ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANVEL vs. ASWAD JAIDAS PATIL, PEZARI POST POYNAD

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13

unexplained cash credit u/s 69A of the Act. He, however, restricted the addition on account of provision for routine expenses to Rs.2,83,000/-, restricted the addition to Rs.50 lakhs out of Rs.54 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act towards unsecured loans and restricted the disallowance

ASWAD JAIDAS PATIL,RAIGAD vs. DY, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-PANVEL, PANVEL

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13

unexplained cash credit u/s 69A of the Act. He, however, restricted the addition on account of provision for routine expenses to Rs.2,83,000/-, restricted the addition to Rs.50 lakhs out of Rs.54 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act towards unsecured loans and restricted the disallowance

AHMEDNAGAR AUTO AND ENGINEERING ASSOCIATION,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 1, , AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

Disallowance u/s 37 - Rs.96,84,389/- b) Addition on account of capital reserve - Rs.96,30,542/- c) Unexplained cash credit

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

unexplained cash credit in the books and the assessee is unable to explain the nature and source to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer and the same is treated as income. It means that the amount which are credited in the books of account and not shown as income, i.e. they have shown as liability or any other credit

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

unexplained cash credit in the books and the assessee is unable to explain the nature and source to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer and the same is treated as income. It means that the amount which are credited in the books of account and not shown as income, i.e. they have shown as liability or any other credit

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

unexplained cash credit in the books and the assessee is unable to explain the nature and source to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer and the same is treated as income. It means that the amount which are credited in the books of account and not shown as income, i.e. they have shown as liability or any other credit

GUNAI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,UDGIR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AURANGABAD

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

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

disallowing the above said anonymous donations amounting to Rs.2,12,84,180/- u/s 115BBC of the Act and also made an addition of the above said cash deposits amounting to Rs.80,18,423/- as unexplained cash credits

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD. vs. GUNAI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, LATUR

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

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

disallowing the above said anonymous donations amounting to Rs.2,12,84,180/- u/s 115BBC of the Act and also made an addition of the above said cash deposits amounting to Rs.80,18,423/- as unexplained cash credits

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

credit worthiness. They are either non-filers or have filed nominal return of\nincome and have not paid tax.\n\nOn verification of the records of the assessee available with this office, it is\nnoticed that the assessee has claimed exemption u/s 10(38) of Rs.1,44,35,387/-.\nHowever, no details regarding this LTCG has been mentioned such

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

credit worthiness. They are either non-filers or have filed nominal return of\nincome and have not paid tax.\n\nOn verification of the records of the assessee available with this office, it is\nnoticed that the assessee has claimed exemption u/s 10(38) of Rs.1,44,35,387/-.\nHowever, no details regarding this LTCG has been mentioned such

INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHULE vs. DHULE ZILHA PARISHAD KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT DHULE, DHULE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

unexplained cash credits u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act and disallowing the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act of Rs.80

SHEI RAJIV NAGARI PATASAVNSTHA MARYA HITANI,GADHINGLAJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 KOLHAPUR , KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act and disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. On appeal

AADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

unexplained credits u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and added to the Total Income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings are separately initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) / NFAC challenging the validity

BRAHM PRECISION MATERIALS PVT LTD,AURANGABAD vs. CIT(A), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act is\nhereby confirmed. This ground of appeal is hereby dismissed.”\n19. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the\nrecord placed before us. In Ground No.1, assessee has raised\nthe issue that 1d.CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance

BRAHM PRECISION MATERIALS PVT. LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act is\nhereby confirmed. This ground of appeal is hereby dismissed.”\n\n19. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the\nrecord placed before us. In Ground No.1, assessee has raised\nthe issue that 1d.CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance

KAPIL ALCOTECH LLP,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1, AURANGABAD

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

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

unexplained cash credits as discussed in Para 22 above 9 Variation on account of difference between total Rs.22,66,14,480/- credits found in the bank accounts of the assessee firm and the total revenue receipts, capital receipts, and exempt receipts u/s 68 of the Act as discussed in Para 23 above Total income determined u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B

TARA CONSTRUCTIONS ,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. (Addition of Rs. 70,48,370/-).” 4(b). Ld. AO also invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act on the unexplained cash credits

MA CHIMANRAOJI KADAM GR BIGAR SETI SAH PATH MAR SASWAD,SATARA vs. ITO, WARD-3, SATARA, SATARA

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

unexplained cash credit-Rs.9,81,47,719 -Disallowance of Interest Rs.1,01,29,686/- -Deduction u/s 80P-Rs.20,905/- 2 Ma Chimanraoji

DASHRATH KISHANRAO CHOUDHARY,GANGAKHED vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowed as unexplained money. 4. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Ld. AO due to the assessee’s non-compliance with the Government Notification (supra) prohibiting SBN acceptance post 03/12/2016 and lack of 4 ITA.No.2750/PUN./2024 evidence substantiating the sources of cash deposits. The relevant findings and observations