ASHISH NIRANJAN SHAH,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -4,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.697/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ashish Niranjan Shah, The Pr.Cit-4, Pune. 39, Mantri Court, Dr.Ambedkar V Road, Next To Rto, Sangam, S Pune – 411001. Pan: Aidps 7682 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel, Irs – Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 28/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 13/10/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Pune Dated26.03.2019 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Learned Pr. Cit- 4, Pune Erred In Law & On Facts In Treating The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Being Erroneous & Thereby Prejudicial To The Revenue U/S 263 Without Appreciating That, The Learned Ao Has Allowed Appellant'S Claim Of Business Loss Amounting To Rs.10,20,14,068/- Incurred On Account Of Default In Payment By Nsel, With Due Application Of Mind & Verification. The Learned Pr. Cit Erred In Holding That, Ao Has Not Carried Out Any Enquiry With Respect To Business Loss Claimed By The Appellant & Not Applied His Ashish Niranjan Shah [A]

House Property 5,55,627/- Income / Loss from Business -9,85,95,156/- Income from Other Sources 3,246/- Gross Total Income Nil 6.5 However, the Assessing Officer has not analysed these transactions and AO has not carried on any inquiries. 6.6 The Assessee had filed an Affidavit before the AO during the Assessment Proceedings, claiming that erroneously the assessee

RAJENDRA RAMESHLAL GUGALE,PUNE vs. PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

House No.B12, Income Tax (Central), Aayakar vs. Pune-Satara Road, Sadan, Bodhi Towers, Salisbury Bibwewadi, PUNE. Park, PUNE – 411 037. PIN – 412 202. Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PAN ABFPG6929E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Nikhil Pathak For Revenue : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, CIT Date of Hearing : 27.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 30.12.2024 ORDER PER RAMA KANTA PANDA, V.P. : This appeal filed

TANAJI PARILAL GAWADE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 12(4) PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2013-14

124/- in absence of proper details. Thus, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,97,65,230/- as against the returned income of Rs.12,82,228/-. 7. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, who dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. The assessee filed the appeal before the Tribunal

ASHWINI BALDEVRAJ MALHOTRA,,PUNE vs. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2460/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10

section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2 Shri Ashwini Baldevraj Malhotra 2. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- 1. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions & scheme of the Law it be held that addition sustained by CIT Appeals to the extent of Rs.2

RAJENDRA L.AGARWAL,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -I),, PUNE

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2330/Pun/2017 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

Housing Society. It is undisputed fact. Therefore, 10 Shri Rajendra L. Agarwal we are of the opinion that in principle, the claim of the assessee should be allowed on the enhancement which was considered by the AO. However, the same is subject to the verification of the evidence and documents filed by assessee before the Assessing Officer during remand proceedings

M/S. MULA PRAVARA ELECTRIC CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD.,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DEPUTY SSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1776/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

house property” and not under the head “income from other sources” as held by the AO. Accordingly, the CIT(A) allowed this issue in favour of the assessee. Other receipts such as scrap scales/misc. receipts are treated as “income from other sources:. In the result, the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 7. Aggrieved with the same

GANRAJ HOMES LLP ,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), PUNE , PUNE

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

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

3-2019 7 E 403 1,00,000 1,00,000 25-11-2018 31-10-2018 Flat H.A Patil Sandip Budhia cancelled entry on 4- 5-19 8 E 702 1,00,000 1,00,000 15-11-2018 10-11-2018 Flat Ashish Sujeet Kumar Meshram Pandey cancelled and exchanged for Flat

GANRAJ HOMES LLP,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), PUNE , PUNE

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

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

3-2019 7 E 403 1,00,000 1,00,000 25-11-2018 31-10-2018 Flat H.A Patil Sandip Budhia cancelled entry on 4- 5-19 8 E 702 1,00,000 1,00,000 15-11-2018 10-11-2018 Flat Ashish Sujeet Kumar Meshram Pandey cancelled and exchanged for Flat

GANRAJ HOMES LLP,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), PUNE , PUNE

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

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

3-2019 7 E 403 1,00,000 1,00,000 25-11-2018 31-10-2018 Flat H.A Patil Sandip Budhia cancelled entry on 4- 5-19 8 E 702 1,00,000 1,00,000 15-11-2018 10-11-2018 Flat Ashish Sujeet Kumar Meshram Pandey cancelled and exchanged for Flat

SHARADA ELECTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-3, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2), an order in revision under this section may be passed at any time in the case of an order which has been passed in consequence of, or to give effect to, any finding or direction contained in an order of the Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal, the High Court or the Supreme

LALITKUMAR KESARIMAL JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1345/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

124) (Chd.-Trib.) held that “wherein substantial amount of capital gain has been invested by the assessee for purpose of purchasing a new house, deduction u/s.54 cannot be denied for the reason that construction was not completed within three years or house was not purchased within two years.” The Ld. AR further referred to the decision of the Mumbai Bench

KRUTI LALITKUMAR JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1345/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

124) (Chd.-Trib.) held that “wherein substantial amount of capital gain has been invested by the assessee for purpose of purchasing a new house, deduction u/s.54 cannot be denied for the reason that construction was not completed within three years or house was not purchased within two years.” The Ld. AR further referred to the decision of the Mumbai Bench

PRANAY LALITKUMAR JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1345/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

124) (Chd.-Trib.) held that “wherein substantial amount of capital gain has been invested by the assessee for purpose of purchasing a new house, deduction u/s.54 cannot be denied for the reason that construction was not completed within three years or house was not purchased within two years.” The Ld. AR further referred to the decision of the Mumbai Bench

SHRI MUKUND BHAVAN TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT(E), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrashri Mukund Bhavan Trust Cit (Exemption), Pune 1105, Raviwar Peth, Mukund Vs. Bhavan, Pune – 411002 Pan: Aaats5170R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V.L. Jain Department By : Shri Mallikarjun Utture, Cit Date Of Hearing : 05-02-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2025 O R D E R

house hold activities), and Sannyasashram (renouncing material world), which is a materialistic arrangement for one social group to dominate another, and by reinforcing identity based on bodily categories. Thus, the entire concept itself is against the social development and not for any charity of the people at large at all. 2 Further verification shows that the Trust Deed contains

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PVT LTD, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

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

House, Near Bhide Hospital, Savedi, Ahmednagar- 414003. PAN : AAACR8605D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue by : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date of hearing : 25.06.2024 Date of pronouncement : 18.09.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: The above captioned three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 27.04.2022 passed by ld. CIT(A)-11, Pune

RAJDEEP BUILDCOM PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

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

House, Near Bhide Hospital, Savedi, Ahmednagar- 414003. PAN : AAACR8605D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue by : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date of hearing : 25.06.2024 Date of pronouncement : 18.09.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: The above captioned three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 27.04.2022 passed by ld. CIT(A)-11, Pune

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PRIVAT LIMITED, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

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

House, Near Bhide Hospital, Savedi, Ahmednagar- 414003. PAN : AAACR8605D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue by : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date of hearing : 25.06.2024 Date of pronouncement : 18.09.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: The above captioned three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 27.04.2022 passed by ld. CIT(A)-11, Pune

SSHBPSS RAMCHANDRA GOPAL SHELAR SHERLARMAMA YOG SANSHODHAN SEVA PRATISHTHAN,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.844/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : - Sshbpss Ramchandra Gopal V The Commissioner Of Shelar Shherlarmama Yog S Income Tax(Exemption), Sanshodhan Seva Pratishthan, Pune. S.No.124, Maeers Mit College Campus, Paud Road, Kothrud, Pune – 411038. Pan: Aaqts9502D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri P.R.Mane – Dr Date Of Hearing 19/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2024 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-Exemption, Pune U/Sec.80G Of The Act Dated 26.03.2024. The Ld.Cit(E) Dismissed The Application Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Application Is Time Barred. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : Sshbpss Ramchandra Gopal Shelar Sherlarmama Yog Sanshodhan Seva Pratishthan

124, Maeers MIT College Campus, Paud Road, Kothrud, Pune – 411038. PAN: AAQTS9502D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by None. Revenue by Shri P.R.Mane – DR Date of hearing 19/06/2024 Date of pronouncement 24/06/2024 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-Exemption, Pune u/sec.80G

MEENAMANI GANGA BUILDER LLP,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 132. 23. Referring to the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Pradeep Kumar Sharma vs. DCIT (2021) 132 taxmann.com 41 (Delhi-Trib) and Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. H. Omkarappa (HUF) vide ITA No.1634/Bang/2019, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal in the said cases