RAJENDRA CHANDRAKANT CHINCHNIKAR,PUNE vs. CIT(A)-11, PUNE

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

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2019-20 Rajendra Chandrakant Chinchnikar Acit, Central Circle, 2165, B Ward, Koshti Galli, Vs. Kolhapur Mangalwar Peth, Pune – 416012 Pan: Acppc3559D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tanzil Padvekar Department By : Shri Milind Debaje, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 25-08-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-09-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of the assessee from 5th to 7th February, 2020 during which certain registers were impounded containing the undisclosed professional receipts according to which such undisclosed receipts for the year under consideration were Rs.49,64,120/-. When confronted the assessee admitted that the receipts contained in the said registers

SHRIKANT GAJANAN VYAVAHARE,KAMATWADE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.915 & 916/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shrikant Gajanan Vyavahare, The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.06, S.No.16/3/1, V Nashik. Samarth Bungla, Near S Modakeshwar Mandir, Modakeshwar Nagar, Kamatwade, Nashik – 422010. Pan: Aakpv1138N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Miss Abhilasha Sanjay Pawar – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 14/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Both Dated 15.02.2023, Emanating From Penalty Order Under Section 270A Of The Act Dated 19.01.2022 & 20.01.2022 For A.Y.2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. Since Issue Involved Is

133A of the Act in the case of Mr.Kishore Patil, who was instrumental in filing Returns of various individuals. The ld.DR vehemently relied on the order of ld.CIT(A) and Assessing Officer. The ld.DR submitted that the penalty has been levied for under reporting and not for mis- ITA Nos.915 & 916/PUN/2023 for A.Y’s.2017-18 & 18-19 Shrikant Gajanan Vyavahare

SHRIKANT GAJANAN VYAVAHARE,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.915 & 916/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shrikant Gajanan Vyavahare, The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.06, S.No.16/3/1, V Nashik. Samarth Bungla, Near S Modakeshwar Mandir, Modakeshwar Nagar, Kamatwade, Nashik – 422010. Pan: Aakpv1138N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Miss Abhilasha Sanjay Pawar – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 14/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Both Dated 15.02.2023, Emanating From Penalty Order Under Section 270A Of The Act Dated 19.01.2022 & 20.01.2022 For A.Y.2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. Since Issue Involved Is

133A of the Act in the case of Mr.Kishore Patil, who was instrumental in filing Returns of various individuals. The ld.DR vehemently relied on the order of ld.CIT(A) and Assessing Officer. The ld.DR submitted that the penalty has been levied for under reporting and not for mis- ITA Nos.915 & 916/PUN/2023 for A.Y’s.2017-18 & 18-19 Shrikant Gajanan Vyavahare

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 12, PUNE vs. VARUN JAIN, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamorecross Objection No.14/Pun/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2720/Pun/2024) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Varun Jain, The Acit, P-024, Forest County, Kharadi, V Circle-12, Pune. Pune – 411014. S. Maharashtra. Pan:Aexpj0171J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2720/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Acit, Varun Jain, Circle-12, Pune. Vs. P-024, Forest County, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Maharashtra. Pan:Aexpj0171J Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Fenil Bhatt – Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Abhinay Kumbhar - Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under C.O.No.14/Pun/2025 [A] & Ita No.2720/Pun/2024 [R]

133A of the Income tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") on JM Finance Asset Management Ltd by DDIT Unit 3(1), Mumbai. The Appellant humbly prays that reopening u/s. 147 of the Act and the reassessment order dated March 19, 2024 under section

ITO, NASHIK vs. ANKIT NARESH TULSIAN, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

sections": [ "10(38)", "147", "148", "143(3)", "69A", "115BBE", "131", "133A", "132", "142(3)" ], "issues": "Whether reassessment proceedings initiated on a change

ROYAL SWAN CHARITABLE MINORITY TRUST,NANDED vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NANDED

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all the three AYs 2012-13,

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

reassessment is justified. Ground Nos. 2 and 6 are therefore rejected. 14.3 Ground No. 4 relates to implication of pre and post amended law with reference to section 133A

ROYAL SWAN CHARITABLE MINORITY TRUST,NANDED vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NANDED

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all the three AYs 2012-13,

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

reassessment is justified. Ground Nos. 2 and 6 are therefore rejected. 14.3 Ground No. 4 relates to implication of pre and post amended law with reference to section 133A

ROYAL SWAN CHARITABLE MINORITY TRUST,NANDED vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NANDED

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all the three AYs 2012-13,

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

reassessment is justified. Ground Nos. 2 and 6 are therefore rejected. 14.3 Ground No. 4 relates to implication of pre and post amended law with reference to section 133A

ANIL BABANLAL AGRAWAL,,JALGAON vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

reassessment order is passed in utter disregard and violation of the principles of natural justice the same is bad in law and null and void and the learned C.I.T.[A] ought to have annulled the same. It is requested that the impugned assessment order may please be annulled. 4. The learned C.I.T.[A] has grossly erred in confirming the various

LATE SHRI BABANLAL B AGARWAL,,JALGAON vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, JALGAON

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

reassessment order is passed in utter disregard and violation of the principles of natural justice the same is bad in law and null and void and the learned C.I.T.[A] ought to have annulled the same. It is requested that the impugned assessment order may please be annulled. 4. The learned C.I.T.[A] has grossly erred in confirming the various

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SHRI DATTATRAYA LAXMAN KHANDGE,, PUNE

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1971/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07

133A of the Act were carried out at the residential premises of Shri Ganesh Khandge on 12.02.2013. During the course of search proceedings, it was found that Shri Vasant Laxman Khandge i.e. assessee before us, father of Shri Ganesh Khandge, along with his brother Shri Dattatreya Laxman Khandge had sold land situated at Talegaon to Namrata Developers. The transaction related

V.L. KHANDGE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1971/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07

133A of the Act were carried out at the residential premises of Shri Ganesh Khandge on 12.02.2013. During the course of search proceedings, it was found that Shri Vasant Laxman Khandge i.e. assessee before us, father of Shri Ganesh Khandge, along with his brother Shri Dattatreya Laxman Khandge had sold land situated at Talegaon to Namrata Developers. The transaction related

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SHRI VASANTRAO LAXMAN KHANDGE,, PUNE

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1971/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07

133A of the Act were carried out at the residential premises of Shri Ganesh Khandge on 12.02.2013. During the course of search proceedings, it was found that Shri Vasant Laxman Khandge i.e. assessee before us, father of Shri Ganesh Khandge, along with his brother Shri Dattatreya Laxman Khandge had sold land situated at Talegaon to Namrata Developers. The transaction related

D.L. KHANDGE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1971/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07

133A of the Act were carried out at the residential premises of Shri Ganesh Khandge on 12.02.2013. During the course of search proceedings, it was found that Shri Vasant Laxman Khandge i.e. assessee before us, father of Shri Ganesh Khandge, along with his brother Shri Dattatreya Laxman Khandge had sold land situated at Talegaon to Namrata Developers. The transaction related

LATE SHRI BABANLAL BHIKULAL AGRAWAL,,JALGAON vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.19/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04 Late Shri Babanlal Bhikulal Agrawal, Through L/H Shri Anil Babanlal Agrawal, 84-85, Main Road, Raver, Dist. Jalgaon-425508 .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aabha7676P बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-2(2), ……""यथ" / Respondent Jalgaon. Assessee By : Shri Sunil Ganoo Revenue By : Shri Vijay Netke सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2020 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12.02.2020 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-2, Nashik Dated 28.10.2014 For The Assessment Year 2003-04. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1] The Ld.Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming Penalty Imposed Of Rs. 10,12,126/- U/S.271(1)(C) On Account Of Alleged Addition Made At Rs.32,13,100/(Inclusive Of Enhanced Income), Without Establishing Any Alleged Facts/Thing & Bringing Any Corroborative Evidence On Record, Even In Penalty Proceedings & Hence, Penalty Be Deleted 2] On The Facts & In The Prevailing Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Confirming The Penalty U/S.271(1)(C) Of The I T Act, Without Rebutting Any Contention Of The Appellant Filed Before Him. Therefore

133A of the Act were carried out at the residential premises of Shri Ganesh Khandge on 12.02.2013. During the course of search proceedings, it was found that Shri Vasant Laxman Khandge i.e. assessee before us, father of Shri Ganesh Khandge, along with his brother Shri Dattatreya Laxman Khandge had sold land situated at Talegaon to Namrata Developers. The transaction related

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

reassessment is bad in law being not validly initiated. 8. Learned CIT [A] has erred in fact and in law in following decision of Pune ITAT in the case of Ninaidevi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, as well as in the case of Everest Education society because in both these cases trust did not file proper details and filed

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

reassessment is bad in law being not validly initiated. 8. Learned CIT [A] has erred in fact and in law in following decision of Pune ITAT in the case of Ninaidevi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, as well as in the case of Everest Education society because in both these cases trust did not file proper details and filed

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

reassessment is bad in law being not validly initiated. 8. Learned CIT [A] has erred in fact and in law in following decision of Pune ITAT in the case of Ninaidevi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, as well as in the case of Everest Education society because in both these cases trust did not file proper details and filed

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

reassessment is\nmade merely on the basis of change of opinion having similar set of\nfacts and such an attempt is not sustainable and ergo the\nreassessment is bad in law being not validly initiated.\n8. Learned_CIT [A] has erred in fact and in law in following\ndecision of Pune ITAT in the case of Ninaidevi Shikshan Prasarak\nMandal