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

section 68. Hence we object for reopening of assessment for your proposed action of addition u/s. 68 of the donation

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

section 68. Hence we object for reopening of assessment for your proposed action of addition u/s. 68 of the donation

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

section 68. Hence we object for reopening of assessment for your proposed action of addition u/s. 68 of the donation

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. SAGAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

reopening have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. We find the Assessing Officer, rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, made addition of Rs.1,62,00,000/- by invoking the provisions of section 68

SATISH VISHNU THOMBARE, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR vs. VARSHA PRAFULLA ZENDE, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1656/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Satish Vishnu Thombare, Varsha Prafulla Zende, Income Tax Officer, Prop Of Bleach Chem Enterprises, Ward-1, Ahmednagar Vs. Industrial Estate, Shrirampur, Maharashtra-413709 Pan : Aabpz2541C अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Miss Shivani Shah (Virtual) Department By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 06-08-2025 Date Of 29-10-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order

section 151 have not been complied with in this case and respectfully following the judgments of the Honorable courts, I am of the considered view that notice issued u/s 148 is bad in law and the reopening u/s 147 is not sustainable and liable to be quashed. Hence, the notice u/s. 148 issued by the AO and the consequent assessment

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

reopening 1d. AO has\nalleged that there is escapement of income and section 68 of\nthe Act needs to be applied for such escapement of income,\nhowever, while concluding the re-assessment

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

reopening 1d. AO has\nalleged that there is escapement of income and section 68 of\nthe Act needs to be applied for such escapement of income,\nhowever, while concluding the re-assessment

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

reopening 1d. AO has\nalleged that there is escapement of income and section 68 of\nthe Act needs to be applied for such escapement of income,\nhowever, while concluding the re-assessment

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

reopening the assessment were not provided to it and therefore, the re- assessment proceedings are invalid in law. 7. So far as merit of the case is concerned, it was submitted that the assessee fulfilled all the 3 ingredients in terms of section 68

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

reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 merely on the basis of the information received through the Insight portal from DDIT(Inv.) Unit 3(3) Delhi and there was no independent application of mind by Assessing Officer to arrive reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. Further, the Learned assessing officer failed

ITO, WARD-1(1), SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR vs. MS. KSHIRSAGAR FABRICS, SOLAPUR

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

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

section 40A(3) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.66,20,000/- u/s 40A(3) of the Act. 6. Before the CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee, apart from challenging the addition on merit, challenged the validity of the re-assessment proceedings. It was explained that the reopening was made

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

Section 263 of\nthe (IT) Act. Accordingly, after considering the totality of facts & circumstances of\nthe case and for the detailed reasons discussed herein above, I hold that the\nassessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act dtd. 28/12/2018 for AY 2011-12, passed by\nthe Assessing Officer as erroneous & prejudicial to the interest of revenue.\n9.0 Accordingly, the assessment

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

Section 263 of\nthe (IT) Act. Accordingly, after considering the totality of facts & circumstances of\nthe case and for the detailed reasons discussed herein above, I hold that the\nassessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act dtd. 28/12/2018 for AY 2011-12, passed by\nthe Assessing Officer as erroneous & prejudicial to the interest of revenue.\n9.0 Accordingly, the assessment

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

reopened under\nSection 148 of the Act.\n\n4. The A.O. did not accept respondent's claim of long term capital gain and added\nthe same in respondent's income under Section 68 of the Act. While allowing the\nappeal filed by respondent, the CIT[A] deleted the addition made under Section 68

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

reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Act for the A.Y.2015-16 are\nreproduced as under:-\n\n1. The assessee is an individual having share income from business profits being Partner in the firms M/s\nBafna Builders and Land Developers, Jalgaon and M/s United Buildcon, Pune, as also having salary income from\nM/s R.C. Bafna Jewellers, a proprietary concern

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

reopen the assessment after four years from the end of the relevant assessment, ie AY 2008- 2009 is not satisfied, and hence, an impugned notice issued u/s.148 dt.31-03-2015 is illegal and bad in law; 5 Gopal Extrusions Pvt. Ltd. (c) Validity of re-opening the assessment has to be decided only on the basis of reason recorded for issue

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. VISTA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

reopening of the assessment. 8. The Ld.CIT(A) further erred in not considering and giving clear findings on addition made under Section 68

AADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

reopening of the assessment vide letter dated 17.09.2019. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 30.10.2019 rejected the objections filed by the assessee by passing a speaking order. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice to the assessee asking him to explain as to why the amount of Rs.50 lacs should not be added u/s 68

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

reopened under\nSection 148 of the Act.\n\n4. The A.O. did not accept respondent's claim of long term capital gain and added\nthe same in respondent's income under Section 68 of the Act. While allowing the\nappeal filed by respondent, the CIT[A] deleted the addition made under Section 68