M/S. VIKRAM DEVELOPERS & PROMOTERS,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2795 & 2796/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. Vikram Developers & Promoters, 19, Shrikrishna Heights, Ganeshkhind Road, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411005. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aagfv4298R बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Central Circle-2(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue By : Shri Milind Chahure सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are Two Appeals Under Consideration Filed By The Assessee Against The Common Orders Of The Cit(A)-12, Pune Dated 08.09.2016 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. Preliminary Issue - Condonation Of Delay – Both Appeals 2. Before Us, At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Both The Appeals Could Not Be Filed In Time & The Said Appeals Were Filed With The Delay Of 01 Day. In This Regard, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Delay Is Unintentional & Prayed For Condoning The Same. 3. After Hearing Both The Sides & Considering The Smallness Of Delay In Filing Of Both The Appeals, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals Of The Assessee In The Following Paragraphs. 4. The Facts & Grounds Are Common In Both The Appeals, Therefore, Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. Accordingly, The Appeal-Wise Adjudication Is Taken Up In The Following Paragraphs.

4 of the Act, which is the charging section. Section 115J of the Act only creates a legal fiction to supplant the measure of total income which is chargeable to tax. Thus, indisputably, tax as computed on the basis of Section 115J of the Act is a tax on income." Suryalatha Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 223ITR

DEPUTU COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

house property‖, ―Capital gains‖ and ―Income from other sources‖], or a company or granting of loans and advances) consists in the purchase and sale of shares of other companies such company shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be carrying on a speculation business to the extent to which the business consists of the purchase and sale

DEPUTY COMMISSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1,, AURANGABAD vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

house property‖, ―Capital gains‖ and ―Income from other sources‖], or a company or granting of loans and advances) consists in the purchase and sale of shares of other companies such company shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be carrying on a speculation business to the extent to which the business consists of the purchase and sale

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. ENDURANCE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, AURANGABAD

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 989/Pn/2015 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

house property‖, ―Capital gains‖ and ―Income from other sources‖], or a company or granting of loans and advances) consists in the purchase and sale of shares of other companies such company shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be carrying on a speculation business to the extent to which the business consists of the purchase and sale

SHREE GARUDA PLANT PRODUCTS LTD,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (2),, NASHIK

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.492/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shree Garuda Plant Products The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Vs Ward-1(2), Nashik. B-26, Additional Midc Area, Ambad, Nashik. Pan: Aaacg 0563 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nishint Gandhi – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Nashik For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Dated 19.02.2019, Emanating Out Of Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 1, Nashik ["The Cit (A)" For Short] Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Learned Income Tax Officer - 1 (2), Nashik, ["The Ao" For Short] Which Was Passed In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice Without Affording A Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Appellant. 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Invoking Section 14A R.W.R. 8D Of The Act, Whereby A Disallowance Of Rs.12,81,831/- Was Made In The Hands Of The Appellant.

4. It is mentioned in the Assessment Order that the Assessee had given two separate premises on rent to two different companies. In ITA No.492/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2015-16 Shree Garuda Plant Products Ltd.[A] the assessment order it is mentioned that as per 26AS, the assessee had received rent as under : Name of tenant Rent Received TDS Buro Happold

BHARAT DEWAKINANDAN AGARWAL,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-13, PUNE., PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

house property, business/profession, capital gains and income from other sources. Under scrutiny, notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act issued. In response to the said notices, the assessee filed details before the AO which is evident from para 2 of the assessment order. According to the AO, the assessee has shown gross annual value regarding office

DCIT CIRCLE 1 NASHIK, NASHIK vs. SHREE SAI PROPERTIES, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

255 (Rajasthan) [2024], the Hon. High Court held that "once there is incriminating material seized or requisitioned belonging or relatable to the person other than on whom search was conducted, section 153C is to be resorted to". (Relevant paragraph 23 onwards). • A similar view is also taken in the case of Sri Dinakara Suvarna vs. DCIT, 143 taxmann.com 362 (Karnataka

BHARAT KESHAVLAL SHAH,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -3,, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

4 ITA.No.855/PUN/2019 Shri Bharat Keshavlal Shah, Pune. liberty to raise appropriate contentions before the Assessing Officer in consequential proceedings. Rejected in very terms. 7. This leaves us with the first and foremost issue of PCIT's revision directions regarding the applicability of interest disallowance u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act. Mr. Khandelwal took-us to assessee’s detailed paper

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

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

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 12(1),, PUNE vs. M/S. YASH ASSOCIATES,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.159/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer, M/S.Yash Associates, 401, 4Th Floor, Shreepal Ward-12(1), Pune. Vs . Chambers, 481/C, Shanivar Peth, Pune – 411030. Pan: Aaafy 6149 E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Cross Objection No.01/Pun/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.159/Pun/2018) िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer, M/S.Yash Associates, 401, 4Th Floor, Shreepal Ward-12(1), Pune. Vs. Chambers, 481/C, Shanivar Peth, Pune – 411030. Pan: Aaafy 6149 E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajiv Thakkar – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 11/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 05/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.159/Pun/218 With Assessee’S Cross Objection Co No.01/Pun/2022 For The A.Y. 2014-15, Arise Against The Cit(A)-8, Pune’S Order Dated 17.10.2017 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-8/Acit Cir-12/293/2017-18/284, In Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused.

Properties (supra). In the case before the Hon'ble High Court, Assessee had' claimed deduction u/s 80IB (10) of the Act for a Building 'E' which was constructed after the advent of Section 80IB (10) of the Act. Prior to that, buildings A to D were constructed before the advent of section 80IB

MUZAFFER MAHMOOD KHAN,,AURANGABAD vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -2,, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

property at Rs.70,00,000/- which is 1346% above market price of Rs.4,84,000/- 5. In reply, it was explained that the developer/builder M/s. Golden Dreams Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. executed Deed of Assignment (Sale Deed) on 3 ITA No.895/PUN/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 31-07-2014 in favour of assessee and the said date is to be considered as date

SHAMBHU PROPERTIES ,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 12(2),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Properties, 218, Shaniwar Peth, Near Omkareshwar Temple, Above Raj Veg. Restaurant, Pune – 411030 PAN : ABBFS8039F ......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 12(2), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri B.D. Bhide Revenue by : Shri Vitthal Bhosale सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 02-08-2021 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 03-08-2021 आदेश / ORDER

M/S. SAVA MEDICA LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.738, 739 & 740/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

House, 3rd Floor, 2(1), Pune Lawani Plaza, B-Wing, Plot No.57/58, Sakorenagar, Viman Nagar, Pune – 411007 PAN: AANCS8819F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue by : Shri Sangram Gaikwad Date of hearing : 25-08-2021 Date of pronouncement : 30-08-2021 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These three appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate final

M/S. SAVA MEDICA LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.738, 739 & 740/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

House, 3rd Floor, 2(1), Pune Lawani Plaza, B-Wing, Plot No.57/58, Sakorenagar, Viman Nagar, Pune – 411007 PAN: AANCS8819F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue by : Shri Sangram Gaikwad Date of hearing : 25-08-2021 Date of pronouncement : 30-08-2021 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These three appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate final

M/S. SAVA MEDICA LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal for the A

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.738, 739 & 740/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

House, 3rd Floor, 2(1), Pune Lawani Plaza, B-Wing, Plot No.57/58, Sakorenagar, Viman Nagar, Pune – 411007 PAN: AANCS8819F Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue by : Shri Sangram Gaikwad Date of hearing : 25-08-2021 Date of pronouncement : 30-08-2021 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : These three appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate final

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2004-05 is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1278 To 1280/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 To 2004-05

4) of the Act by the Managing Director of the Company which was subsequently retracted. There is no declaration of undisclosed income for the assessment year 2003-04 and 2004-05. These facts have not been disputed by the Revenue. We observe that the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) in Para 4.1 of the impugned order has categorically recorded these

GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2004-05 is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1278 To 1280/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 To 2004-05

4) of the Act by the Managing Director of the Company which was subsequently retracted. There is no declaration of undisclosed income for the assessment year 2003-04 and 2004-05. These facts have not been disputed by the Revenue. We observe that the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) in Para 4.1 of the impugned order has categorically recorded these

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. GHATGE PATIL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2004-05 is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1278 To 1280/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 To 2004-05

4) of the Act by the Managing Director of the Company which was subsequently retracted. There is no declaration of undisclosed income for the assessment year 2003-04 and 2004-05. These facts have not been disputed by the Revenue. We observe that the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) in Para 4.1 of the impugned order has categorically recorded these