VINAYAK HANUMANTRAO GHORPADE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE

In the result, appeal in ITA No

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.1438 & 1439/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 Vinayak Hanumantrao V Vaishnavi Satish Bankar, Ghorpade, S. Pune. F.No.7, Plot No.60/61, S.No.165/1B, Shivanjali, Near Central Circle-1(3), Pune. Mahadev Temple, Indira Nagar, Pune – 411033. Pan: Afdpg6919A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte Revenue By Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar –Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Pune-11 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2019-20 & 2020-21, Both Dated 02.05.2024 Emanating From Separate Assessment Order U/S.153A R.W.S 144 Of The I.T.Act, Both Dated 23.09.2021.For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals

Housing Loan for Flat No.7 Shivanjali Near Mahadev Temple, Indra Nagae, Chinchwad, Pune-411033 against which the Assessee has claimed deduction u/s.24(b) claiming this impugned flat as self-occupied property. In these facts and circumstances of the case, the deduction of Rs.55,292/- is upheld. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the Assessee is dismissed. Ground No.2 : 11. This Ground relates

VINEET PRAKASH POL,NASHIK vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.302/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vineet Prakash Pol, V The Acit, F-16, Midc, Ambad, S. Circle-1, Nashik. Nashik – 422010. Maharashtra. Pan: Abkpp4357J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Vinod Pawar – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commssioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated31.01.2024For The A.Y.2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.13,81,195 Out Of The Total Disallowance Of Rs.30,74,834 Made By The A.O In Respect Of Interest Paid To Partnership Firms On Loans Obtained From Them Without Appreciating That The Said Disallowance Was Not Justified On Facts & In Law. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Ought To Have Appreciated That While

section 250 of the Act, dated31.01.2024for the A.Y.2015-16. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.13,81,195 out of the total disallowance of Rs.30,74,834 made by the A.O in respect of interest paid to partnership firms on loans obtained from them without appreciating that

MUSTAFA ALIHUSAIN SUNELWALA,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-14(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

house property, you have accepted to own two flats.” 5.1 The Ld. AR brought our attention to the notice dated 11.03.2024 (copy at page 1 of the paper book) for penalty u/s 274 r.w.s. 270A of the Act and submitted that the notice does not mention which limb of section 270A(9) is attracted. She submitted that the assessee made

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

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

195 Тахтап 117 (Вот.)\nii. PCIT Vs. Lark Chemicals (P) Ltd. (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312\n(SC)\niii. Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (2014) 45 taxmann.com 20\n(Gujarat)\niv. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar 268 ITR 332 (Bombay)\nv. M/s. Lark Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT – ITA No.2636/M/2013,\ndated 06.02.2015\n10. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative

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

195 Taxman 117 (Bom.) ii. PCIT Vs. Lark Chemicals (P) Ltd. (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312 (SC) iii. Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (2014) 45 taxmann.com 20 (Gujarat) iv. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) v. M/s. Lark Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT – ITA No.2636/M/2013, dated 06.02.2015 10. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative has contended

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

195 Taxman 117 (Bom.) ii. PCIT Vs. Lark Chemicals (P) Ltd. (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312 (SC) iii. Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (2014) 45 taxmann.com 20 (Gujarat) iv. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) v. M/s. Lark Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT – ITA No.2636/M/2013, dated 06.02.2015 10. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative has contended

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

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

195 Тахтап 117 (Вот.)\nii. PCIT Vs. Lark Chemicals (P) Ltd. (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312\n(SC)\niii. Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (2014) 45 taxmann.com 20\n(Gujarat)\niv. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar 268 ITR 332 (Bombay)\nv. M/s. Lark Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT – ITA No.2636/M/2013,\ndated 06.02.2015\n10. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative

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

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

195 Тахтап 117 (Вот.)\n11\nITA Nos.1121 to 1126/PUN/2024\nRajarshi Shahu Shikshan Sanstha\nii. PCIT Vs. Lark Chemicals (P) Ltd. (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312\n(SC)\niii. Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (2014) 45 taxmann.com 20\n(Gujarat)\niv. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar 268 ITR 332 (Bombay)\nv. M/s. Lark Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT – ITA No.2636/M/2013,\ndated

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

195 Taxman 117 (Bom.) ii. PCIT Vs. Lark Chemicals (P) Ltd. (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312 (SC) iii. Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT (2014) 45 taxmann.com 20 (Gujarat) iv. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) v. M/s. Lark Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT – ITA No.2636/M/2013, dated 06.02.2015 10. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative has contended

SHRI VINAY BADERA,PUNE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Vinay Badera Acit, Circle 3, Pune 303, Rohan Tapovan, Sb Road, Vs. Gokhale Nagar, Pune – 411016 Pan: Abjpb1324J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.S. Rajpurohit Department By : Shri Arvind Desai, Addl Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-01-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18-03-2025 O R D E R

section 57(iii) of the Act, any other expenditure (not being in the nature of capital expenditure) laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income, is allowed as deduction against income shown as ‘Income from other sources’. He, therefore, asked the assessee to furnish the details of deductions claimed u/s 57 along

PUNE MATHADI HAMAL AND OTHER MANUAL WORKERS BOARD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1012/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pune Mathadihamal & Other The Income Tax Manual Workers Board, V Officer, Shramashakti Bhavan, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Coomercial Plot No.1, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aaalp0097L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vipul Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Shri Rajesh Gawali– Dr’S Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Orders Of Ld.Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Act Dated 14.07.2023 :

housing for the workers, providing scholarships to the wards of the workers, providing full fledge Hospitalisation facility and free medical treatment to the workers etc. The mathadi boards do not carry on any activity for profit. The primary object is to protect the poor manual workers from exploitation by ensuring full wages, labour law benefits, ensuring full utilization of work

SMT. SUSHMA BALASAHEB KADAM,PUNE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No Ita No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. 1-3 976/Pun/2025 Shri Vitthalrao Namdeo Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 978/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Asgpk7498A 4-7 979/Pun/2025 Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Acit, 2016-17 980/Pun/2025 18, Sukhawani Fortune, Morwadi Central Circle 2017-18 1004/Pun/2025 Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2020-21 1005/Pun/2025 Pan: Abapk8131B 2018-19 8-10 981/Pun/2025 Smt. Sushma Balasaheb Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 983/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Ambpk0804D Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvaraj Chavan Department By : Shri Rajesh Haladkar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R

house for which he was not paying any rent. Therefore, the perquisite value of Rs.5,94,000/- was estimated in the statement recorded and admitted as income over and above the regular income which had remained to be taxed. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of the same and determined the total income

SHRI BALASAHEB VITTHALRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No Ita No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. 1-3 976/Pun/2025 Shri Vitthalrao Namdeo Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 978/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Asgpk7498A 4-7 979/Pun/2025 Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Acit, 2016-17 980/Pun/2025 18, Sukhawani Fortune, Morwadi Central Circle 2017-18 1004/Pun/2025 Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2020-21 1005/Pun/2025 Pan: Abapk8131B 2018-19 8-10 981/Pun/2025 Smt. Sushma Balasaheb Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 983/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Ambpk0804D Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvaraj Chavan Department By : Shri Rajesh Haladkar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R

house for which he was not paying any rent. Therefore, the perquisite value of Rs.5,94,000/- was estimated in the statement recorded and admitted as income over and above the regular income which had remained to be taxed. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of the same and determined the total income

SMT. SUSHMA BALASHEB KADAM,PUNE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No Ita No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. 1-3 976/Pun/2025 Shri Vitthalrao Namdeo Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 978/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Asgpk7498A 4-7 979/Pun/2025 Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Acit, 2016-17 980/Pun/2025 18, Sukhawani Fortune, Morwadi Central Circle 2017-18 1004/Pun/2025 Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2020-21 1005/Pun/2025 Pan: Abapk8131B 2018-19 8-10 981/Pun/2025 Smt. Sushma Balasaheb Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 983/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Ambpk0804D Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvaraj Chavan Department By : Shri Rajesh Haladkar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R

house for which he was not paying any rent. Therefore, the perquisite value of Rs.5,94,000/- was estimated in the statement recorded and admitted as income over and above the regular income which had remained to be taxed. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of the same and determined the total income

SMT. SUSHMA BALASAHEB KADAM,PUNE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No Ita No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. 1-3 976/Pun/2025 Shri Vitthalrao Namdeo Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 978/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Asgpk7498A 4-7 979/Pun/2025 Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Acit, 2016-17 980/Pun/2025 18, Sukhawani Fortune, Morwadi Central Circle 2017-18 1004/Pun/2025 Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2020-21 1005/Pun/2025 Pan: Abapk8131B 2018-19 8-10 981/Pun/2025 Smt. Sushma Balasaheb Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 983/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Ambpk0804D Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvaraj Chavan Department By : Shri Rajesh Haladkar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R

house for which he was not paying any rent. Therefore, the perquisite value of Rs.5,94,000/- was estimated in the statement recorded and admitted as income over and above the regular income which had remained to be taxed. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of the same and determined the total income

SHRI BALASAHEB VITTHALRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No Ita No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. 1-3 976/Pun/2025 Shri Vitthalrao Namdeo Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 978/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Asgpk7498A 4-7 979/Pun/2025 Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Acit, 2016-17 980/Pun/2025 18, Sukhawani Fortune, Morwadi Central Circle 2017-18 1004/Pun/2025 Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2020-21 1005/Pun/2025 Pan: Abapk8131B 2018-19 8-10 981/Pun/2025 Smt. Sushma Balasaheb Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 983/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Ambpk0804D Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvaraj Chavan Department By : Shri Rajesh Haladkar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R

house for which he was not paying any rent. Therefore, the perquisite value of Rs.5,94,000/- was estimated in the statement recorded and admitted as income over and above the regular income which had remained to be taxed. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of the same and determined the total income

SHRI. BALASAHEB VITTHALRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No Ita No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. 1-3 976/Pun/2025 Shri Vitthalrao Namdeo Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 978/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Asgpk7498A 4-7 979/Pun/2025 Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Acit, 2016-17 980/Pun/2025 18, Sukhawani Fortune, Morwadi Central Circle 2017-18 1004/Pun/2025 Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2020-21 1005/Pun/2025 Pan: Abapk8131B 2018-19 8-10 981/Pun/2025 Smt. Sushma Balasaheb Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 983/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Ambpk0804D Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvaraj Chavan Department By : Shri Rajesh Haladkar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R

house for which he was not paying any rent. Therefore, the perquisite value of Rs.5,94,000/- was estimated in the statement recorded and admitted as income over and above the regular income which had remained to be taxed. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of the same and determined the total income

SHRI. BALASAHEB VITTHALRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No Ita No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. 1-3 976/Pun/2025 Shri Vitthalrao Namdeo Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 978/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Asgpk7498A 4-7 979/Pun/2025 Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Acit, 2016-17 980/Pun/2025 18, Sukhawani Fortune, Morwadi Central Circle 2017-18 1004/Pun/2025 Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2020-21 1005/Pun/2025 Pan: Abapk8131B 2018-19 8-10 981/Pun/2025 Smt. Sushma Balasaheb Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 983/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Ambpk0804D Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvaraj Chavan Department By : Shri Rajesh Haladkar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R

house for which he was not paying any rent. Therefore, the perquisite value of Rs.5,94,000/- was estimated in the statement recorded and admitted as income over and above the regular income which had remained to be taxed. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of the same and determined the total income

SHRI. VITTHALRAO NAMDEO KADAM,PUNE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrasr No Ita No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. 1-3 976/Pun/2025 Shri Vitthalrao Namdeo Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 978/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Asgpk7498A 4-7 979/Pun/2025 Shri Balasaheb Vitthalrao Kadam Acit, 2016-17 980/Pun/2025 18, Sukhawani Fortune, Morwadi Central Circle 2017-18 1004/Pun/2025 Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2020-21 1005/Pun/2025 Pan: Abapk8131B 2018-19 8-10 981/Pun/2025 Smt. Sushma Balasaheb Kadam Acit, 2016-17 To A-6, Sukhawani Residency, Plot Central Circle 2017-18 983/Pun/2025 No.32, Pimpri, Pune – 411018 2(4), Pune 2018-19 Pan: Ambpk0804D Assessee By : S/Shri B C Malakar & Yuvaraj Chavan Department By : Shri Rajesh Haladkar (Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R

house for which he was not paying any rent. Therefore, the perquisite value of Rs.5,94,000/- was estimated in the statement recorded and admitted as income over and above the regular income which had remained to be taxed. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of the same and determined the total income