AGARWAL GROUP CORPORATE HOLDING P. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1666/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shri Brijendra Nath Agarwal, Mzsk & Associates, Chartered Accountants Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Near Rto, Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aawpa9005D Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Circle 2(1), Pune

reassessment proceedings got abated on issue of notice under section 153A(i) of the Act. It further be held that the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in concluding that issue of notice u/s 153A(i) for the year under consideration is void-ab-initio. The assessment framed by the AO and that confirmed

RATHOD JEWELLERS,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

justice are satisfied. Cross-examination in sense is not the technical cross-examination in a Court olaw in the witness- box." Therefore, in view of above this office is of the opinion tht there is no need as well time for cross examination. Further, the party of which the cross examination has been asked for has been duly verified

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. TARADEVI RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

natural justice.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "132", "153A", "143(3)", "153B", "147", "148", "68", "10(38)", "69C", "151" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

justice is liable to be deleted. Ground No. 4 stands allowed in\nfavour of appellant.\n\n9. Even on merit also, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC allowed the claim of deduction\nu/s 10(38) of the Act made by the assessee by observing as under:\n\nAddition of Rs 7,68,24,174 under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

natural justice which the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has examined\nthoroughly and deleted the addition for such violation. We, therefore, uphold the\norder of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on this issue also.\n\n63. Even otherwise also, we find during the 153A assessment proceedings the\nAssessing Officer had specifically asked regarding the exempt long term capital\ngain to which

M/S. KASTURI RASHI DEVELOPERS,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5(3), , PUNE

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

natural justice. 3. I have heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material on record. I espouse the three issues raised by the assessee in seriatim. 4 M/s. Kasturi Rashi Developers I. INITIATION OF REASSESSMENT

RAISONI BAGRECHA DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. PNE-C-(25)(1), CIRCLE 1, JALGAON, JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2548 & 2550/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Raisoni Bagrecha Diamonds Pne-C-(25)(1), Pvt. Ltd. 288, Baliram Peth, Circle-1, Jalgaon Jalgaon-425001, Maharashtra Vs. Pan : Aadcr 7439 N अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanjay T. Tupe, Ca Department By : : Smt. Indira R. Adakil –Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 04-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-01-2026 आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Separate Order(S) Both Dated 14.08.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

natural Justice by deliberately not intimating the defect in Form 35 (Column 12) during the entire appellate proceedings spanning nearly three years and then invoking this very defect as grounds to dismiss the appeal in the final order, thereby denying the appellant any opportunity to rectify the inadvertent error. This approach clearly demonstrates that the procedural defect was used merely

RAISONI BAGRECHA DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. PNE-C-(25)(1), CIRCLE 1, JALGAON, JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2548 & 2550/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Raisoni Bagrecha Diamonds Pne-C-(25)(1), Pvt. Ltd. 288, Baliram Peth, Circle-1, Jalgaon Jalgaon-425001, Maharashtra Vs. Pan : Aadcr 7439 N अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanjay T. Tupe, Ca Department By : : Smt. Indira R. Adakil –Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 04-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 01-01-2026 आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Separate Order(S) Both Dated 14.08.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :-

natural Justice by deliberately not intimating the defect in Form 35 (Column 12) during the entire appellate proceedings spanning nearly three years and then invoking this very defect as grounds to dismiss the appeal in the final order, thereby denying the appellant any opportunity to rectify the inadvertent error. This approach clearly demonstrates that the procedural defect was used merely

M/S. ANGELICA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX,,

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Hon’Ble Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No: 403/Pun/2015 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vason Engineers Ltd., Theadditional Commissioner Of (Formerly Angelica Properties Pvt. Vs Income Tax, Range1, Pune. Ltd.,) 301, Phoenix, Opp.Residency Club, Bund Garden Road, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aafca 8644 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No: 1738/Pun/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Angelica Properties Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Opp. Grand Hyatt Hotel, Vs Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vimannagar, Puune – 411 014. Pan: Aafca 8644 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Dharmesh Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Naveen Gupta – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Pune Dated 30.01.2015 & 09.06.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 Respectively. 2. The Assessee In Ita No.403/Pun/2015 For The A.Y.2010-11 Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts Enhancing The Income From Sale Of ‘Matrix It Building’ By Changing The Head Of Income From Capital Gains To Business Income Without Complying With The Principles Of Natural Justice & Without Giving Any Opportunity Of Hearing.

natural justice and without giving any opportunity of hearing. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in holding that rental income and maintenance charges of Rs.4,94,31,708/- is chargeable to tax under the head ‘Income from Business' as against the head ‘Income from House Property’ shown by the assessee

VASCON ENGINEERS LTD (SUCCESSOR TO ANGELICA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.),PUNE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, PUNE

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Hon’Ble Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No: 403/Pun/2015 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vason Engineers Ltd., Theadditional Commissioner Of (Formerly Angelica Properties Pvt. Vs Income Tax, Range1, Pune. Ltd.,) 301, Phoenix, Opp.Residency Club, Bund Garden Road, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aafca 8644 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No: 1738/Pun/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Angelica Properties Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Opp. Grand Hyatt Hotel, Vs Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vimannagar, Puune – 411 014. Pan: Aafca 8644 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Dharmesh Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Naveen Gupta – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Pune Dated 30.01.2015 & 09.06.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 Respectively. 2. The Assessee In Ita No.403/Pun/2015 For The A.Y.2010-11 Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts Enhancing The Income From Sale Of ‘Matrix It Building’ By Changing The Head Of Income From Capital Gains To Business Income Without Complying With The Principles Of Natural Justice & Without Giving Any Opportunity Of Hearing.

natural justice and without giving any opportunity of hearing. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in holding that rental income and maintenance charges of Rs.4,94,31,708/- is chargeable to tax under the head ‘Income from Business' as against the head ‘Income from House Property’ shown by the assessee

ASHOK HIRACHAND SHAH,PANVEL vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 2, PANVEL

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.812/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ashok Hirachand Shah, Assessing Officer, Plot No. 4, Mangal Bunglow, Ward – 2, Panvel Road No. 5, Sector No. 19, Vs. New Panvel, Tal.-Panvel-410206 Pan : Acdps4800M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajinkya Shah Department By : Shri Rajesh Gawali Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of 17-12-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.01.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Denial Of Natural Justice & Proper Opportunity The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Appellant Was Denied Proper Opportunity & Natural Justice During The Assessment Proceedings. The Assessing Officer Called For Information At The Far End Of The Assessment Proceedings On 19/11/2018 & Despite The Appellant'S Authorized Representative Submitting The Details On 19/12/2018, The Ao Failed To Discuss Or Consider The Same. The Matter Ought To Have Been Remanded Back For Fresh Adjudication To Allow Proper Analysis Of The Transactions. 2. Addition Without Specifying The Section The Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 1,49,05,289/- Made By The Ao Without Specifying The Section Under Which The Addition Was Made. The Non-Mention Of The Specific Section Renders The Assessment Order Bad In Law, As It Violates The Principles Of Natural Justice & Transparency In Taxation. 3. Failure To Discharge Onus Under Section 69A

natural justice and fair adjudication.” 3. Briefly stated the facts are that the assessee is an individual. For the AY 2011-12, he did not file his return of income. Based on AIR information, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) found that during the relevant AY 2011-12 the assessee has deposited the amount aggregating to Rs.1

RATANLAL C. BAFNA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

Accordingly. These assessee’s three appeals raising the above stated identical issues as partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.01 To 03/Pun/2016 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 To 2007-08

justice in light of Andaman Timber Industries V/s CCE (2015) 127 DTR 241(SC). He further referred to the searched party Shri Devichand Chhoriya’s search statement as well as his cross-examinations (latter one dated 11.12.2009) that he had already paid all the taxes regarding the forgoing three entries alleged to have been found in the seized documents

RATANLAL C. BAFNA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

Accordingly. These assessee’s three appeals raising the above stated identical issues as partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.01 To 03/Pun/2016 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 To 2007-08

justice in light of Andaman Timber Industries V/s CCE (2015) 127 DTR 241(SC). He further referred to the searched party Shri Devichand Chhoriya’s search statement as well as his cross-examinations (latter one dated 11.12.2009) that he had already paid all the taxes regarding the forgoing three entries alleged to have been found in the seized documents

RATANLAL C. BAFNA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

Accordingly. These assessee’s three appeals raising the above stated identical issues as partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.01 To 03/Pun/2016 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-06 To 2007-08

justice in light of Andaman Timber Industries V/s CCE (2015) 127 DTR 241(SC). He further referred to the searched party Shri Devichand Chhoriya’s search statement as well as his cross-examinations (latter one dated 11.12.2009) that he had already paid all the taxes regarding the forgoing three entries alleged to have been found in the seized documents

SACHIN SHANTILAL KHIWANSARA,BEED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2288/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sachin Shantilal Khiwansara, V The Income Tax Officer, Main Road, Shirur Kasar, S. Ward-1(5), Aurangabad. Shirur So., Beed, Beed – 413249. Pan: Bytpk1339N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Saurabh D.Khivansara Revenue By Smt Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commisioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2016-17 Dated 17.07.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. That On Facts & In Law, The Ex-Parte Order Of Ld. Cit Appeals, Nfac Is Opposed To Law & Against The Principles Of Natural Justice & Accordingly The Impugned Appellate Order Is Liable To Be Set Aside.

justice 4. That in making an addition of Rs. 1,03,86,725/- us 69A without considering withdrawals and the nature of business transactions, the procedure followed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, and the addition as made by the assessing authority as sustained by the CIT APPEALS is unjustified, arbitrary, and deserves to be deleted. 5. That

KISHOR DIGAMBAR PATIL,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(1),NASHIK, NASHIK

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 54 & 55/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kishor Digambar Patil, 03, Saras Apartment, Patil Lane 04, College Rd., Nashik – 422005 Pan: Aarpp2052J . . . . . . . अपऩलधर्थी / Appellant

justice and non-application of mind on the part of Ld. AO while dealing with imposition of penalty u/s 270A of the Act. 4. Both the parties laid their rival contentions and after hearing them at a length, we have perused the case records in the light of rule 18 of ITAT, Rules 1963 and freezed the following undisputed facts

KISHOR DIGAMBAR PATIL,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 54 & 55/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Kishor Digambar Patil, 03, Saras Apartment, Patil Lane 04, College Rd., Nashik – 422005 Pan: Aarpp2052J . . . . . . . अपऩलधर्थी / Appellant

justice and non-application of mind on the part of Ld. AO while dealing with imposition of penalty u/s 270A of the Act. 4. Both the parties laid their rival contentions and after hearing them at a length, we have perused the case records in the light of rule 18 of ITAT, Rules 1963 and freezed the following undisputed facts

RATANLAL C. BAFNA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.109 & 110/Pun/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Shri Ratanlal C. Bafna, Proprietor Of R.C. Bafna Silver Palace, 96, Subhash Chowk, Jalgaon, Pin-425 001, Pan : Aampb 3939K .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

reassessment proceedings by the Revenue Authorities u/s.147/148 of the Act. Thus, ground No. 2 and 3 raised in appeal by the assessee are dismissed. 5. The assessee in addition has also put forth before us another legal ground wherein it is asserted by the assessee that there has been gross violation of natural justice

RATANLAL C. BAFNA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.109 & 110/Pun/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Shri Ratanlal C. Bafna, Proprietor Of R.C. Bafna Silver Palace, 96, Subhash Chowk, Jalgaon, Pin-425 001, Pan : Aampb 3939K .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

reassessment proceedings by the Revenue Authorities u/s.147/148 of the Act. Thus, ground No. 2 and 3 raised in appeal by the assessee are dismissed. 5. The assessee in addition has also put forth before us another legal ground wherein it is asserted by the assessee that there has been gross violation of natural justice