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

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year and for which a prior notice under Section 148 would be required to be issued. Section 147 does not contemplate an eventuality which Section 153A or Section 153C contemplates, the basis of which is inter alia a search action under Section 132 being resorted as noted hereinabove. Thus

AYOKI FABRICON PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2155/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ayoki Fabricon Pvt. Ltd., 137 To 139, Akshay Complex, Dhole Patil Road, Pune. Pan : Aabca5780F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Dcit, Circle- 1(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak & Shri Nimit Gujarathi Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Kamat, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.12.2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Pune Dated 14.06.2016 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Additional Depreciation Of Rs.1,10,53,748/- U/S 32(1)(Iia) On New Plant & Machinery On The Ground That The Assessee Was Not Engaged In The Business Of Manufacture Or Production Of Any Article Or Thing. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring The Fact That – I) The Details Furnished To The Assessing Officer By The Assessee During The Assessment Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Were Same As Were Furnished During The Assessment Proceedings U/S 143(3) & Therefore.

u/s 147 of the Act validly. For this he relied on the contents of various paragraphs of the reassessment order. 9. On the issue of present reassessment proceedings as the product of “change of opinion”, ld. Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to the contents of page 82 of the Paper Book i.e. letter dated 17.01.2011 and submitted that

A.C.I.T ,WARDHA CIRCLE , WARDHA , WARDHA vs. M/S KAPIL SOLVEX PVT .LTD , YAVATMAL

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2009-10

u/s 147 of the Act inspite of the fact that it had requested the Assessing Officer vide letters dated 07.04.2014 and 22.08.2014. 12. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. IDBI Ltd. (2016) 76 taxmann.com 227 (Bom), he submitted that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the said decision

M/S KARIA BUILDERS ,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 14(3), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Karia Builders Ito, Ward 14(3), Pune 402, Konark Indrayu, Kondhwa, Vs. Pune – 411048 Pan: Aadfk5220B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket M Joshi Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-07-2025 O R D E R

147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 16.05.2023. Before completion of the assessment, a notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271D of the Act was issued to the assessee on 17.08.2022 which reads as under: 9 19. Thus, the penalty proceedings were initiated on 17.08.2022. We find the JCIT in the show cause notice for penalty u/s 271D of the Act issued

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SATARA CIRCLE,, SATARA vs. PRATAPGAD SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,, SATARA

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi

reassessment proceedings wherein the appellant was assessed u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Act disallowing the appellant's claim for depreciation

MAHATMA PHULE GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKAR PAT SANSTHA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. PCIT-1, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19 Mahatma Phule Gramin Bigarsheti Pcit-1, Pune Sahakar Pat Sanstha Vs. A/P Hattiwade, Ajara, Kolhapur – 416505 Pan: Aaaam2608K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None (Written Submission Filed) Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-01-2026 O R D E R

reassessment, Assessing Officer ultimately comes to conclude that no additions or modifications are warranted under those heads, it would not be entitled to make any additions in respect of other items forming part of original return. 7 10. Relying on various other decisions, it has been mentioned that the Assessing Officer has no power to make additions beyond reason

AYOKI FABRICON PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

147, which is relevant for our purpose, reads as under : “Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable

AYOKI FABRICON PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

147, which is relevant for our purpose, reads as under : “Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable

AYOKI FABRICON PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

147, which is relevant for our purpose, reads as under : “Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, PUNE, PUNE vs. THE SHETKARI SHIKSHAN MANDAL, PUNE

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

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

u/s 143(3)) is reopened within 4 years from the end of the assessment year, some of the rigors of section 147 is avoided. The relevant section as it stood in AY 2016-17 is reproduced below: 147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year

GOPAL EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD,,JALGAON vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2),, JALGAON

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita. No.1633/Pun/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09

147- If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year he "may, subject to the provisions of section 148 to 153, assess or reassess "such income" and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice, subsequently in the course

PATODIA FORGINGS AND GEARS LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE

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

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

reassessment on total income of Rs.10,53,56,890/- on 28.11.2019 u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act including therein addition of Rs.55,75,000/- being expenses claimed on account of loans on foreign currency transaction and translation. 5. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the reopening of assessment u/s 147

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS (I) PVT. LTD.,, RAIGAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

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

reassessment order are not disposed off by the Assessing Officer. III. The Appellant prays that the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and be quashed. Ground 2: without prejudice to Ground 1- Not following Rule of Consistency IV. erred in disallowing depreciation on Know-how, Patents, Trade-marks amounting to Rs.11

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS (I) PVT. LTD.,, RAIGAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

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

reassessment order are not disposed off by the Assessing Officer. III. The Appellant prays that the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and be quashed. Ground 2: without prejudice to Ground 1- Not following Rule of Consistency IV. erred in disallowing depreciation on Know-how, Patents, Trade-marks amounting to Rs.11

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

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

reassessment order are not disposed off by the Assessing Officer. III. The Appellant prays that the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and be quashed. Ground 2: without prejudice to Ground 1- Not following Rule of Consistency IV. erred in disallowing depreciation on Know-how, Patents, Trade-marks amounting to Rs.11

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

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

reassessment order are not disposed off by the Assessing Officer. III. The Appellant prays that the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and be quashed. Ground 2: without prejudice to Ground 1- Not following Rule of Consistency IV. erred in disallowing depreciation on Know-how, Patents, Trade-marks amounting to Rs.11

JOHNSON MATTHEY CHEMICALS INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,RAIGAD vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10 is

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

reassessment order are not disposed off by the Assessing Officer. III. The Appellant prays that the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is bad in law and be quashed. Ground 2: without prejudice to Ground 1- Not following Rule of Consistency IV. erred in disallowing depreciation on Know-how, Patents, Trade-marks amounting to Rs.11

JAIBHAGWAN BANARASIDAS JINDAL,JALNA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

147 enlists other conditions under which the section is applicable (deeming provision); which is when the income has been assessed but there has been under-assessment, the income has been assessed at too low a rate, excessive relief has been provided and/or excessive loss, depreciation allowance or any other allowance has been computed under the provisions

SHRI SHANTINATH BHAGWAN JAIN SHWETAMBAR MURTIPUJAK SANGH,PUNE vs. CIT, EXEMPTION,, PUNE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2 ITA No.203/PUN/2021, A.Y. 2010-11 2. It emerges at the outset that the CIT(E)’s impugned order exercising section 263 revision jurisdiction terms the corresponding assessment /reassessment herein dated 29-09-2017 as an erroneous one causing prejudice