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

4 ITA Nos.2392 & 2455/PUN/2024, AY 2018-19 The deduction under sub-section (1) from profits and gains derived from an undertaking shall not be admissible unless the accounts of the undertaking for the previous year relevant to the assessment year for which the deduction is claimed have been audited by an accountant, as defined in the Explanation below sub-section

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 :

801A(4)(b)(i) of the Act. 4. The learned CIT(A) while confirming the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA(4) made by the AO has erred in holding that appellant company failed to prove that it had fulfilled the conditions as laid down in section

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

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

801A(4) on similar facts and no disallowance was made. 31. The above discussion suggests that Hon'ble Courts as well as Hon'ble Tribunal on various occasions have held that each unit should be considered as separate undertaking eligible for deduction u/s 80IA and the deduction should be computed independently for each unit and not on consolidated basis

SHAH CONSTRUCTIO,SATARA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-SATARA, SATARA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.617/Pun/2024 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2022-23 Shah Construction, Vs Acit, Satara Parag, 286 2, Circle, Satara Budhwar Peth, Tal Karad, Dist Satara- 415110 Maharashtra Pan-Aaffs0461E Appellant Respondent

section 801A be deleted. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law there is only a short delay of fifteen days in submitting the Return of Income along with Form 10CCB for good and valid reasons. There was no cause to disallow

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

VIJAY DEVICHAND NIBJIYA,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE (5), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.634/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2022-23 Vijay Devichand Nibjiya, V The Dcit, Office No.304/305/306, S. Circle-(5)/A.O. D Wing, 3Rd Floor, Business Centralised Processing Court, Mukundnagar, Pune – Centre. 411037. Maharashtra. Pan: Aanpn8491R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil S Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Akhilesh Srivastva – Dr Date Of Hearing 19/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Add./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-6, Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Y.2022-23 Dated 13.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the A.Y.2022-23 dated 13.02.2025. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : ITA No.634/PUN/2025 [A] “11 The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction of Rs.1,55,63,901/- u/s 801A(4

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

Section\n80-IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 once the conclusion reached is\nthat it is a contractor and not a developer as stated in the sub-\nsection?\nWhether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the\nld.CIT(A) has erred in allowing deduction u/s 80IA(4) of the IT Act,\n1961 to the assessee

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.

section 801A(10) of the Act is a “domestic transfer pricing” provision and proving tax avoidance is not one of the pre-condition for invoking transfer pricing provisions. v. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in concluding that net profit percentage of the assessee could

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.

section 801A(10) of the Act is a “domestic transfer pricing” provision and proving tax avoidance is not one of the pre-condition for invoking transfer pricing provisions. v. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in concluding that net profit percentage of the assessee could

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

801A(4) on each windmill as separate unit, the assessee should have computed deduction on all the windmills as single undertaking. We find that the issue whether deduction u/s. 80IA(4) is to be computed on each windmill unit separately or on consolidated basis was considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s. D.J. Malpani Vs. ACIT

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

801A(4) on each windmill as separate unit, the assessee should have computed deduction on all the windmills as single undertaking. We find that the issue whether deduction u/s. 80IA(4) is to be computed on each windmill unit separately or on consolidated basis was considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s. D.J. Malpani Vs. ACIT

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

801A(4) on each windmill as separate unit, the assessee should have computed deduction on all the windmills as single undertaking. We find that the issue whether deduction u/s. 80IA(4) is to be computed on each windmill unit separately or on consolidated basis was considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s. D.J. Malpani Vs. ACIT

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

801A(4) on each windmill as separate unit, the assessee should have computed deduction on all the windmills as single undertaking. We find that the issue whether deduction u/s. 80IA(4) is to be computed on each windmill unit separately or on consolidated basis was considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s. D.J. Malpani Vs. ACIT

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

801A(4) on each windmill as separate unit, the assessee should have computed deduction on all the windmills as single undertaking. We find that the issue whether deduction u/s. 80IA(4) is to be computed on each windmill unit separately or on consolidated basis was considered by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s. D.J. Malpani Vs. ACIT

SHANKARLAL KUNDANMAL PARIK,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

disallow the appellant's claim for deduction under Section 801A of the Act, when processing the return under Section 143(1) of the Act.” 5. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. Addl./JCIT

M/S. M.B.PATIL CONSTRUCTIONS LTD,,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1,, AURANGABAD

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

4. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-12, Pune, has erred in law as well as in facts by confirming the disallowance of assessee's claim of a deduction of Rs.2,73,36,424/- under section 801A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1,, AURANGABAD vs. M/S. M.B. PATIL CONSTRUCTION LTD,, AURANGABAD

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

4. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-12, Pune, has erred in law as well as in facts by confirming the disallowance of assessee's claim of a deduction of Rs.2,73,36,424/- under section 801A

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