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

147 accepting returned income of Rs.24,70,490/-. The AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 270A for under reporting of income as a consequence of 'Mis reporting of income' and vide order u/s 270A dated 11.09.2023 imposed penalty at 200% i.e., 9,14,842/-. 7.3 During appeal proceedings, submissions made by the appellant against levy of penalty can be summarised

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

147 of the Act on 22/01/2014 accepting such income declared in the Revised Return of Income filed. The penalty therefore so levied by the Assessing Officer in the penalty order passed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act on 30/07/2014 was arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law and therefore, in the humbly opinion of the appellant, the same the penalty levied

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

u/s. 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 2. In the instant appeal, Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CTT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.7,93,62,371/- and Rs.86,63,700/- made by the AO on account of on money receipt

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

u/s 37 of the Act was considered under reported is in consequence of misreporting of income under section 270A(2) rws 270(9) of the Act. 5.2 For the purpose of evaluating the correctness of rival submissions addressed we deem it apposite to extract section 270A & 270AA of the Act herein below: 270A. Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting

SOMNATH RAMDAS JADHAV,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR

Accordingly, the appeal in ITA No.1092/PUN/2025 for A.Y. 2013-14 involving the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

reassessment proceedings and quash the assessment order dated 21.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2013-14. Thus, the ground no.4 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. Since the assessee succeeds on the legal ground, the grounds challenging on the merit of the issue becomes academic in nature and are not being adjudicated

SOMNATH RAMDAS JADHAV,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

Accordingly, the appeal in ITA No.1092/PUN/2025 for A.Y. 2013-14 involving the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

reassessment proceedings and quash the assessment order dated 21.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2013-14. Thus, the ground no.4 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. Since the assessee succeeds on the legal ground, the grounds challenging on the merit of the issue becomes academic in nature and are not being adjudicated

SOMNATH RAMDAS JADHAV,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO WARD2, AHMEDNAGAR

Accordingly, the appeal in ITA No.1092/PUN/2025 for A.Y. 2013-14 involving the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

reassessment proceedings and quash the assessment order dated 21.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2013-14. Thus, the ground no.4 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. Since the assessee succeeds on the legal ground, the grounds challenging on the merit of the issue becomes academic in nature and are not being adjudicated

SOMNATH RAMDAS JADHAV,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

Accordingly, the appeal in ITA No.1092/PUN/2025 for A.Y. 2013-14 involving the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

reassessment proceedings and quash the assessment order dated 21.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2013-14. Thus, the ground no.4 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. Since the assessee succeeds on the legal ground, the grounds challenging on the merit of the issue becomes academic in nature and are not being adjudicated

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

Penalty per se, is applicable for taxation u/s 115BBC As such, forming 'reasons' for one phenomenon, and taxing the same for some different phenomenon, is completely conflicting. Learned AO is incorrect is starting the 147 proceedings for S. 68, continuing the same for S. 68; and concluding the matter for S. 115BBC. As a sequel, it follows, the taxation thrusted

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

Penalty per se, is applicable for taxation u/s 115BBC As such, forming 'reasons' for one phenomenon, and taxing the same for some different phenomenon, is completely conflicting. Learned AO is incorrect is starting the 147 proceedings for S. 68, continuing the same for S. 68; and concluding the matter for S. 115BBC. As a sequel, it follows, the taxation thrusted

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

Penalty per se, is applicable for taxation u/s 115BBC As such, forming 'reasons' for one phenomenon, and taxing the same for some different phenomenon, is completely conflicting. Learned AO is incorrect is starting the 147 proceedings for S. 68, continuing the same for S. 68; and concluding the matter for S. 115BBC. As a sequel, it follows, the taxation thrusted

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

Penalty u/s\n271(1)(c) of Income-tax Act, 1961 initiated separately for concealment of\nincome.\"\n5.\nThe assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A) on 11.02.2020. In the meantime,\nthe Ld. PCIT examined the records and noted that the order passed by the\nAssessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. He noted\nthat during

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

Penalty u/s\n271(1)(c) of Income-tax Act, 1961 initiated separately for concealment of\nincome.\"\n5.\nThe assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A) on 11.02.2020. In the meantime,\nthe Ld. PCIT examined the records and noted that the order passed by the\nAssessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. He noted\nthat during

ADVIK HI TECH PVT LTD,PUNE vs. DY.COMM..OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE 8, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

reassessment order u/s 147 of the Act in comparison to the income declared by the appellant in the return u/s 139(1) of the Act. The appellant contended that the return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act was neither processed u/s 143(1) nor scrutinized u/s 143(3) in earlier occasion. In support of this, the appellant 5 ITA.No

SOMNATH RAMDAS JADHAV,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

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

reassessment proceedings\nand quash the assessment order dated 21.03.2022 passed u/s 147\nr.w.s.143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2013-14. Thus, the\nground no.4 raised by the assessee is allowed.\n12. Since the assessee succeeds on the legal ground, the grounds\nchallenging on the merit of the issue becomes academic in nature\nand are not being adjudicated

SOMNATH RAMDAS JADHAV,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR

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

reassessment proceedings\nand quash the assessment order dated 21.03.2022 passed u/s 147\nr.w.s.143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2013-14. Thus, the\nground no.4 raised by the assessee is allowed.\n12. Since the assessee succeeds on the legal ground, the grounds\nchallenging on the merit of the issue becomes academic in nature\nand are not being adjudicated

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1,AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR vs. NARENDRA SAMPATLAL BAFNA, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

147 was not valid and the proper course of action that should have been taken by the Assessing Officer was u/s 153C as the provisions of section 153C of the Act are clearly applicable to the facts of the case. We, therefore, uphold the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC on the issue of validity of re-assessment proceedings

RAMESHWAR RAMVILAS SARDA ,PUNE vs. ITO 14(3), PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

u/s 271D dated 03/01/2023. The grounds raised are adjudicated as under: The ground Nos. 1 and 3 are interconnected to each other as such, they are adjudicated together as under: Ground No.1: On the basis of fact and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. AO erred in levying penalty under section 271D for alleged violation of Section

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

Penalty per se, is applicable for taxation u/s\n115BBC\nAs such, forming 'reasons' for one phenomenon, and taxing\nthe same for some different phenomenon, is completely\nconflicting. Learned AO is incorrect is starting the 147\nproceedings for S. 68, continuing the same for S. 68; and\nconcluding the matter for S. 115BBC. As a sequel, it follows,\nthe taxation thrusted