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

68 of the Act dealing with unexplained cash received by charitable or religious institutions. Thus, the underlying facts and source of escapement remain the same and only the legal characterization has been corrected. Therefore, the reassessment proceedings are validly initiated and completed. The mere change in the section under which the income is ultimately brought to tax does

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

68 of the Act dealing with unexplained cash received by charitable or religious institutions. Thus, the underlying facts and source of escapement remain the same and only the legal characterization has been corrected. Therefore, the reassessment proceedings are validly initiated and completed. The mere change in the section under which the income is ultimately brought to tax does

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

68 of the Act dealing with unexplained cash\ncredits and section 115BBC of the Act with anonymous donations\nreceived by charitable or religious institutions. Thus, the underlying\nfacts and source of escapement remain the same and only the legal\ncharacterization has been corrected. Therefore, the reassessment\nproceedings are validly initiated and completed. The mere change in\nthe 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

68 of the Act dealing with unexplained cash\ncredits and section 115BBC of the Act with anonymous donations\nreceived by charitable or religious institutions. Thus, the underlying\nfacts and source of escapement remain the same and only the legal\ncharacterization has been corrected. Therefore, the reassessment\nproceedings are validly initiated and completed. The mere change in\nthe section

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

68 of the Act dealing with unexplained cash\n12\nITA Nos.1121 to 1126/PUN/2024\nRajarshi Shahu Shikshan Sanstha\ncredits and section 115BBC of the Act with anonymous donations\nreceived by charitable or religious institutions. Thus, the underlying\nfacts and source of escapement remain the same and only the legal\ncharacterization has been corrected. Therefore, the reassessment\nproceedings are validly initiated

DHANRAJ CHHAGANLAL SHAH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

198/- and Rs.1,33,41,043/- respectively by holding that the assessee is continuously making this provision without incurring any liability out of this provision. 4. Being aggrieved by the above additions, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order deleted the addition of Rs.2,27,27,402/- on account of sundry creditors by holding

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE vs. DHANRAJ CHHAGANLAL SHAH, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

198/- and Rs.1,33,41,043/- respectively by holding that the assessee is continuously making this provision without incurring any liability out of this provision. 4. Being aggrieved by the above additions, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order deleted the addition of Rs.2,27,27,402/- on account of sundry creditors by holding

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. SKODA AUTO A.S.,, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.787/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11

198 of the Act, the said tax withheld by SAIPL was taxable as income of the assessee. However, the assessee claimed deduction under section 10(6A) of the Act on the ground that there was no requirement for grossing up the amount. The assessee had entered into an agreement with SAIPL on 01.10.2001 and the copy of said agreement

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

section 68 by proving the identity and 5 creditworthiness of the share applicants and the genuineness of the transactions. Relying on various decisions, it was argued that the addition u/s 68 is not in accordance with law. However, the CIT(A) while deleting the addition on merit, dismissed the grounds challenging the validity of re-assessment proceedings by observing

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, AURANGABAD vs. M/S. HASSAB REALTY PVT.LTD,, AURANGABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2341/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Ito, Ward -1(1), Aurangabad

68 unexplained cash credits in the nature of unsecured loans/ land advances amounting to Rs.2,64,31,847/- only. The CIT(A) which has partly reversed the impugned additions in his lower appellate discussion. 6. It is in view of forgoing admitted factual position that we hold that the Assessing Officer had not made any addition pertaining to his three

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

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

198 ITR 147 (Ker.), decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P.) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Delhi) confirmed the findings of the Assessing Officer that the sundry creditors were bogus, accordingly, confirmed the addition. While doing so, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee had not filed

M/S GIRIRAJ ENTERPRISES,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16

68,835/- which was claimed as exempt u/s 10(35) of the Act. The assessee sold all the units on 29.01.2015 for a consideration of Rs.8,99,93,198/- and the difference amount i.e. cost (-) sale price amounting to Rs.1,00,06,802/- was claimed as the business loss. He submitted that the Assessing Officer made the addition purely

ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PUNE, PUNE vs. BHIKSHU GRANIMART, PUNE

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

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

section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the books of accounts, in general, and the complete cash book, in particular, were not produced by the assessee for verification during the assessment proceedings and specific finding to that effect has been recorded by the Assessing Officer in the assessment proceedings? 11. Grounds of appeal No.1

BRAHM PRECISION MATERIALS PVT LTD,AURANGABAD vs. CIT(A), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

68 of the Act. The invocation of provisions of section\n115BBE may be vacated/cancelled/quashed.\n4. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the action of the\nAssessing Officer in making the ad-hoc addition on account of the\nexcess cost of raw material consumed, and in confirming the addition\nto the extent of Rs.1

BRAHM PRECISION MATERIALS PVT. LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

68 of the Act. The invocation of provisions of section\n115BBE may be vacated/cancelled/quashed.\n\n4. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the action of the\nAssessing Officer in making the ad-hoc addition on account of the\nexcess cost of raw material consumed, and in confirming the addition\nto the extent of Rs.1

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PRIVAT LIMITED, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

68,86,771/-. 11. I have considered the facts of the case and submissions made by the appellant. The main issue involved in the present appeal is whether an assessee can make a fresh claim while filing the return u/s 153A of the Act for an unabated assessment, which was not made in the original return or during the original

RAJDEEP BUILDCON PVT LTD, AHMEDNAGAR,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

68,86,771/-. 11. I have considered the facts of the case and submissions made by the appellant. The main issue involved in the present appeal is whether an assessee can make a fresh claim while filing the return u/s 153A of the Act for an unabated assessment, which was not made in the original return or during the original

RAJDEEP BUILDCOM PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

68,86,771/-. 11. I have considered the facts of the case and submissions made by the appellant. The main issue involved in the present appeal is whether an assessee can make a fresh claim while filing the return u/s 153A of the Act for an unabated assessment, which was not made in the original return or during the original

SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.549 & 550/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 वष"

68. d) Ld AR also submitted that foundation civil work in a integral part of Wind Mill on which depreciation @ 80% is allowable and this has been held in the following cases. i) Mayura Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT ITA No1347/PN/2014 by ITAT ‘B’ Bench, Pune dated 26-10-2015. ii) Dr. Santosh Kalmesh Prabhu Vs. ACIT ITA No.1294/PN/2014