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

ii) the 1st day of April, 2018, any deduction is admissible under any provision of this Chapter under the heading "C.-Deductions in respect of certain incomes", no such deduction shall be allowed to him unless he furnishes a return of his income for such assessment year on or before the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section

SHREENATH MHASKOBA SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.305/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shreenath Mhaskoba Sakhar Vs. Dcit, Circle-5, Pune. Karkhana Ltd., Survey No.12/2, 2Nd Floor, Meghdoot Building, Behind Bharat Petroleum Pump, Hadpasar, Pune- 411028. Pan : Aahcs3018G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri B.D. Bhide Revenue By : Shri A. D. Kulkarni Date Of Hearing : 02.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Addl/Jcit(A)-7, Kolkata [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “Being Aggrieved By An Order Passed U/Sec.250 By The Ld. Cit(A)- Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred For Short As The Ld. Cit(A)) Your

801A due to non e-filing of Form 10CCB along with return of income Rs.3,96,40,491/-. 5.2 The ground number 1 is prayer to condone delay in filing of appeal. Intimation u/s 143(1) was passed on 25.06.2020 and received by appellant on 29.06.2020. It was therefore required to file appeal on or before 29.07.2020. However

DESAI INFRA PROJECTS (I) PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. CIT(A), PUNE-11, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

3) The learned CIT(A) further erred in holding that the CPC was justified in disallowing the claim of deduction u/s 801A(4)(i) on account of delay in filing 10CCB in the intimation order passed u/s. 143(1) and the situation was covered by explanation (a)(ii) to section

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

ii) to 11(a) of section 80IA of the Act 12. In this case, admittedly the assessee is having two segments of business ie one is power generation through five windmills which is eligible business and another is construction segment. The assessee has generated profit from two windmills and incurred losses from three windmills. The assessee also derived profit from

DCIT CIRCLE-1, NASHIK vs. JYOTI PAPER UDYOG LIMITED, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

801A, 801B etc. Thus, it is observed that the payments made by the appellant to the four related parties u/s 40A(2), exceeding Rs.5 crore fell within the scope of Specified Domestic Transactions (SDT\") as defined under clause (i) of section 92BA as existing on the Statute Books during/for the relevant period. The transactions entered with the related parties

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

disallowing the claim is that as per assessing officer, all the above- mentioned units should be aggregated and considered as a 'single eligible business'. The issue as to whether each windmill is required to be treated as 'separate undertaking' or all the windmills should be aggregated has been examined by the Hon'ble ITAT, Pune on various occasions. Some

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

disallowing the claim is that as per assessing officer, all the above- mentioned units should be aggregated and considered as a 'single eligible business'. The issue as to whether each windmill is required to be treated as 'separate undertaking' or all the windmills should be aggregated has been examined by the Hon'ble ITAT, Pune on various occasions. Some

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

disallowing the claim is that as per assessing officer, all the above- mentioned units should be aggregated and considered as a 'single eligible business'. The issue as to whether each windmill is required to be treated as 'separate undertaking' or all the windmills should be aggregated has been examined by the Hon'ble ITAT, Pune on various occasions. Some

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

disallowing the claim is that as per assessing officer, all the above- mentioned units should be aggregated and considered as a 'single eligible business'. The issue as to whether each windmill is required to be treated as 'separate undertaking' or all the windmills should be aggregated has been examined by the Hon'ble ITAT, Pune on various occasions. Some

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

disallowing the claim is that as per assessing officer, all the above- mentioned units should be aggregated and considered as a 'single eligible business'. The issue as to whether each windmill is required to be treated as 'separate undertaking' or all the windmills should be aggregated has been examined by the Hon'ble ITAT, Pune on various occasions. Some

DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, SWARGATE vs. ENTRATA INDIA PVT. LTD, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.133/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Entrata India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. International Tech Park, Block-1, Wing-A, 14Th Floor, Kharadi, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aaacw7089A Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.66/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Entrata India Pvt. Ltd., International Tech Park, Block-1, Wing-A, 14Th Floor, Kharadi, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aaacw7089A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing 14.11.2024 : Date Of Pronouncement : 24.12.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 24.11.2023 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-13, Pune [‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.133/Pun/2024 For Adjudication.

disallowance u/s 10AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.2,13,87,394/-. ii. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to compute deduction u/s 10AA of the Income Tax Act without setting off of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation

ENTRATA INDIA PVT. LTD. ,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.133/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Entrata India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. International Tech Park, Block-1, Wing-A, 14Th Floor, Kharadi, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aaacw7089A Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.66/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Entrata India Pvt. Ltd., International Tech Park, Block-1, Wing-A, 14Th Floor, Kharadi, Pune- 411014. Pan : Aaacw7089A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing 14.11.2024 : Date Of Pronouncement : 24.12.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 24.11.2023 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-13, Pune [‘Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.133/Pun/2024 For Adjudication.

disallowance u/s 10AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.2,13,87,394/-. ii. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to compute deduction u/s 10AA of the Income Tax Act without setting off of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation

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

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1158/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Gat No.357, Plot No.99, Village- Kharabwadi, Tal.- Khed, Chakan- 410501. Pan : Aacca3106E Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1330/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Vs. Advik Hi Tech Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.357, Plot No.99, Village- Kharabwadi, Tal.- Khed, Chakan- 410501. Pan : Aacca3106E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad A. Shah & Shri Rohit S. Tapadiya Revenue By : Shri Amol Khairnar Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 16.10.2023 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Respectively.

ii) In respect of non-monetary items, exchange differences arising on conversion thereof at the last day of the previous year shall not be recognised as income or as expense in that previous year. Exceptions to Paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 6. Notwithstanding anything contained in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5; initial recognition, conversion and recognition of exchange difference shall

T AND T INFRA LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 T & T Infra Limited Acit, Circle – 7, Pune A-1, Vishnu Vihar, Bibwewadi Vs. Kondhwa Road, Market Yard, Pune – 411037 Pan: Aaect3902H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tarun Ghia Department By : S/Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 10-07-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-10-2024 O R D E R Per Astha Chandra, Jm :

3. The learned CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA(4) made by the AO amounting to Rs.40,91,541/- in respect of five third party projects by holding that appellant violated the provisions of section 801A(4)(b)(i) of the Act. 4. The learned CIT(A) while confirming the disallowance of deduction

KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD (SUCCESSOR KUMAR HOUSING CORPORATION PVT LTD),PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 14, PUNE

801A\n801A(4)(iii)\n7.\nName of the enterprise or undertaking eligible for deduction under section 80-IA, 80-IB or\n80-IC\nSection and sub-section of the Income-tax Act, 1961, under which deduction is being\nclaimed\nDate of commencement of operation/ activity by the undertaking or enterprise\n8.\n02/12/2005\n9.\nInitial assessment year from when deduction

SUNIL BANKATLAL DESADLA,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-5(1), PUNE, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

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

section-80IA(4) deduction disallowance to the tune of Rs.24,23,653/- than that already allowed of Rs.98,24,640/. He takes us to the CIT(A)-NFAC's detailed discussion to the effect reading as under : “4.3. Ground No. 3 & 4 relates to adjustment of Rs.98,24,640/- claimed under chapter VIA in the order passed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLHAPUR vs. MAHALAXMI INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD., KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

3) r.w.s.\n143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the \"Act\") on\n16.03.2021 determining total income of the assessee at Rs.46,94,97,181/-\nwherein he made the following additions/disallowances: (i) disallowance\nout of deduction claimed u/s 80IA(4) amounting to Rs.10,29,58,075/-; (ii)\ndisallowance on helicopter expenses of Rs.47,77,646/-; (iii) disallowance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE vs. ADVIK HI-TECH PVT. LTD., PUNE

In the result, the cross appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA\nNo

ii) In respect of non-monetary items, exchange differences arising on\nconversion thereof at the last day of the previous year shall not be\nrecognised as income or as expense in that previous year.\n\nExceptions to Paragraphs 3, 4 and 5\n6. Notwithstanding anything contained in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5;\ninitial recognition, conversion and recognition of exchange difference