DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA vs. KAY BOUVET ENGINEERING LIMITED, SATARA

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

133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises of M/s. Siasons Trade and Industry Pvt. Ltd. (STIPL) by the DDIT (Inv), Unit 5(1), Mumbai on 21.01.2021. During the course of survey it was found that STIPL is indulged in receiving accommodation entries in the form of bogus purchases and bogus sales which were admitted by Shri

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, AHMEDNAGAR vs. DEEPAK BABURAO VISPUTE, KOPARGAON

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2020-21

survey proceedings u/s 133A of the Act amounting to Rs.4,42,86,847 as unexplained investment to be taxed by applying the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 8. The Assessing Officer similarly made addition of Rs.2,83,490/- out of sales promotion expenses being not supported by satisfactory evidences and therefore, 5 not genuine. He further made addition

DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON vs. S.K. TRANSLINE PVT. LTD.,, JALGAON

In the result, the cross objections are partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

u/s. 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 18-02-2009. During the course of survey, the assessee disclosed additional income of Rs.25,00,000/-. The assessee filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year on 19-09-2009 declaring total

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

133A is taxable u/s 69B of the Act and in view of provisions of section 115BBE(2), no deduction of the said amount can be allowed to the assessee in any of the asst. year. 2] The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the excess work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- declared during the course of survey

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

133A is taxable u/s 69B of the Act and in view of provisions of section 115BBE(2), no deduction of the said amount can be allowed to the assessee in any of the asst. year. 2] The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the excess work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- declared during the course of survey

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

133A is taxable u/s 69B of the Act and in view of provisions of section 115BBE(2), no deduction of the said amount can be allowed to the assessee in any of the asst. year. 2] The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the excess work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- declared during the course of survey

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

133A is taxable u/s 69B of the Act and in view of provisions of section 115BBE(2), no deduction of the said amount can be allowed to the assessee in any of the asst. year. 2] The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the excess work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- declared during the course of survey

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

133A is taxable u/s 69B of the Act and in view of provisions of section 115BBE(2), no deduction of the said amount can be allowed to the assessee in any of the asst. year. 2] The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the excess work in progress of Rs.3,11,76,525/- declared during the course of survey

ANAND CONSTRUWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NASHIK -1, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.955/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Anand Construwell Private Vs. Pcit-1, Nashik. Limited, Ramchandra Apartments, Makhmalabad Road, Panchvati, Nashik- 422003. Pan : Aafca7736H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Pcit-1, Nashik [‘Ld. Pcit’] For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Basis Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed U/S. 263 By The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Nashik May Please Be Quashed. 2. On The Basis Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax Is Not Justified In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 By Holding That Provisions Of Section 69C Are Applicable In The Present Case As The Assessee Was Not Able To Explain The Sources Of Expenditure

survey action u/s 133A of the Act was conducted, where the assessee has declared that the expenditure of Rs.2,28,29,555/- recorded in Profit and Loss account was not incurred for the purpose of business. The same was duly offered to income by the assessee. 4. The assessment order u/s 143(3) has passed by the AO on 30/09/2021

RAVINDRA JOMA BHAGAT,,RAIGAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, PANVEL

In the result, the appeal by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) was carried out in the case of assessee on 26-02-2010. During 4 A.Y. 2009-10 survey it was noticed that the assessee had sold land during the period relevant to assessment year under appeal. The assessee had not filed any return of income

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

Survey action u/s 133A of the Act was conducted in the case of M/s. JM Financial Asset Management Limited (“JM Financial”) situated at 7th & 8th Floor, Appa Saheb Marathe Marg, Cynergy, 3 IT(SS)A Nos.23 to 25/PUN/2024 Prabhadevi, Mumbai, during which it was found that JM Balanced Fund – Dividend Option Regular scheme by JM Financial had manipulated accounting methodology

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of assessee and group cases on 04.01.2013. Statement on oath of Mr. Ravindra Dhondiram Shinde, Managing Director of assessee company and Shri Balwant Patil, Accountant was recorded. During the course of Survey action, purchases made by the assessee from financial year 2005-06 till the date of search were verified

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of assessee and group cases on 04.01.2013. Statement on oath of Mr. Ravindra Dhondiram Shinde, Managing Director of assessee company and Shri Balwant Patil, Accountant was recorded. During the course of Survey action, purchases made by the assessee from financial year 2005-06 till the date of search were verified

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of assessee and group cases on 04.01.2013. Statement on oath of Mr. Ravindra Dhondiram Shinde, Managing Director of assessee company and Shri Balwant Patil, Accountant was recorded. During the course of Survey action, purchases made by the assessee from financial year 2005-06 till the date of search were verified

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, KOLHAPUR vs. VIJAYKUMAR RAJARAM SHAH,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of assessee and group cases on 04.01.2013. Statement on oath of Mr. Ravindra Dhondiram Shinde, Managing Director of assessee company and Shri Balwant Patil, Accountant was recorded. During the course of Survey action, purchases made by the assessee from financial year 2005-06 till the date of search were verified

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of assessee and group cases on 04.01.2013. Statement on oath of Mr. Ravindra Dhondiram Shinde, Managing Director of assessee company and Shri Balwant Patil, Accountant was recorded. During the course of Survey action, purchases made by the assessee from financial year 2005-06 till the date of search were verified

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of assessee and group cases on 04.01.2013. Statement on oath of Mr. Ravindra Dhondiram Shinde, Managing Director of assessee company and Shri Balwant Patil, Accountant was recorded. During the course of Survey action, purchases made by the assessee from financial year 2005-06 till the date of search were verified

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

133A of the Act was conducted on the business premises of assessee and group cases on 04.01.2013. Statement on oath of Mr. Ravindra Dhondiram Shinde, Managing Director of assessee company and Shri Balwant Patil, Accountant was recorded. During the course of Survey action, purchases made by the assessee from financial year 2005-06 till the date of search were verified