BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

18 results for “house property”+ Section 105clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi665Karnataka508Mumbai415Bangalore169Chandigarh104Chennai102Jaipur76Kolkata71Hyderabad69Cochin60Telangana53Calcutta52Ahmedabad44Indore37Raipur33Guwahati21Amritsar21Lucknow19Pune18SC15Rajkot12Cuttack11Visakhapatnam10Surat10Rajasthan9Nagpur7Patna7Varanasi5Jodhpur4Agra4Panaji3Orissa3Dehradun2Allahabad2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)14Section 80I14Addition to Income13Section 109Section 54F8Section 43C8Section 288Section 2(15)7Section 143(2)6Exemption

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. DILIP MOTILALJI CHORDIA, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as\nthe Cross Objection filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 1486/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 44ASection 96

House Property\n37,800\nC\nIncome from business/profession\nas per Sch.BP of ITR\n(-)*44,70,811\nD\nAdd : Disallowances/Additions\nIncome from sale of TDR [Para 5.3] | ₹5,31,95,834\nE\nIncome from other sources\n14,20,893\nGross Total income\n5,31,83,716\nLess : Deduction under Chapter VI-\nA claimed\n1,62,538\nE\nTotal Assessed Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE,, AHMEDNAGAR vs. SANJAY NEMICHAND LOHADE,, AHMEDNAGAR

6
House Property6
Deduction5
ITA 982/PUN/2019[2008-09]Status: Disposed
ITAT Pune
01 Sept 2022
AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 54F

sections 54 & 54F as well. 8. It is submitted before Your Honour that it is not in dispute that the property which was purchased by the appellant and claimed exemption U/sec. 54F is the bungalow along with land, which is house property as per municipal records and taxes have also been paid as residential property. It is further submitted that

LAXMINARAYAN RAMSWARUP MANIYAR,JALGAON vs. CIRCLE-1, JALGAON, JALGAON

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

ITA 1203/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1203/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Laxminarayan Ramswarup Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Jalgaon. Maniyar, Sitaram Ramswarup, 105, Polan Peth, Dana Bazar, Jalgaon- 425001. Pan : Aaqpm9220L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vinay V. Kawdia Revenue By : Shri Harshit Bari Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.03.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) In The Absence Of Conditions Precedent For Invoking Provisions Of S. 143(1)(A)(Iii) Of The Act, The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Adjustment Of Rs. 8,03,196/- Made By Cpc U/S 143(1)(A)(Iii) Of The Act By Denying The Set Off Of Brought Forward Unabsorbed Depreciation Of Earlier Years Against Current Years Income.

For Appellant: Shri Vinay V. KawdiaFor Respondent: Shri Harshit Bari
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

105, Polan Peth, Dana Bazar, Jalgaon- 425001. PAN : AAQPM9220L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Vinay V. Kawdia Revenue by : Shri Harshit Bari Date of hearing : 21.08.2025 Date of pronouncement : 12.11.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.03.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year

DIMPLE RAJESH OSWAL,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), PUNE

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

ITA 1506/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Bharat ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Sailee Dhole, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 56(2)(vii)

house before accounting year 2014-15 then no income could be deemed on account of lower payment of purchase price. Accordingly the Tribunal held that the provisions of 8 section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act are not applicable. He submitted that since in the instant case the assessee had made the initial booking in the year

INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3),, SOLAPUR vs. KAPURBA AND COMPANY, BARSHI, SOLAPUR

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 308/PUN/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri S.N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 3

section 2(47) of the Act. 6. We note that the assessee is a firm, engaged in the business of purchase and sale of land. The assessee conducts its business under the name and style as “Kapurba and Company”. The assessee filed its return of income declaring a total income of Rs.10,16,327/- which was processed

ARMED FORCES EX-OFFICERS MULTISERVICES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS NFAC, PUNE

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

ITA 787/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: CA Shweta JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

105. The Learned Assessing Officer erred in not considering the Co-operative Banks as Co-operative Societies for the purpose of this section. The learned assessing officer erred in not taking cognisance of clarification published by CBDT vide circular no. 133 of 2007 dated 09 May 2007 wherein it was stated that provision of section 80P(4) are not applicable

M/S. CITY CORPORATION LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 528/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora & Saukhya LakadeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 80I

property and construction of residential and commercial buildings. It filed its return of income on 29.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs.119,8,31,267/- after claiming deduction of Rs.1,02,32,288/- u/s 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). The case was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, statutory notices

M/S. CITY CORPORATION LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 527/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora & Saukhya LakadeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 80I

property and construction of residential and commercial buildings. It filed its return of income on 29.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs.119,8,31,267/- after claiming deduction of Rs.1,02,32,288/- u/s 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). The case was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, statutory notices

JAYANT AVINASH DAVE,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 5 , PUNE

In the result, the cross appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the CO is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 23/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.23/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Jayant Avinash Dave Vs. Dcit, Office No.801-804, 8Th Floor, Circle 5, Pune Amar Business Park, Sadanand Estates, Plot No.1, S.No.105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.182/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Dcit, Vs. Jayant Avinash Dave Circle 5, Pune 46/2/1B, Kaka Halwai Industrial Estate, Pune Satara Road, Pune – 411009 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.11/Pun/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.182/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Jayant Avinash Dave Vs. Dcit, Office No.801-804, 8Th Floor, Amar Circle 5, Pune Business Park, Sadanand Estates, Plot No.1, S.No.105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Cross Objector Respondent & Co No.11/Pun/2022

Section 144ASection 28

105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 PAN: AAQPD6875J Cross Objector Respondent and CO No.11/PUN/2022 Assessee by Shri Mihir Naniwadekar Revenue by S/Shri Keyur Patel CIT-DR and Ramnath P Murkende Date of hearing 26-10-2023 Date of pronouncement 30-10-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : These two cross appeals – one by the assessee and the other

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE vs. JAYANT AVINASH DAVE,, PUNE

In the result, the cross appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the CO is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 182/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.23/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Jayant Avinash Dave Vs. Dcit, Office No.801-804, 8Th Floor, Circle 5, Pune Amar Business Park, Sadanand Estates, Plot No.1, S.No.105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.182/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Dcit, Vs. Jayant Avinash Dave Circle 5, Pune 46/2/1B, Kaka Halwai Industrial Estate, Pune Satara Road, Pune – 411009 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.11/Pun/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.182/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Jayant Avinash Dave Vs. Dcit, Office No.801-804, 8Th Floor, Amar Circle 5, Pune Business Park, Sadanand Estates, Plot No.1, S.No.105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 Pan: Aaqpd6875J Cross Objector Respondent & Co No.11/Pun/2022

Section 144ASection 28

105, Baner Road, Pune – 411045 PAN: AAQPD6875J Cross Objector Respondent and CO No.11/PUN/2022 Assessee by Shri Mihir Naniwadekar Revenue by S/Shri Keyur Patel CIT-DR and Ramnath P Murkende Date of hearing 26-10-2023 Date of pronouncement 30-10-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : These two cross appeals – one by the assessee and the other

SUVARNA KIRAN CHAVAN,NASHIK vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, NASHIK

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

ITA 1785/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1785/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250

house property, income from business or profession etc. The assessee filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 05.11.2017 declaring income of Rs.43,40,100/- which was revised on same date declaring total income of Rs.31,75,740/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was 3 Suvarna Kiran

ROASHAN VISHNU PATHARE, L/H OF VISHNU TUKARAM PATHARE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(4),, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 221/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.221/Pun/2018 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M.G.Jasnani
Section 143(3)Section 54FSection 68

105 .......अपीलाथी / Appellant PAN : ATCPP3031F बनाम / V/s. ……प्रत्यथी /Respondent ITO, Ward 4(4), Pune Assessee by : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue by : Shri M.G.Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 12.10.2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 17.11.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JM : 1. This assessee’s appeal for AY 2012-13 arises against the CIT(A)-2, Pune

INCOME-TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS),, PUNE vs. CHANAKYA MANDAL PARIWAR,, PUNE

ITA 835/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripotethe Income Tax Officer M/S. Chanakya Mandal Pariwar (Exemptions) 1557, Sadashiv Peth Vs. Ward - 2, Pune Near Navi Peth Vitthalmandir Punne 411009 Pan – Aaatc6391G Appellant Respondent Co No. 06/Pun/2020 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Chanakya Mandal Pariwar The Income Tax Officer 1557, Sadashiv Peth (Exemptions) Vs. Near Navi Peth Vitthalmandir Ward - 2, Pune Punne 411009 Pan – Aaatc6391G Cross Objector Appellant In Appeal Assessee By: Shri Hari Krishan Revenue By: Shri S.P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing: 25.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.07.2022 O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No. 835/Pun/2017 With Assessee’S Cross Objection Co No. 06/Pun/2020 For Ay 2012-13 Arise From The Cit(A)-10, Pune’S Order Dated 30.01.2017 Passed In Case No. Pn/Cit(A)10/Ito Exmp Wd 1/44,45,46,47/15-16, Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 174 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The Act).

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

houses and. residential, institutions for students and those connected with the institutions. 5.10 To construct, establish, equip, maintain, manage and/ or support financially or otherwise laboratories, schools, workshops, study circles, colleges and educational institutions. 5.11 To donate, support, assist any institute, fund, academy, trust; association, autonomous body, chamber, engaged or to be engaged in conducting any professional and management courses

MARWADI NAVYUVAK VACHANALAYA ,LATUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 561/PUN/2025[Not Applicable]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Sept 2025

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Pandamarwadi Navyuvak Vachanalaya Cit(Exemption), Pune Marwadi Navyuvak Vachanal, Vs. Main Road, Latur – 413512 Pan: Aabtm2714L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25-08-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-09-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

105 ITR 546 (Mad), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that purchasing a building and letting out some surplus area was not indulging in any activity for profit and the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act cannot be denied to the assessee. He submitted that when the Revenue challenged

SAI BHARGAVNATH INFRA,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1332/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 43CSection 50C

House Sinhagad Road, Hingne Khurd, PUNE – 411 051 PAN: ACBFS 9830 K :Appellant Vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax Circle 6, Pune. : Respondent Appellant by : Shri Suhas Bora Respondent by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of Hearing : 11-08-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 17-08-2022 ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM : This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from

REKHA KISHORE BARI,DHULE vs. ASSESSING OFFICER-NFAC, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1667/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1667/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Rekha Kishore Bari, V The Assessing Officer- Datta Bari Bhavan, S Nfac. Opp.Rana Pratap Statute, Dhule – 424001. Pan: Abepb3597J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani – Ar Revenue By Shri Sandeep P Sathe – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] For Assessment Year 2020-21 Dated 19.07.2024 Passed U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Emanating From The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act, Dated 31/08/2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 3GSection 56(2)

105 of RFCTLARR was amended by substituting sub, sec 3, owing to which all statutes mentioned in 4th schedule were given benefit of RFCTLARR. By which, The NHAI Act, ITA No.1667/PUN/2024 [A] 1956 also got covered in the Ambit of RFCTLARR Act. pg. no 23 of legal paper book) 4.6. Further, Central Government also notified, RFCTLARR (removal of difficulties) Order

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 725/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ratan SamalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)

houses of the managing director and other directors. In such a case, when the managing director or any other persons were found to be not in possession of any incriminating material, the question of examining them by the authorised officer during the course of search and recording any statement from them by invoking the powers under section

THE PUNYASHLOK AHILYADEVI HOLKAR SOLAPUR UNIVERSITY,,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, SOLAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1544/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1544/Pun/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Punyashlok Ahilyadevi Holkar The Assistant Solapur University Solapur, Vs Commissioner Of Income (Previously Known As Solapur Tax, Circle-2, Solapur. University), Solapur-Pune Highway, Kegaon, Solapur – 413 255. Pan: Aaals 0728 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sunil Ganoo – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 04/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/06/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-10, Pune, Dated 03.05.2016 For The A.Y. 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1] In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned C.I.T.[A] Has Grossly Erred In Rejecting The Claim Of Exemption Made By The Appellant Assessee U/S10[23C][Iiiab] Of The I.T. Act 1961. The Various Reasons Given By The Learned Cit[A] For Rejecting The Claim Of Exemption Made By The Appellant Assessee U/S 10[23C] [Iiiab] Of The I.T.Act 1961 Being Legally Unsustainable & Devoid Of Merits The Same May Please Be Vacated & The Exemption As Claimed May Please Be Granted To The Appellant Assessee.

Section 10Section 143(3)

properties, machinery and equipments and other infrastructure facilities by way of grants from Govt of Maharashtra and if the same are considered the appellant assessee qualifies the conditions prescribed u/s 10[23][iiiab] of the I.T.Act 1961 and hence the consequential relief may please be granted. 4] The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete