UNIQUE AUTOMOBILES ,,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, SANGLI

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.477/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Unique Automobiles, The Cit(A), Kolhapur. 32, Jayraj, Near Tata Petrol Vs Pump, Vishrambag, Sangli – . 416416. Pan: Aaafu 3563 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri M.G.Jansnani - Dr Date Of Hearing 11/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 05/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2004-05 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Kolhapur’S Order Dated 01.11.2017 Passed In Appeal No. Sli/093/10- 11, In Proceedings U/S.271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

271B 26a[, section 271 BA], 27 [section 27IBB.]section 271C , section 27ID, section 271E , 28 [ section 271F. 29 1 section 271 FA ,] 30[ section 271FB, ] 3.1 [ section 271G.1] clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A. sub- section (1) of section 272AA1 or 32 [ section 272B or] 33 [sub- section

ERIC MARIO RAJIV FONSECA,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (IT) -4,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi

penalty proceedings upon the assessee u/s 271A, 271B and section 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act 1961. 2. The learned

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023

MANOJ S. GUGALE,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1327/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Manoj S. Gugale 652, Shantisadan, Topkhana, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ahmednagar …. Pan: Adzpg9595N Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 3, Ahmednagar

u/s 271(1)(c) had erred in not appreciating the following important facts: a) The appellant had offered additional income, which constitutes a voluntary and bonafide act. b) In compliance of the disclosure, the appellant had filed the revised statement incorporating the additional income during the course of assessment proceedings also claimed the TDS voluntarily, which was remained

SUNIL TUKARAM ZAMBARE,,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

271B of the Act for not getting the books of account audited.” 10. Further, we also perused the penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer on 28.03.2014. On perusal of penalty order, we find the following is the reasons for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act :- “……. furnishing inaccurate particular of income/concealing income……” 11. The above extracts

D.R.K. CONSTRUCTION,,SATARA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

271B [section-271BA] [Section 271BB] section 271C, [section 271CA,] section 271D, section 271E, [271F,section 271FA,] [section 271FAB] [section 271FB] [section 271G)) [section 271GA] [section 271H,] [section 271-I] clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub- section (2) of section 272A, sub-section (1) of section 272AA] or [section 272B or] [sub-section

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2 , AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

SATISH MADHUKAR KANHERKAR,AHILYANAGAR vs. ITO , WARD-2, AHILYANAGAR

In the result, all the 10 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 147. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 23.03.2019 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,94,560/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 01.11.2019 and made addition of Rs.16,20,009/- being the difference between the turnover

RAVINDRA GAMBHIR PATIL,JALGAON vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), JALGAON

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSE in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri S S Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 423 To 425/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ravindra Gambhir Patil, At Post Changdev, Tal-Muktainagar, Jalgaon - 425 306 Pan: Angpp1849K . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(4) Jalgaon . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Dr. Kalpesh Rupavatiya सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/05/2023 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Bench; These Bunch Of Three Appeals Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2011-12 Is Assailed Against The First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short “Cit(A) /Nfac”] Dt. 13/02/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”]

271(1)(c) for concealment & a penalty @0.5% u/s 271B of the Act for failure to comply with section 44AB