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

u/s 147 of\nthe Act, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court accepted the contention of the petitioner\nand quashed the re-assessment proceedings by observing as under:\n“12. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance, we\nhave perused the record. At the outset, we may observe that the (2023) 149\ntaxmann.com

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 270A of the Act. i. G R Infraprojects Limited (AY2020-21) (TS-17-HC-2024(RAJ) Dated 02.01.2024; ii. Global Coal and Mining Pvt. Ltd. (AY 2020-21) ITA No. 2682/Del/2024, dated 18.03.2025; iii. IIFL Samasta Finance Limited (AY 2020-21) ITA No. 1054/Bang/2024, dated 27.09.2024. 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly supported the order

SUBHASH RUNWAL,BIBWEWADI, PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(4) PUNE, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13 Subhash Runwal 204, Solitari-5, Nr. Kalyan Bhel, Bibwewadi Rd., Pune-411037. Pan: Adbpr7670R. . . . . . . . Appellant

69 and u/s 69A were made by invoking explanation 3 to section 147 of the Act. Therefore in adjudicating the legal issue under challenge, we have to deal with relevant fraction of provisions of section 139, section 147, and 149 of the Act. 8. In terms of section 139(1)(b) of the Act, a person being other than company

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

reassessment proceedings when admittedly conditions specified u/s 147 of the ITA, 1961 for valid initiation were not satisfied in as much as all the facts were truly and fully disclosed in the original assessment proceedings and order was passed after due verification. As such, the addition was only the result of a change in opinion and the action

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1,AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR vs. ATUL ASHOK PARAKH, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee both are dismissed

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

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, hence the ground no. 2 of the appeal is dismissed.” 8. On the issue of addition u/s 69 of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC accepted the explanation offered by the assessee before him and deleted the addition after recording his observations and findings as under : “6.3 It is apparent from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR vs. ATUL ASHOK PARAKH, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee both are dismissed

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

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act, hence the ground nos. 2(a) to 2(e) and 4 of the appeal are treated as dismissed.” 8. On the issue of addition u/s 69 of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC accepted the explanation offered by the assessee before him and deleted the addition after recording his observations and findings

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(5), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD, MAHARASHTRA vs. ROYAL ESTATES, AURANGABAD, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, the appeals of Revenue for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

reassessment can be issued u/s. 148. Even after the insertion of section 142A there is no amendment in the language of section 147. Therefore, he condition prescribed u/s. 147 for reopening of assessment still exists.” 18. In our view, the Ld. CIT(A) has validly found substance in the plea of the assessee that the Ld. AO cannot make

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), AURANGABAD., AURANGABAD, MAHARASHTRA vs. ROYAL ESTATES, AURANGABAD, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, the appeals of Revenue for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

reassessment can be issued u/s. 148. Even after the insertion of section 142A there is no amendment in the language of section 147. Therefore, he condition prescribed u/s. 147 for reopening of assessment still exists.” 18. In our view, the Ld. CIT(A) has validly found substance in the plea of the assessee that the Ld. AO cannot make

ATUL VIJAY MADAN ,NASHIK vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -1, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1529/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Atul Vijay Madan, V The Dcit, 2 Pooja Apartment, Behind S Circle-1, Nashik. Karwa Mangal Karyalay, Sharanpur Road, Nashik-422002. Maharashtra. Pan: Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket M Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde– Dr Date Of Hearing 23/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 13.05.2024 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.45,00,000 Made By The A.O. U/S 69 Towards Alleged Unexplained Loan

69 of the Act. Accordingly amount of Rs.45,00,000/- is added to the total Income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act are initiated for concealment of income.” 5. During the assessment proceedings, assessee has submitted a ledger account which shows Opening Balance of Rs.56 lakhs loan given to Mr.Ramzan Kokani

DATTAPRASAD RADHAKISAN REVGADE,HIVARGAON vs. ITO WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra, Judicialmember & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1897/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dattaprasad Radhakisan V The Income Tax Officer, Revgade, S Ward-2, Ahmednagar. At Hivargaon Post Dongargaon, Tal Aklole, Ahmednagar – 422609. Pan: Cddpr8213C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Piyush Bafna – Ar Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This 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 A.Y.2018-19 Dated 23.06.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

reassessment proceedings initiated pursuant to such defective notice are liable to be quashed. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to other grounds, the assessment order passed under section 147 r.ws 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and void 3 ITA No.1897/PUN/2025 [A] ab initio

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-7, PUNE vs. PAN INTERNATIONAL, PUNE

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.175/Pun/2020 & Co No. 23/Pun/2022 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-2009 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-7, Pune . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Pan International, 347, Afl House, Off Dhole Patil Rd, Behind Hotel Meru, Pune – 411 001 . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Pan: Aabfp4234F & Cross Objector द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Sharad Vaze Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 09/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 09/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Revenue Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 06/11/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] Quashing The Order Of Assessment Dt. 10/03/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(2), Pune[For Short “Ao”] For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2008-09 On Technical-Cum-Legal Ground.

69,60,093/- by disallowing certain expenses u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non- deduction of taxes therefrom and reassessed the taxable income u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at ₹2,73,20,830/-. 3.3 Aggrieved thereby the assessee challenged the addition on legal as well meritare grounds before the first appellate authority [for short

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

u/s 68, where the assessee company has failed. genuineness of its shareholders to show genuineness of its shareholders 6 Navodaya Castle (P.) Ltd. Vs 69 to 70 SLP dismissed against High Court CIT [2015] 56 taxmann.com ruling that certificate of incorporation, 18 (SC) PAN etc., are not sufficient for purpose of identification of subscriber company when there is material

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 12, PUNE vs. VARUN JAIN, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamorecross Objection No.14/Pun/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2720/Pun/2024) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Varun Jain, The Acit, P-024, Forest County, Kharadi, V Circle-12, Pune. Pune – 411014. S. Maharashtra. Pan:Aexpj0171J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2720/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Acit, Varun Jain, Circle-12, Pune. Vs. P-024, Forest County, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Maharashtra. Pan:Aexpj0171J Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Fenil Bhatt – Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Abhinay Kumbhar - Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under C.O.No.14/Pun/2025 [A] & Ita No.2720/Pun/2024 [R]

u/s. 147 of the Act and the reassessment order dated March 19, 2024 under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act ("reassessment order") are bad-in-law on account of failure to satisfy jurisdictional requirements under section 147 to 151A of the Act. Therefore, the reassessment order must be quashed. The Appellant craves leave to amend, alter, modify

SACHIN NAGRAJ CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ITO, PUNE

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

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

u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Act. 4. The assessee challenged the ex-parte order before the Ld. CIT(A). Although the appeal was filed late by 14 days, the Ld. CIT(A) condoned the delay and decided the appeal ex-parte for non-compliance of notices of hearing dismissing the appeal of the assessee

BABASAHEB SAHEBARAV JAGDALE,MASANARWADI LINGALI DAUND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 14(5), AAYAKAR SADAN BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK GULTEKDI

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

Bench: CIT(A) as per clause (b) Sec 246A of the IT Act, 1961. The Learned CIT(A) further erred to hold that Appellant should have filed Appeal to ITAT.

147 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act, 1961 is bad in law, illegal and not tenable on various grounds: a. The proceedings have been initiated, order u/s 148A(d) and notice u/s 148A(b) and 148 have been issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not by Faceless Assessing Officer as required by section 151A of IT Act, 1961 and CBDT

JAYDEV MAHADEV ARYA,LATUR vs. ITO WARD 1, LATUR, LATUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 147 is upheld and ground of appeal no.1 to 6 are dismissed.” 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition made by the learned AO vide his assessment order passed u/s 147 r.ws

JAYDEV MAHADEV ARYA,LATUR vs. ITO WARD 1, LATUR, LATUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

section 147 is upheld and ground of appeal no.1 to 6 are dismissed.” 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition made by the learned AO vide his assessment order passed u/s 147 r.ws

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI MANSUKH T. TIMBADIA,, RAIGAD

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

147 of the Act vide order dt:18-03-2016. The CIT(A) considering 40:60 ratio as it is discussed in the impugned order at Page No. 19 held the 40% of cash amount workout at Rs.3,33,06,667/- admitted to had been received by the assessee vide seized documents and deleted the remaining addition of Rs.31

MANSUKH TIMBADIA,,RAIGAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

147 of the Act vide order dt:18-03-2016. The CIT(A) considering 40:60 ratio as it is discussed in the impugned order at Page No. 19 held the 40% of cash amount workout at Rs.3,33,06,667/- admitted to had been received by the assessee vide seized documents and deleted the remaining addition of Rs.31