MAHARASHTRA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

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

carried forward. By the time the assessee had already filed return of income for the impugned assessment years and hence the assessee had no occasion to claim set off of brought forward business loss from assessment year 2002-03 in the return of income. It is a clear case of supervening impossibility. 6. Here it would be relevant to refer

MAHARASHTRA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

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

carried forward. By the time the assessee had already filed return of income for the impugned assessment years and hence the assessee had no occasion to claim set off of brought forward business loss from assessment year 2002-03 in the return of income. It is a clear case of supervening impossibility. 6. Here it would be relevant to refer

MAHARASHTRA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 14,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

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

carried forward. By the time the assessee had already filed return of income for the impugned assessment years and hence the assessee had no occasion to claim set off of brought forward business loss from assessment year 2002-03 in the return of income. It is a clear case of supervening impossibility. 6. Here it would be relevant to refer

DINDAYAL MAGASVARGIYA SAHAKARI SOOT GIRNI LTD,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE SANGLI, CIRCLE SANGLI

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.205/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dindayal Magasvargiya Vs. Acit, Circle Sangli, Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd., Sangli. At Waghwadi, Post Kameri, Tal. Walwa, Sangli- 415403. Pan : Aaaad0254E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Ao Erred In Initiating Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 For Ay 2014-15, Being The Year Beyond 4 Years & For Which Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Has Already Been Passed, Thereby

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 for AY 2014-15 by recording the reason to believe which is based on audit objection. We submit that the reason based on such borrowed satisfaction cannot be the basis of reopening the concluded assessment. Therefore, entire proceedings are void ab initio. 4. Without prejudice to the above grounds on the facts and in the circumstances

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. FRESENIUS KABI INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2095/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07

loss was first computed and accordingly, he prayed for upholding the order of CIT(A). 7. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to the grounds and submitted that this is a case where Revenue aggrieved with the decision of CIT(A) who granted set off of unabsorbed depreciation on earlier years against the income

M/S NOBLE DRUGS LTD,NASHIK vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE -2 , NASHIK

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.214/Pun/2020 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Noble Drugs Ltd., Plot No. B-22, Midc Ambad, Nashik - 422 010 .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaacn6198H

carry forward of the loss pertaining to A.Y. 2000-01 in the assessment proceedings for the year under appeal. 3. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)- 2, Nashik, is not justified in upholding the reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. FRESENIUS KABI INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2096/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Dcit, Circle- 1(2), .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pune. बनाम / V/S. Fresenius Kabi India Pvt. Ltd., Heritage House, 6 – E, Ramabai Ambedkar Road, Pune. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan : Aaacf2614E Revenue By : Smt. Amrita Mishra, Cit Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01.01.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Pune Dated 02.06.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are As Under :- “1. The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Is Contrary To Law & To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Grossly Erred In Allowing Set Off Of Unabsorbed Depreciation To The Tune Of Rs.30 Crs. 3. The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Grossly Erred In Allowing The Ground In Favour Of Assessee Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 72A Of The Act. 4. For These & Such Other Grounds As May Be Urged At The Time Of Hearing, The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) May Be Vacated & That Of The Assessing Officer Be Restored.

reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted the entry of adjustment of Rs.30 crores towards claim of 3 business losses/unabsorbed depreciation is in accordance with the law. The assessee is entitled to claim of full amount of business losses/unabsorbed depreciation and the same is in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The AO holds that the claim of losses needs

VLIFE SCIENCES TECHNOLOGIES P LTD (SINCE MERGED WITH NOVALEAD PHARMA P LTD ),PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.57/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 Vlife Sciences Technologies Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income (Since Merged With Novalead Tax, Circle-(1), Pune. Pharma P. Ltd.,) 3Rd Floor, Anahat, Plot No.5, Ram Indu Park, Baner Road, Pune – 411045. Pan: Aabcv 5959 N Assessee/ Appellant Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B.D.Bhide – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 19/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05/07/2023 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 (Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Dated 23.12.2021 Emanating From Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Act, Dated 28.02.2014 For A.Y.2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Being Aggrieved By An Order Passed By The Id. Cit(A) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfaq Hereinafter Referred For Short As ‘Id. Cit(A), U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 23Rd December, Vlife Sciences Technologies Pvt. Ltd., [A]

reassessment records in-spite of repeated requests filed by the appellant which are acknowledged by the lower assessing authorities including the jurisdictional Pr. CIT. vi. Said order was passed by ignoring CBDT’s instruction/ LETTER F.NO.DGIT (VIG.)/HQ/SI/APPEALS/2017-18/9959 because of which, there was inordinate delay while passing an order U/Sec.250 beyond 15 days from the date of last hearing

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.

losses which had accrued under the repealed Income Tax Act of 1922 is not saved expressly by Section 297 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. But, it is not necessary to save a right expressly in order to keep it alive after the repeal of the old Act of 1922. Section 6(2) saves accrued rights unless they are taken

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.

losses which had accrued under the repealed Income Tax Act of 1922 is not saved expressly by Section 297 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. But, it is not necessary to save a right expressly in order to keep it alive after the repeal of the old Act of 1922. Section 6(2) saves accrued rights unless they are taken

HIRSCHVOGEL COMPONENTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2011-12

carried forward at Rs.6,04,46,280/-. 4. The assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) / NFAC, who deleted the addition. On appeal by the Revenue, the Tribunal vide ITA No.2285/PUN/2017, order dated 29.06.2021 restored the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer by observing as under: “7. At the time of hearing, the Ld. Counsel

CYZA CHEM PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1 (1),, PUNE

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

loss of Rs.3,66,911/-. A search action was carried out in this Serum Group. During the search action, some incriminating documents were found and the bundle no.7 contains the papers relating to the purchase of land. On verification of the same, the Assessing Officer found that the said incriminating documents relating to purchase of land by the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. SECO TOOLS INDIA PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the Cross Objections of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.812 & 813/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 2003-04

reassessment has to be based on fulfillment of certain pre-conditions and if the concept of „change of opinion‟ is removed, as contended on behalf of the Department, then, in the garb of reopening the assessment, review would take place. One must treat the concept of „change of opinion‟ as an in-built test to check abuse of power

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED ( SUCCESSOR OF ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS LIMITED),PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

carried forward of Rs.1,41,25,06,638 for AY 2021-22 which is clearly evident from the Schedule MATC of the ITR’s of both the AYs. The MAT credit was brought forward by the assessee for AY 2022-23 lower by Rs.1,86,60,746 (Rs.1,41,25,06,638 - Rs.1,39,38,45,890) after adjusting

BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-8(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

reassessed has the effect of reducing the loss or converting such loss into income. 11. The assessees case would fall only in clause (g) of Section 270A(2) of the Act as the ultimate assessment had the effect of reducing the loss retuned by the assessee. It was further pointed out that under reporting of income has got certain exceptions

INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PUNE vs. SMT. ROOPA JAYANT GUPTA,, PUNE

In the result, all the 5 appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1296 To 1300/Pun/2017 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, अपीऱाथी/Appellant Ward 3(2), Pune …. Vs. Smt. Roopa Jayant Gupta, C/O Mrs. Mrinalini Kirloskar, Lakaki Road, Model Colony, Pune – 411016 …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pan: Aehpb5246H

reassessment. In response, the assessee requested to treat the returns filed originally for the respective assessment years as returns filed in response to the notices u/s 148 of the Act. The AO observed that the assessee had disclosed long term capital gain and short term capital gain for the respective assessment years on sale of mutual funds / shares / units

INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PUNE vs. SMT. ROOPA JAYANT GUPTA,, PUNE

In the result, all the 5 appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1296 To 1300/Pun/2017 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, अपीऱाथी/Appellant Ward 3(2), Pune …. Vs. Smt. Roopa Jayant Gupta, C/O Mrs. Mrinalini Kirloskar, Lakaki Road, Model Colony, Pune – 411016 …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pan: Aehpb5246H

reassessment. In response, the assessee requested to treat the returns filed originally for the respective assessment years as returns filed in response to the notices u/s 148 of the Act. The AO observed that the assessee had disclosed long term capital gain and short term capital gain for the respective assessment years on sale of mutual funds / shares / units

INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PUNE vs. SMT. ROOPA JAYANT GUPTA,, PUNE

In the result, all the 5 appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1296 To 1300/Pun/2017 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, अपीऱाथी/Appellant Ward 3(2), Pune …. Vs. Smt. Roopa Jayant Gupta, C/O Mrs. Mrinalini Kirloskar, Lakaki Road, Model Colony, Pune – 411016 …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pan: Aehpb5246H

reassessment. In response, the assessee requested to treat the returns filed originally for the respective assessment years as returns filed in response to the notices u/s 148 of the Act. The AO observed that the assessee had disclosed long term capital gain and short term capital gain for the respective assessment years on sale of mutual funds / shares / units