PRAKASHBAPU PATIL GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA LTD,SANGLI vs. ACIT CIRCLE SANGLI, SANGLI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1325& 1328/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Prakashbapu Patil Gramin V The Acit, Bigar Sheti Sahakari Pat S Circle-Sangli. Sanstha Ltd., Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd., Savali Miraj, Sangli – 416410. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaap1616N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Smt. Deepa Khare – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 19/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] For Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16; Dated 05.04.2024 & 10.04.2024 Respectively; Passed U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Since The Issue Involved Is Common

80P(4) of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was explained in detail in Assessment Order u/s 147, r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the I.T. Act, 1961, dated 22/03/2022 in the case of assessee for AY 2015-16. 06. In spite of sufficient opportunities, the assessee has not furnished any explanation regarding penal

SHREE SANT SAVTA GRAMIN BIGAR SETI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PIMPALGAON vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1597/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shree Sant Savta Gramin Bigar V Assessment Unit, Seti Sahakari Patsanstha S Income Tax Maryadit, Department, Delhi. Pimpalgaon, Niphad, Maharashtra – 422209. Pan: Aacas4098M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Sadananda – Jcit Date Of Hearing 10/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11/02/2026 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(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2016-17 Dated 27.11.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The I.T.Act, Dated 05.03.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

271(1)(c)-of the Act. with regards to concealing the particulars of income and furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, penalty u/s 271F with regards to failure to furnish return of income.” 4. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order, Assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A). 5. Ld.CIT(A) uphold the decision of Assessing Officer. The relevant paragraph of ld.CIT

AMAN CHHOTE VYAPARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,,ICHALKRANJI vs. आयकर अधिकारी, वार्ड - 4,, ICHALKARANJI

In the result, all the three appeals of assessee are allowed on legal grounds

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.142 To 144/Pun/2018 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2005-06 & 2006-07 Aman Chhote Vyapari Sahakari Patsanshta Maryadit, Gala No.61, 62 & 63, Weekly Market, Ichalkaranji. Pan: Aabta0044M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Ichalkaranji ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri M.K. Kulkarni Revenue By : Shri S.P. Walimbe

2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty levied u/s 271 (1)(c) by the AO though she has not recorded her satisfaction as to which specific default in respect which the penalty is levied by her, there by rendering her order of levying the penalty

AMAN CHHOTE VYAPARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,,ICHALKRANJI vs. आयकर अधिकारी, वार्ड - 4,, ICHALKARANJI

In the result, all the three appeals of assessee are allowed on legal grounds

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.142 To 144/Pun/2018 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2000-01, 2005-06 & 2006-07 Aman Chhote Vyapari Sahakari Patsanshta Maryadit, Gala No.61, 62 & 63, Weekly Market, Ichalkaranji. Pan: Aabta0044M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Ichalkaranji ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri M.K. Kulkarni Revenue By : Shri S.P. Walimbe

2) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty levied u/s 271 (1)(c) by the AO though she has not recorded her satisfaction as to which specific default in respect which the penalty is levied by her, there by rendering her order of levying the penalty

BAPUJIBUWA NAGARI SAH PAT SANSTHA LTD.,,PUNE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.946/Pun/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Bapujibuwa Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, S.No.10/2, Dagadu Patil Nagar, Thergaon, Pune – 411033. Pan : Aaaab8597J. बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, ……""यथ" / Respondent Range – 9, Pune.

2. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty amounting to ₹67,52,000/- levied by the AO under section 271D of the Act. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case is a co- operative society and is engaged in the activity of providing

SHRI. DUDHGANGA VEDGANGA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -1,, KOLHAPUR

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

section 40A(2) of the Act, as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court supra. Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed a reasonable opportunity of hearing by the AO in such fresh determination of the issue. 7. It is noted that in some of the appeals, the assessees have raised an alternate ground for allowing deduction

SADASHIVRAO MANDLIK KAGAL TALUKA SAH. SAKHAR KARKHAN LTD,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, KOLHAPUR

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sadashivrao Mandlik Kagal Tal. Vs. Acit, Sah. Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Circle-1, Sushant S. Phadnis C.A., 613 E Kolhapur Ward, Phadnis Chambers, Shahupuri, 1St Lane, Kolhapur – 416003 Pan : Aaaak1300Q Appellant Respondent

u/s. 80P (2) (a) (iii) when the issue was fully, covered in the assesses favour by the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Budhewal Co.op. Sugar Mills Ltd. as reported in 315 ITR 351. 6) On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on merit