KOTHARI AGRITECH PRIVATE LIMITED,SOLAPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, SOLAPUR

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

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

68,26,650/- 11 ITA Nos.2392 & 2455/PUN/2024, AY 2018-19 It is noted that JAO has also passed the detailed rectification order u/s 154 r.w.s. 143(3) vide order number ITBA/REC/S/154-1/2023- 24/1054089997(1) dated 03.07.2023 and elaborately discussion relevant and applicable case laws, has remarked that Para no. 6.4.3" in the rectification order as under:- 6.4.3 Based on the above

SHIVENDRA NAGOJIRAO PATANKAR,(HUF),,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2),, KOLHAPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee as well as the Cross

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.260/Pun/2018 िनधा!रण वष! / Assessment Year : 2014-15

234B and 234C is not justified.” Cross Objections by Revenue : “1. On the facts and circumstances relating to addition of Rs.81,00,000/-, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the same u/s.69 instead of section 68

SHRI PARSHWANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTH,SATARA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 68 of the Act by the Assessing Officer duly confirmed by him being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A)-12, Pune erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant society filed against the Assessment Order passed

ANUJ UMESH GOEL,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 7,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1632/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14

section 234A and 234B of the Act. The assessee claims that it had paid self assessment tax in installments of ₹ 68

KAPIL ALCOTECH LLP,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21

68 of I.T. Act, 1961 is illegal, invalid and bad in law. 13) The assessee denies liability to pay interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of I.T. Act, 1961. Without prejudice, levy of interest under section

AMIT SURESH AGRAWAL,SATARA vs. ITO WARD-2, SATARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2225/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Amit Suresh Agrawal, V The Income Tax Officer, Amit Trading Co, Plot No.35, S Ward-2, Satara. Satara – 415002. Maharashtra. Pan: Abgpa2925D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Kulkarni – Advocate Revenue By Shri Eknath Abhang – Add.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 30/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2025 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 The A.Y.2016-17 Dated 02.04.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 10.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

68 is not attracted in this case. The addition is wholly unjustified and deserves to be deleted in its entirety. 7. Without prejudice to the legal grounds above, the learned CIT(A) has erroneously dismissed the appeal ex-parte without proper examination of facts and merits of the case. The learned CIT(A) has ignored the genuine reasons, including health

RATHOD JEWELLERS,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 68 doesn't arise. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact of incorrect levy of interest 234B

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

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

68,389/-\nRs.2,18,655/-\nRs.90,472/-\nRs.31,31,51,116/-\n3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who\nwithout admitting the appeal dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the\nground that the assessee has not filed the return of income as well as not\npaid an amount equal to the amount of advance

SWATHI KEWAL NEMMANIWAR,KINWAT NANDED vs. ASST. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, NANDED, NANDED

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

68, and the tax calculated as per provisions of section 115BBE of the Act, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The Appellant denies the liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B

SANJAY DANCHAND GHODAWAT,JAYSINGHPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE ICHALKARANJI CIRCLE, ICHALKARANJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.540/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Vs The Assistant 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co-Op Commissioner Of Hsg Society, Income Tax, Jaysinghpur – 416101. Cir Ichalkaranji Circle, Maharashtra Ichalkaranji, Pan: Adlpg5040N Maharashtra – 416101. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.541/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Vs The Assistant 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co-Op Commissioner Of Hsg Society, Income Tax, Jaysinghpur – 416101. Cir Ichalkaranji Circle, Maharashtra Ichalkaranji, Pan: Adlpg5040N Maharashtra – 416101. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.598/Pun/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Assistant Vs Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Commissioner Of Income 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co- Tax, Op Hsg Society, Kolhapur. Jaysinghpur – 416101. Maharashtra Pan: Adlpg5040N Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee

section 234B is not leviable and ought to have been waived on the facts of the case. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. ITA Nos.540, 541/PUN/2024 (A) & 598(R)/PUN/2024 Sanjay Danchand Ghodawat(03 Appeals) In view of the above and other grounds that may be urged

SANJAY DANCHAND GHODAWAT,JAYSINGHPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE ICHALKARANJI CIRCLE, ICHALKARANJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.540/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Vs The Assistant 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co-Op Commissioner Of Hsg Society, Income Tax, Jaysinghpur – 416101. Cir Ichalkaranji Circle, Maharashtra Ichalkaranji, Pan: Adlpg5040N Maharashtra – 416101. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.541/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Vs The Assistant 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co-Op Commissioner Of Hsg Society, Income Tax, Jaysinghpur – 416101. Cir Ichalkaranji Circle, Maharashtra Ichalkaranji, Pan: Adlpg5040N Maharashtra – 416101. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.598/Pun/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Assistant Vs Sanjay Danchandghodawat, Commissioner Of Income 28 Sushreya, Yashwant Co- Tax, Op Hsg Society, Kolhapur. Jaysinghpur – 416101. Maharashtra Pan: Adlpg5040N Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee

section 234B is not leviable and ought to have been waived on the facts of the case. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. ITA Nos.540, 541/PUN/2024 (A) & 598(R)/PUN/2024 Sanjay Danchand Ghodawat(03 Appeals) In view of the above and other grounds that may be urged

M/S. FIAT INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

234B of the Act. The Appellant prays that the interest under section 2348 of the Act is unwarranted and the same be deleted and/or correspondingly reduced. 5. Ground No. 5 Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Appellant prays that the penalty proceedings

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1) , PUNE vs. FIAT INDIA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

234B of the Act. The Appellant prays that the interest under section 2348 of the Act is unwarranted and the same be deleted and/or correspondingly reduced. 5. Ground No. 5 Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Appellant prays that the penalty proceedings

VENTURA (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1788/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ventura (India) Pvt. Ltd., Wing C, Marisoft, Kalyani Nagar Annex, Vadgaon Sheri, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411014 …. Pan: Aabce3274C Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

234B of the Act is consequential, hence the same is dismissed. The issue in ground of appeal No.13 against initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is premature and the same is also dismissed. 7. Vide additional ground of appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by inclusion of Cosmic Global Ltd. and Vishal Technologies

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX vs. VENTURA (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of assessee and Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1788/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ventura (India) Pvt. Ltd., Wing C, Marisoft, Kalyani Nagar Annex, Vadgaon Sheri, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Pune – 411014 …. Pan: Aabce3274C Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 7, Pune

234B of the Act is consequential, hence the same is dismissed. The issue in ground of appeal No.13 against initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is premature and the same is also dismissed. 7. Vide additional ground of appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by inclusion of Cosmic Global Ltd. and Vishal Technologies

NANDKISHOR L. AGRAWAL,,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.794/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Nandkishor L Agrawal D-16, Addl.Midc, Aurangabad Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Jalna. …. Pan: Adppa7327N Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 1(3), Jalna

section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 2 Nandkishor L Agrawal 1. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.36,00,000/- from Sandeep Agrawal U/s 68. Appellant prays to delete the same. 2. Assessing Officer has added

SPRINGER NATURE TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLISHING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

234B of INR 66,02,052, without assigning any reason whatsoever. Excess levy of interest under section 234C of the Act and ITA.No.2800/PUN/2024 Springer Nature Technology and Publishing Solutions Private Limited 14. The learned AO erred in levying interest under section 234C of the Act amounting to INR 39,34,599 as against Interest

SPRINGER NATURE TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLISHING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

234B of INR 66,02,052, without assigning any reason whatsoever. Excess levy of interest under section 234C of the Act and ITA.No.2800/PUN/2024 Springer Nature Technology and Publishing Solutions Private Limited 14. The learned AO erred in levying interest under section 234C of the Act amounting to INR 39,34,599 as against Interest