\nAct, Rules & Bye Laws to Invest every year a fixed % of its Deposits accepted during the year\nfrom its members

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

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

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -5, PUNE vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT LTD.,, PUNE

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

2). Since the order of the ld. CIT(A) is based on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the cases referred (supra), we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Hence, the ground of appeal no.2 filed by the Revenue stands dismissed. 15. Ground of appeal

HAVELI TALUKA VEEJ KAMGAR SAHAKARI PATHSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6 (1) PUNE, PMT BUILDING, SWARGATE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowing\ndeduction claimed u/s 80P rightly and while by doing so, the AO has not\ncommitted any illegality. Therefore, the impugned addition amounting\nRs.8,84,993/- is upheld. Accordingly, the Ground No.1 of the Appeal is\ndismissed.\"\nCommission income of Rs.56,52,925/-\n7.1.12 From the above legal proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt

HSBC SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in making following observations which are contrary to the facts of the case and in law: ...It is seen that the appellant itself has disallowed Rs.2,55

HSBC SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 11,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in making following observations which are contrary to the facts of the case and in law: ...It is seen that the appellant itself has disallowed Rs.2,55

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

2) and 142(1) of the Act. So far as\nthe issue raised in the instant appeal is concerned, we note that\nld. AO had examined the issue of subsidy received by the\nassessee from the Govt. of Maharashtra for Mega Projects\nunder PSI, 2007 vide Industrial Energy and Labour\ndepartment Resolution No.PSI-1707/(CR-50) IND-8, dated\n30.03.2007

PUNE MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAK SAHKARI PATAPEDHI MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,PUNE 4, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21

55,990/- on these investments which has been claimed as deduction u/s 80P(2)(a) of the Act. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order has allowed such deduction. According to the Ld. PCIT, as per the provisions of section 80P(2)(a) of the Act, there are different situations in which the claim of deduction can be allowed

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

2) and 142(1) of the Act. So far as the\nissue raised in the instant appeal is concerned, we note that\nld. AO had examined the issue of subsidy received by the\nassessee from the Govt. of Maharashtra for Mega Projects\nunder PSI, 2007 vide Industrial Energy and Labour\ndepartment Resolution No.PSI-1707/(CR-50) IND-8, dated\n30.03.2007

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

2) and 142(1) of the Act. So far as the\nissue raised in the instant appeal is concerned, we note that\nld. AO had examined the issue of subsidy received by the\nassessee from the Govt. of Maharashtra for Mega Projects\nunder PSI, 2007 vide Industrial Energy and Labour\ndepartment Resolution No.PSI-1707/(CR-50) IND-8, dated\n30.03.2007

AJIT NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIR-7, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2318/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2022-23 Ajit Nagari Sahakari Pat V Dcit, Sanstha Ltd., S Circle-7, Pune. Rashtrawadi Bhavan, Hudco Road, Saswad, Tal-Khed, Pune – 412301. Pan: Aaaaa6401E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Smt Deepa Khare Revenue By Smt Neha Thakkar – (Virtual) On Rotation Duty Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 23/01/2026 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(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2022-23 Dated 10.01.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under

section 144B of the Act, dated 05.03.2024. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The ld CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of Rs.1,95,55

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

2) read with section 270A(7). 3. The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the penalty levied under section 270A of the Act for claiming deduction of Health and Education Cess by the Appellant which was supported by various Judicial precedents. 4. The Ld. AO / CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the claim of Health and Education Cess

PUNE MATHADI HAMAL AND OTHER MANUAL WORKERS BOARD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1012/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pune Mathadihamal & Other The Income Tax Manual Workers Board, V Officer, Shramashakti Bhavan, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Coomercial Plot No.1, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aaalp0097L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vipul Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Shri Rajesh Gawali– Dr’S Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Orders Of Ld.Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Act Dated 14.07.2023 :

disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D(ii) of the Rules and therefore, the same conclusion ought to have been applied to section 36(1)(iii) as well. Therefore, in the fact situation of the case, the remand by the tribunal to the Assessing Officer to examine whether the investments were 14 Pune Mathadi Hamal and Other Manual Workers

VAIBHAV NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT, NEAR SAWANT NIWAS, OPP. PANCHVATI THEATER,ICHALKARANJI,ICHALKARANJI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD NO. 1, VRINDAVAN COLONY, ASARA NAGAR, SANGLI ROAD, ICHALKARANJI, ICHALKARANJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1210/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Vaibhav Nagari Sah Pat V The Assessing Officer, Sanstha Maryadit, S Ward No.1, Ichalkaranji. 10/1280, Sawant Niwas, Opp.Panchvati Theter, Sangli Road, Ichalkaranji – 416115. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaav0226E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Dayanand Jawalikar – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/06/2025

disallowance of 210,13,612/-, being proportionate interest income earned from deposits with Cooperative Banks, by wrongly holding that such income is not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The authorities below failed to appreciate that the deposits were made out of working capital and operational funds in the normal course

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(3), PUNE, PUNE vs. M/S. TATA MOTORS KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2529/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Income Tax Officer, V Tata Motors Karmachari Ward-8(3), Pune. S. Sahakari Patpedhi, H 5 3Rd Floor, C/O.Tata Motors, Pune City, Pune – 411018. Pan: Aabat7682B Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhinay Kumbhar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 06/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld.Commssioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 04.10.2024 For The A.Y.2017-18. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer Of The Deduction Of Rs. 6,18,57,845/- Claimed Under Section Bop Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Being Interest Earned From The Investments

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of the deduction of Rs. 6,18,57,845/- claimed under section BOP of the Income-tax Act, 1961 being interest earned from the investments ITA No.2529/PUN/2024 [R] with co-operative banks, ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co-operative Sales Society