SATISH VISHNU THOMBARE, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR vs. VARSHA PRAFULLA ZENDE, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1656/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Satish Vishnu Thombare, Varsha Prafulla Zende, Income Tax Officer, Prop Of Bleach Chem Enterprises, Ward-1, Ahmednagar Vs. Industrial Estate, Shrirampur, Maharashtra-413709 Pan : Aabpz2541C अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Miss Shivani Shah (Virtual) Department By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 06-08-2025 Date Of 29-10-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order

business of supply of chemicals. For AY 2010-11, the assessee had filed her original return of income on 17.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs.8,95,759/-. A search and seizure action u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) was conducted on 02.07.2013 in the case of one, Shri Anand Kumar Sharma. The Ld. Assessing Officer

TEJAS SHIVAJI ADSUL,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

business of agriculture. For A.Y. 2018- 19, the assessee did not file his return of income. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) by issue of notice u/s 148 on account of the sale of immovable property worth Rs. 80,00,000/- In response to the notice u/s

DCIT CIRCLE 1 NASHIK, NASHIK vs. SHREE SAI PROPERTIES, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

business income for the year under consideration and added back to the total income of the assessee. Also penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is initiated separately for concealment of income. [Addition Rs.7,93,62,371/-] 10. After going through the submissions and above mentioned discussion, the total assessed income of the assessee

ASHOK DHANRAJ CHORDIA ,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-1, PUNE

reassess the income of the other person in accordance\nwith the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied\nthat the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned\nhave a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other\nperson for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year\nrelevant to the previous

MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

reassess such income and also any\nother income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to\nhis notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under section 147 of the\nAct\n28.1 The first proviso to section 147 is important. As per this proviso, where an\nassessment under subsection (3) of section 143 or section 147

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

reassess such income and also any\nother income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to\nhis notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under section 147 of the\nAct\n28.1 The first proviso to section 147 is important. As per this proviso, where an\nassessment under subsection (3) of section 143 or section 147

M/S MANILAL P. SAVLA & COMPANY,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 5, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

147 of the Act and obtaining the requisite\napproval, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO\") issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on\n31.03.2021 which was duly served upon the assessee electronically. The\nassessee was asked to file its return of income for AY 2017-18 in the said\nnotice issued u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee was then issued

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PVT LTD, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

business of civil contractors and development of infrastructure projects on BOT basis through various Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) entities formed for the execution of such projects as per the conditions of the respective authorities. In this case, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the IT Act was conducted on 27.10.2010, the assessee filed its return of income u/s

RAJDEEP BUILDCOM PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

business of civil contractors and development of infrastructure projects on BOT basis through various Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) entities formed for the execution of such projects as per the conditions of the respective authorities. In this case, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the IT Act was conducted on 27.10.2010, the assessee filed its return of income u/s

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PRIVAT LIMITED, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

business of civil contractors and development of infrastructure projects on BOT basis through various Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) entities formed for the execution of such projects as per the conditions of the respective authorities. In this case, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the IT Act was conducted on 27.10.2010, the assessee filed its return of income u/s

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

business income, was enacted and came into force by the Finance Act, 2022-23, the assessee withdrew its claim of deduction of health and education cess in the subject AY 2020-21 amounting to Rs.5,34,01,866/- (pages 187 and 235 of the paper book refers). 5.1 Referring to the amended provisions inserted with Finance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. CLARION TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

business of computer Software Development and providing 3 ITA Nos.331 & 421/PUN/2016, A.Y. 2009-10 IT-enabled Services. The assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.1,05,000/- after claiming deduction of Rs.7,39,07,383/- u/s. 10B of the Act. Under scrutiny, the AO finalized the assessment by allowing deduction u/s

CLARION TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

business of computer Software Development and providing 3 ITA Nos.331 & 421/PUN/2016, A.Y. 2009-10 IT-enabled Services. The assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.1,05,000/- after claiming deduction of Rs.7,39,07,383/- u/s. 10B of the Act. Under scrutiny, the AO finalized the assessment by allowing deduction u/s

AADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

business Therefore, the loan received by the assessee company M/s Aadhunik Infrastructure pvt Ltd is bogus and just an accommodation entry provided by the Cambridge finacials pvt ltd. Therefore, the amount of Rs 50,00,000/- shown in the books of the assessee as loan is treated as bogus and added back to the total income of the assessee u/s

ASHOK VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,JALGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, JALGAON, JALGAON

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

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

business worthwhile to justify the sharp rise in market price of shares. The sharp rise in the market price of this entity is not supported by financial fundamentals of the company. Both purchase and sale of the shares are concentrated within few persons/entities. The exit providers do not have creditworthiness. They are either non-filers or have filed nominal return

MR. CHITTARANJAN TRIMBAK GAIKWAD,PUNE vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

business profit inter-alia contending that "the AR attended and stated that he has no objection for proposed addition of Rs. 8,29,550/-". The relevant para 4 of the assessment order pertaining to such addition of Rs. 8,29,550/- is reproduced as below: “4. In response to the notice issued, Shri A. M. Hippargekar, Tax Consultant

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

business and residential premises of Mantri Group of Jalna on 02.05.2013 wherein the assessee was also covered. Accordingly assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act was completed on 22.03.2016 by determining the total income at Rs.16,79,230/- and agricultural income at Rs.54,990/- against the returned income of Rs.15,08,324/-. 4. Subsequently information was received from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

business and residential premises of Mantri Group of Jalna on 02.05.2013 wherein the assessee was also covered. Accordingly assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act was completed on 22.03.2016 by determining the total income at Rs.16,79,230/- and agricultural income at Rs.54,990/- against the returned income of Rs.15,08,324/-. 4. Subsequently information was received from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

business and residential premises of Mantri Group of Jalna on 02.05.2013 wherein the assessee was also covered. Accordingly assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act was completed on 22.03.2016 by determining the total income at Rs.16,79,230/- and agricultural income at Rs.54,990/- against the returned income of Rs.15,08,324/-. 4. Subsequently information was received from