INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

House, Tilak Road, Pune – 411002 PAN : AAATI2653M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 14-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

House, Tilak Road, Pune – 411002 PAN : AAATI2653M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 14-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

House, Tilak Road, Pune – 411002 PAN : AAATI2653M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 14-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

House, Tilak Road, Pune – 411002 PAN : AAATI2653M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 14-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above batch of 5 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated

ABHINAV LIMAYE,PUNE vs. DCIT, CPC / ITO WARD 13(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2641/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Abhinav Limaye, Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru. B-605, Sai Marigold, Rahatani Road, Pimple Saudagar, Pune- 411027. Pan : Aclpl5320P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Agiwal Revenue By : Ms. Shilpa N. C. Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.10.2024 Passed By Ld. Addl/Jcit(A), Udaipur [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Having Income From Salary, House Property & Income From Other Sources & Has Furnished Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The It Act

house property and income from other sources and has furnished return of income u/s 139(1) of the IT Act 2 declaring total income of Rs.17,74,210/-. The return was processed by CPC and a demand of Rs.1,56,730/- was raised. After considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee

KALPANA PRAKASH KALE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(5), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

house property. 3. Since there was a delay of 54 days in filing of the appeal by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. Ld CIT(A) erred

MANOJ SURESH TATOOSKAR,PUNE vs. CIRCLE 1(1) , PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

condone the delay of 166 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is that ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition towards notional rent income at Rs.44,43,100/- from letting out house property

GAURAV RAJA PATHAK,PUNE vs. DCIT-CIRCLE1(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

House Property) thereby increasing the returned income by Rs. 35,95,270/-. 3 2. Non-Condonation of the Delay Learned

VIJAYMALA VILAS KALOKHE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-10(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1666/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vijaymala Vilas Kalokhe, Ito, Ward-10(1), Pune Aditya Row House, Lane No. 2, Opp. Patel Garden, Sr. No. 8/2A, Vs. Juni Sangavi, Maharashtra-411027 Pan : Asepk8161G अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 28-01-2026 Date Of 30-01-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.06.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2013-14. 2. Briefly Stated The Facts Are That The Assessee Is An Individual. He Filed His Return Of Income For Ay 2013-14 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,21,050/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) After Following The Mandate Procedure As Laid Down Under The Relevant Provisions Of The Act. Accordingly, Statutory Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act & Show Cause Letter(S) Were Issued To The Assessee From Time To Time. However, The Assessee Failed To File Any Response To The Said Notice(S) Which Constrained The Ld. Assessing Officer (“Ao”) To Pass An Ex-Parte Order U/S 144 Of The Act Based On The Material Available On Record. The Ld. Ao Proceeded To Complete The Assessment On Total Income Of Rs.2,66,70,989/-U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act Thereby Making An Addition Of Rs.2,63,83,209/- On Account Of Undisclosed Long Term Capital Gain (Ltcg) By Observing As Under : “5.1. On-Going Through The Information Available On Record & In View Of The Order Passed U/S 148A(D) Of The Act Dated 21.07.2022, It Is Noticed That 2

House, Lane No. 2, Opp. Patel Garden, Sr. No. 8/2a, Vs. Juni Sangavi, Maharashtra-411027 PAN : ASEPK8161G अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 28-01-2026 Date of 30-01-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against

SUJIT VITTHAL SHINDE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 11(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.100/Pun/2025 Assessment Year 2021-22

condone the delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A). 7. So far as merits of the case are concerned, we observe that the appellant has shown income under the head “Income from House property

KARMAVEER BHAUSAHEB HIRAY NASHIK JILHA KRISHI AUDYOGIKSAHAKARI SANGH LTD. KRISHI BHAVAB,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NASHIK

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

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

condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the same for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not granting 80P(2)(d) deduction on the interest earned and dividend received from

KISHORE KASHINATH KOLI,PANVEL vs. CIT(A), DELHI

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

Housing Society, Near Rupali Cinema, Panvel – 410206 PAN: ANWPK6412F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Mrs. Naina Chaurasia Department by : Shri Basavaraj Hiremath, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 08-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 09-01-2026 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated

VTP FOODS,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 7 (3), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

House, Plot No 3, 4 and 5, Sr. Vs. No.34A/6, Behind Shakti Sports, Nagar Road, Wadgaonsheri, Pune – 411014 PAN: AACAV1580B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department by : Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR Date of hearing : 26-03-2025 Date of pronouncement : 30-04-2025 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal

APPASO SAMPATRAO MANE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 7(1), PUNE

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

condoning the delay of 145 days in filing the appeal, despite the\nappellant being non resident and explained sufficient cause for the delay by way\nof an affidavit.\n1.2 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the appellant, an NRI\nresiding in the USA since 2014, did not access his registered email provided to\nPAN Database, after

KAILAS KANTILAL KOTHARI,NASHIK vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

condone the delay of 80 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit it for adjudication 3. In the grounds of appeal, the assessee has raised legal issue challenging the validity of intimation issued by CPC u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act on the ground that no opportunity as mandated in first Proviso to section

ANIL HANUMANT CHOUDHARI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(3) PUNE, PUNE

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

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

condoned the delay in submitting ITR-V and both the returns are valid returns. 4) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing the final appeal order without taking into consideration the point of dispute (i.e. difference between ready reckoner value of the property and stamp duty paid on the apparent consideration) or referring the case back to the file

PASHANKAR AUTO WORKS PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(5), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.420/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Pashankar Auto Works Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward-4(5), S.No.45/1, Dehu Road, Pune Katraj-Bypass, Baner, Pune 411 015, Maharashtra Pan : Aaecp8466C Appellant Respondent

House Property” and “Income from Other Sources” on which tax was deducted at sources 2 under the provisions of section 194B and 194A, the Assessing Officer (AO) formed opinion that income escaped assessment of tax. Accordingly, the AO issued notice u/s.148 to the appellant on 19.03.2021. The said notice was remained uncomplied with. Even the notice issued u/s.143

PRASAD DATTATRYA THAKAR,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 14,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

condoning the delay and adjudication of appeal in merit. Without prejudice to the above ground, following grounds are taken on merit. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, learned Assessing Officer erred in treating the entire gross receipt received on account of sale of property a sum of Rs.1,07,50,000 a long