M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

u/s. 1 13/PUN/2024 2014-15 14.11.2023 Rs.8,96,41,183/- 143(3) r.w.s.147 2 14/PUN/2024 2015-16 14.11.2023 Rs.18,04,78,120/- 143(3) 3 15/PUN/2024 2016-17 14.11.2023 Rs.6,65,05,360/- 143(3) 4 16/PUN/2024 2017-18 14.11.2023 Rs.9,25,05,871/- 143(3) 5 17/PUN/2024 2018-19 14.11.2023 Rs.3,79,79,669/- 143(3) r.w.s.143

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

u/s. 1 13/PUN/2024 2014-15 14.11.2023 Rs.8,96,41,183/- 143(3) r.w.s.147 2 14/PUN/2024 2015-16 14.11.2023 Rs.18,04,78,120/- 143(3) 3 15/PUN/2024 2016-17 14.11.2023 Rs.6,65,05,360/- 143(3) 4 16/PUN/2024 2017-18 14.11.2023 Rs.9,25,05,871/- 143(3) 5 17/PUN/2024 2018-19 14.11.2023 Rs.3,79,79,669/- 143(3) r.w.s.143

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

147 of the Act which was\nreopened based on the change on opinion without bringing any fresh\ntangible material on record and thereby further erred in overlooking\nthe fact that the issue of taxation of share premium was duly\nexamined during the course of original assessment proceedings and\nthus, the said reassessment order deserves to be quashed and set\naside

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

Section 80IA/IB of the Act.\nIt must follow that there is due application of mind by the Assessing\nOfficer to the issue raised.\nThe above observations apply on all fours to this Petition, so far as the\nRevenue's submission of no change of opinion is concerned.\n11. The further submission of Mr. Walve that in the absence

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

Section 80IA/IB of the Act.\nIt must follow that there is due application of mind by the Assessing\nOfficer to the issue raised.\nThe above observations apply on all fours to this Petition, so far as the\nRevenue's submission of no change of opinion is concerned.\n11. The further submission of Mr. Walve that in the absence

SURESH VITTHALRAO BARGE,BEED vs. WARD-1(5), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed as per the

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

147 of the Act dated 26.12.2018 by the ITO, Ward-1(2), Beed, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On facts and circumstances of case and in law, the learned CIT(A) (NFAC) erred in not quashing the entire / 2 ITA.No.1398/PUN./2025 (Suresh Vitthalrao Barge) whole