DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANAGBAD., AURANGABAD. vs. SHREEHARI ASSOCIATES PVT LTD, AURANGABAD.

The appeals of the REVENUE are ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, and to buttress the said argument reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ‘K P Madhusudhanan Vs CIT’ reported at 251 ITR 99 (SC) and ‘UOI Vs Dharmendra Textiles Processor’ reported in 306 ITR 227 (SC). The Ld. DR Mr Desai further pressing into

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD. vs. SHREEHARI ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED, AURANGABAD

The appeals of the REVENUE are ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamore

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, and to buttress the said argument reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ‘K P Madhusudhanan Vs CIT’ reported at 251 ITR 99 (SC) and ‘UOI Vs Dharmendra Textiles Processor’ reported in 306 ITR 227 (SC). The Ld. DR Mr Desai further pressing into

PRAPHULL KALURAM SHIVALE,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 12,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 490/Pun/2019 करिनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Praphull Kaluram Shivale, 234, Balu Shetpabal Road, Vadhu Budruk, Shirur,Pune – 412216 Pan :Bfqps4176B . . . . . . . अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 12, Pune . . . . . . . ""थ" / Respondent "ारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri B. C. Malakar Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing :16/08/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement :26/08/2022 आदेश / Order Per G.D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Appellant Assessee Is Challenged Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 14/02/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 [For Short “The Act”] Which In Turn Dove Out Of Order Of Penalty [For Short “Po”] Of Asstt. Commission Of Income Tax, Circle-12 Pune [For Short “Ao”] Dt.28/06/2018 U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2015-16. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 14

section 271(1)(c), by an order imposed a penalty of ₹76,80,877/- (rounded up to ₹77,00,000/-)equal to 100% of tax sought to be evaded on additional business income brought to tax and assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act., over & above the income returned in original return of income filed by the appellant assessee

M.M. PATEL PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,SOLAPUR vs. PCIT- CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

penalty orders are passed for violations u/s 271(1)(c) and\n271B and 271D and 271(1)(b)... and so on. An exercise of missing two\nseparate orders under one common order, is besides the law and\nwholly incorrect.\nD. Mis-match of authorities (without prejudice to main challenges)\nFrom a collective perusal of sections 12AA/12AB, etc. it reveals that

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. XIII. erred in not quashing the initiation of penalty proceedings by the Assessing Officer. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any or all the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal hearing.” 6 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. 4. Shri

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. XIII. erred in not quashing the initiation of penalty proceedings by the Assessing Officer. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any or all the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal hearing.” 6 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. 4. Shri

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS (I) PVT. LTD.,, RAIGAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. XIII. erred in not quashing the initiation of penalty proceedings by the Assessing Officer. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any or all the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal hearing.” 6 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. 4. Shri

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS (I) PVT. LTD.,, RAIGAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. XIII. erred in not quashing the initiation of penalty proceedings by the Assessing Officer. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any or all the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal hearing.” 6 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. 4. Shri

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

section 271(1)(c) of the Act. XIII. erred in not quashing the initiation of penalty proceedings by the Assessing Officer. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any or all the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at the time of appeal hearing.” 6 M/s. Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Private Limited. 4. Shri

MR. MOHAN MADAN BHOITE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-9, PUNE

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

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

227, Ward – 9(1), Pune Sector No. 27/A, Pradhikaran, Vs. Nigdi, Pune-411044 PAN : AAOPB4275A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Abhay A Avchat Department by : Shri Vidya Ratna Kishore Date of hearing : 17-12-2025 Date of 27-01-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order

TEREX INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objections of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.583/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to one another. 4. The Revenue in ITA No.552/PUN/2016 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Hon'ble DRP has erred on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, in allowing for the aggregation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. DEMAG CRANES & COMPONENTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed, appeal of Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objections of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.583/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to one another. 4. The Revenue in ITA No.552/PUN/2016 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Hon'ble DRP has erred on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, in allowing for the aggregation

KIMBERLY CLARK LEVER P.LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2481/Pun/2012 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Kimberly Clark Lever P. Ltd., Gat No.934 To 937, Village Sanaswadi Off Nagar Road, Ta- Shirur, Pune-412208. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaack4647E बनाम / V/S. Acit, Circle-Xi(I), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwalla Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Garg सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Final Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short) Of The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Pune (‘The Assessing Officer’ For Short) Dated 29.10.2012 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “The Appellant Objects To The Order Dated 29 October 2012 Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144(C) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 11(1), Pune [‘Acit’ Or ‘Ao’] Following The Directions Issued By The Dispute Resolution Panel (‘Drp’) In Respect Of The Aforesaid Assessment Year On The Following Among Other Grounds:

271(1)(c) of the Act. The learned DRP erred in not giving any directions in respect of the same. b. The learned ACIT / DRP erred in not appreciating that there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by the appellant for penalty proceedings to be initiated in this regard. 9. Each

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE,, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING AND EDUCATION RESEARCH,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

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

u/s 274 of the Act that the AO retained both the limbs, whereas penalty was imposed only with reference to one of them, namely furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Respectfully following the above referred Full Bench judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court, we overturn the impugned order on this legal issue and direct to delete the penalty

MAHARASHTRA ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING AND EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

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

u/s 274 of the Act that the AO retained both the limbs, whereas penalty was imposed only with reference to one of them, namely furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Respectfully following the above referred Full Bench judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court, we overturn the impugned order on this legal issue and direct to delete the penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE,, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING AND EDUCATION RESEARCH,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

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

u/s 274 of the Act that the AO retained both the limbs, whereas penalty was imposed only with reference to one of them, namely furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Respectfully following the above referred Full Bench judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court, we overturn the impugned order on this legal issue and direct to delete the penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE,, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING AND EDUCATION RESEARCH,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

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

u/s 274 of the Act that the AO retained both the limbs, whereas penalty was imposed only with reference to one of them, namely furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Respectfully following the above referred Full Bench judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court, we overturn the impugned order on this legal issue and direct to delete the penalty

MAHARASHTRA ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING AND EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

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

u/s 274 of the Act that the AO retained both the limbs, whereas penalty was imposed only with reference to one of them, namely furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Respectfully following the above referred Full Bench judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court, we overturn the impugned order on this legal issue and direct to delete the penalty

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE vs. FERRERO INDIA PVT.LTD, PUNE

penalty proceedings under section 271 (1 )(c) of the Act. 6. The AO passed the assessment order uls 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Act on 17.04.2015 (Received by assessee on 07.05.2015). Aggrieved by the assessment order passed by the AO, the Assessee has filed the appeal before the CIT(A) on 03.06.2015. In respect of transfer pricing adjustment