SHRIKANT CHANDRAKANT LOKHANDE,LATUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, LATUR, LATUR

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2696/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16

147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, violates the principles of natural justice. Subsequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee merely on the technical issue and consequently, the Appellant was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present his case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Sahara India (Firm

ARUNA SINGH ,THANE vs. ITO WARD 3(1), KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

147, the assessment so made shall be\nregarded as a regular assessment for the purposes of this section. 5\nExplanation 3.- In Explanation 1 and in sub- section (3),\" tax on the total\nincome determined under sub- section (1) of section 143\" shall not include the\nadditional income-tax, if any, payable under section 143.]\"\nSection 208\n\"208. Conditions

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

b) of sub-section (2) of section 249, grant immunity from imposition of penalty under section 270A and initiation of proceedings under section 276C or section 286CC, where the proceedings for penalty under section 270A has not been initiated under the circumstances referred to in sub-section (9) of the said section 270A. (4) The Assessing Officer shall, within

SWAMINATH BABURAO PATIL,SOLAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3) SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.832/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Swaminath Baburao Patil, V The Income Tax Officer, C37, Siddheshwar Market S Ward-2(3), Solapur. Yard, Hyderabad Road, Solapur – 431005. Maharashtra. Pan: Akwpp4321P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Girish Ladda Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule (Through Virtual Hearing) – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2014-15 Dated 27.01.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Act, Dated 19.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

b) on 10/06/2022, so the AO was having 6 days from this date to issue notice u/s 148 under new regime which expired on 16/06/2022 2) Non issuance of Notice u/s 143(2) On the facts of the case and in law, the reassessment order passed u/s 147 may please be quashed being passed without issue of statutory Notice u/s

MRINALINI JAYANT PURANIK,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20 Mrinalini Jayant Puranik Ito, Ward 2(2), Pune Flat 14, Khagol Coop Society, Vs. S.No.38/1, Panchavati, Pashan, Pune – 411008 Pan: Almpp5163E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Kulkarni Department By : Shri A D Kulkarni Date Of Hearing : 26-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

147, as the case may be, has been paid within the period specified in such notice of demand; and (b) no appeal against the order referred to in clause (a) has been filed. (2) An application referred to in sub-section (1) shall be made within one month from the end of the month in which the order referred

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

b) Amount difference: From perusal of 2nd para on page-1 and last para on Page-2 of the "reasons" reveal an alleged LTCG amount of Rs.1,60,30,716 which has escaped assessment. As against, the 2nd last para of the 1st page of the two pages "reasons" of reassessment, relates to the exempt LTCG of Rs.1

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

b) Amount difference: From perusal of 2nd para on page-1 and last para on Page-2 of the "reasons" reveal an alleged LTCG amount of Rs.1,60,30,716 which has escaped assessment. As against, the 2nd last para of the 1st page of the two pages "reasons" of reassessment, relates to the exempt LTCG of Rs.1

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

b) Amount difference: From perusal of 2nd para on page-1 and last para on Page-2 of the "reasons" reveal an alleged LTCG amount of Rs.1,60,30,716 which has escaped assessment. As against, the 2nd last para of the 1st page of the two pages "reasons" of reassessment, relates to the exempt LTCG of Rs.1

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

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

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

b) Amount difference: From perusal of 2nd para on page-1 and last para on Page-2 of the "reasons" reveal an alleged LTCG amount of Rs.1,60,30,716 which has escaped assessment. As against, the 2nd last para of the 1st page of the two pages "reasons" of reassessment, relates to the exempt LTCG of Rs.1

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

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

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

b) Amount difference: From perusal of 2nd para on page-1 and last para on Page-2 of the "reasons" reveal an alleged LTCG amount of Rs.1,60,30,716 which has escaped assessment. As against, the 2nd last para of the 1st page of the two pages "reasons" of reassessment, relates to the exempt LTCG of Rs.1

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

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

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

b) Amount difference: From perusal of 2nd para on page-1 and last para on Page-2 of the "reasons" reveal an alleged LTCG amount of Rs.1,60,30,716 which has escaped assessment. As against, the 2nd last para of the 1st page of the two pages "reasons" of reassessment, relates to the exempt LTCG of Rs.1

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

b) Amount difference: From perusal of 2nd para on page-1 and last para on Page-2 of the "reasons" reveal an alleged LTCG amount of Rs.1,60,30,716 which has escaped assessment. As against, the 2nd last para of the 1st page of the two pages "reasons" of reassessment, relates to the exempt LTCG of Rs.1

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ASHISH OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

B Phadke\nShri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR\nDate of hearing\n17-06-2025\nDate of pronouncement\n17-07-2025\nORDER\nPER BENCH:\nThe above batch of 8 appeals filed by the Revenue in case of four different\nassessees for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively are directed\nagainst the separate orders dated 29.11.2023 of the Ld.CIT(A), Pune

SHAHBAZ MOHAMMED SHAFEEQUE,MALEGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, MALEGAON

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2291/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shahbaz Mohammed V The Income Tax Officer, Shafeeque, S. Ward-1, Malegaon. House No.904, Lane No.2, Malegaon City S.O., Malegaon, Nashik, Malegaon – 423203. Maharashtra. Pan: Cfppm6844A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) 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.2015-16 Dated 28.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

147 r.w.s 144 of the Act on 23/05/2023 by the AO which was served electronically (on email) on the same day. Accordingly, this appeal is delayed by 126 days for which the assessee has failed to submit sufficient cause for delay as per section 249(3) of the Act. Therefore, I am satisfied that the appellant 3 ITA No.2291/PUN/2025

NAVJYOTI FARMING PRIVATE LIMITED,BELAPUR vs. ITO, WARD -3 , PANVEL

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13

B-426, NBC Complex, Plot No.43, Vs. Sector-11 CBD, Belapur, Navi Mumbai – 400614 PAN: AACCN2419H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar Department by : Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 02-12-2024 Date of pronouncement : 30-12-2024 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed

GULAMAHEMAD HAMIDULLA KHAN,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 14(3), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

reassessment proceeding under the new provisions of section 147 as inserted by finance act 2021, on the basis of information gathered during the search conducted on M/s Renukamata Multistate Urban Co-operative Credit Society, therefore the action is illegal as the proceedings ought to have been initiated u/s 153C, therefore consequential order passed is bad in law and deserves

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

4. The A.O. did not accept respondent's claim of long term capital gain\nand added the same in respondent's income under Section 68 of the Act.\nWhile allowing the appeal filed by respondent, the CIT[A] deleted the\naddition made under Section 68 of the Act. The CIT[A] has observed that\nthe A.O. himself has stated that

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

4. The A.O. did not accept respondent's claim of long term capital gain\nand added the same in respondent's income under Section 68 of the Act.\nWhile allowing the appeal filed by respondent, the CIT[A] deleted the\naddition made under Section 68 of the Act. The CIT[A] has observed that\nthe A.O. himself has stated that

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

4. The A.O. did not accept respondent's claim of long term capital gain\nand added the same in respondent's income under Section 68 of the Act.\nWhile allowing the appeal filed by respondent, the CIT[A] deleted the\naddition made under Section 68 of the Act. The CIT[A] has observed that\nthe A.O. himself has stated that