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

239 CTR (Bom) 183, has categorically held that the AO may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings though the reasons for such issue were not included in the notice, however, if after issuing a notice under section 148, the AO accepted the contention

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

239 CTR (Bom) 183, has categorically held that the AO may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings though the reasons for such issue were not included in the notice, however, if after issuing a notice under section 148, the AO accepted the contention

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 has been referred but\nthereafter finally the addition has been made u/s.115BBC of\nthe Act. We would like to go through the judicial precedents in\nthis regard. We take note of the Judgment of Hon'ble High\nCourt of Gujarat in the case of Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT\n(2014) 45 taxmann.com 20 (Gujarat). In this case also

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 has been referred but\nthereafter finally the addition has been made u/s.115BBC of\nthe Act. We would like to go through the judicial precedents in\nthis regard. We take note of the Judgment of Hon'ble High\nCourt of Gujarat in the case of Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT\n(2014) 45 taxmann.com 20 (Gujarat). In this case also

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 has been referred but\nthereafter finally the addition has been made u/s.115BBC of\nthe Act. We would like to go through the judicial precedents in\nthis regard. We take note of the Judgment of Hon'ble High\nCourt of Gujarat in the case of Dhruv Parulbhai Patel Vs. ACIT\n(2014) 45 taxmann.com 20 (Gujarat). In this case also

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. SURYACHANDRA LALMANI DUBEY, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

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

68,24,239/- needs to be verified. Also, the information provided in para (iii) needs to be verified. 8 Suryachandra Lalmani Dubey [R] Therefore, I have reasons to believe for A. Y. 2014-15, income to the tune of Rs. 36,56,250/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BODHI TOWER vs. KUMAR BUILDERS PROJECT PUNE PRIVATE LIMITED, BUND GARDEN

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

239 of the said Act. In the present case we find that the Respondents have failed to exercise such powers to condone the delay in filing returns and consequent refund by the Petitioners on irrelevant and extraneous reasons. 10. This Court in the Judgment in the case of M/s. Bombay Mercantile Co- op Bank Ltd vs. The Central Board

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. M/S PARTHA MULTITRADE INDIA PVT LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS SWIFT VENTURES PVT LTD), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.682 To 685/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Partha Multitrade Aurangabad. India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Swift Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No.1/5, A. S. Yadav Chawl Pada, Nr. Mahakali Mandir, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan : Aalcs3668L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.06.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.685/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

section 143(1)(a). At any rate, the assessments made are only protective assessments. Under the law it is open to the department to make assessments on two persons in respect of the same income, where there is some ambiguity as to the liability to charge, such assessments are made to protect the interest of the revenue so much

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. M/S PARTHA MULTRITRADE INDIA PVT LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS SWIFT VENTURES PVT LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.682 To 685/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Partha Multitrade Aurangabad. India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Swift Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No.1/5, A. S. Yadav Chawl Pada, Nr. Mahakali Mandir, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan : Aalcs3668L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.06.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.685/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

section 143(1)(a). At any rate, the assessments made are only protective assessments. Under the law it is open to the department to make assessments on two persons in respect of the same income, where there is some ambiguity as to the liability to charge, such assessments are made to protect the interest of the revenue so much

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, , AURANGABAD vs. M/S PARTHA MULTITRADE INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.682 To 685/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Partha Multitrade Aurangabad. India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Swift Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No.1/5, A. S. Yadav Chawl Pada, Nr. Mahakali Mandir, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan : Aalcs3668L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.06.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.685/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

section 143(1)(a). At any rate, the assessments made are only protective assessments. Under the law it is open to the department to make assessments on two persons in respect of the same income, where there is some ambiguity as to the liability to charge, such assessments are made to protect the interest of the revenue so much

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. M/S PARTHA MULTITRADE INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.682 To 685/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-1, Vs. M/S. Partha Multitrade Aurangabad. India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Swift Ventures Pvt. Ltd.), Flat No.1/5, A. S. Yadav Chawl Pada, Nr. Mahakali Mandir, Dahisar, Mumbai-400068. Pan : Aalcs3668L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30.06.2022 For The Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2011-12 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.685/Pun/2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Are Stated Herein.

section 143(1)(a). At any rate, the assessments made are only protective assessments. Under the law it is open to the department to make assessments on two persons in respect of the same income, where there is some ambiguity as to the liability to charge, such assessments are made to protect the interest of the revenue so much

PARAS JAVERILAL JAIN,,DHULE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act and 68 of the IT Act will be that though apart from establishing the identity of the donor the assessee must establish the genuineness of the transaction as well as the creditworthiness of the donor. In view of this fact, through the appellant is able to establish the identity of the donor

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

68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 that being the discrepancy noted by the Assessing Officer between the unsecured loan of Rs 25,00,000/- received by the assessee from an individual as per the audit report and the 9 confirmation of the same by the lender which was furnished during the assessment proceedings? 4) Whether in the facts

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AURANGBAD, AURANGBAD vs. SANJAY SUGANCHAND KASLIWAL, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed\nand the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed as\nper terms indicated above

239 ITR 230\n(Madras)]\n6. CIT v. Madura Devakottai Transports (P.) Ltd.- [(1999) 238 ITR\n1003 (Madras)]\n7. CIT v. K.P. Abdullah - [(2001) 240 ITR 947 (Madras)]\n8. CIT v. Yamuna Digital Electronics (P.) Ltd.- [(1999) 238 ITR 717\n(AP)]\n9. CIT v. Jaya Stores - [(1999) 107 Тахтап 612 (Madras)]\n10. CIT v. Ram Niwas - [(2008) 170 Тахxman

M/S. TATA TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1433/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S. Tata Technologies Limited, Plot No.25, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Hingewadi, Pune – 411057 …. Pan: Aaact3092N Vs. The Dy. Director Of Income Tax …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent (International Taxation)-Ii, Pune

239 ITR 587 (SC). Further, the assessee referred to section 90 of the Act and pointed out that where the DTAA has been entered into with a country, then the provisions of the Act or Treaty, whichever is more beneficial shall apply. He referred to the relevant extracts of provisions relating to the royalty as defined in different Treaties

BHARAT KANTILAL CHANGEDE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(3), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13

68,457/- and information obtained from the bank u/s 133(6) of the Act at Rs.1,01,52,582/-. 4. Before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee, apart from challenging the addition on merit, challenged the validity of re-assessment proceedings on the ground that no notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee after

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE vs. SOFT TECH ENGINEERS PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2581/Pun/2017 िनधा"रणवष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Assistant Soft Tech Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of Income Vs Unit-5A, The Pentagon, Tax, Shahu College Road, Near Satara Circle-6, Pune. Road, Telephone Exchange, Pune – 411009. Pan: Aaccs 3857 L Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee Assessee By Shri Nikhil Mutha – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 06/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr.Dipak P.Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals)-4, Pune’S Order Dated 30.05.2017 ,Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(A) Has Erred In Allowing The Amount Of Rs.3,13,93,146/- Being Claim For Professional Fees & Contracting Expenses & Rs.61,03,239/- Being Managerial Expenses Relating To Software Development While The Same Should Be Capitalized & Not To Be Allowed As Revenue Expenses.

section 143(3) on 07.12.2016 determining the income at Rs.7,50,33,345/- after making the following additions: i) Professional fees treated as Capital in nature Rs.3,13,93,146/- ii) interest & Managerial Remuneration treated as Capital in nature Rs. 61,03,239/- iii) Disallowance in Bad debts Rs. 61,17,001/- iv) Disallowance in deposit balances written

M/S. SHREE HATKESHWARA CARGO MOVERS,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1586 & 1587/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S. Shree Hatkeshwara Cargo Vs. Acit, Circle-5, Movers Pune Office No.8, Wonder City, Katraj By-Pass Road, Pune – 411046 Pan: Aatfs8504N Appellant Respondent

239 was offered towards inadmissible expenses. The assessee filed revised return declaring total income of Rs.1,04,88,260, thereby including the declared income. Accordingly, the assessment order was passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 with a nominal addition, determining total income at Rs.1,05,68,000. Thereafter, the AO imposed penalty with reference to the amount offered during the course

M/S. SHREE HATKESHWARA CARGO MOVERS,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1586 & 1587/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S. Shree Hatkeshwara Cargo Vs. Acit, Circle-5, Movers Pune Office No.8, Wonder City, Katraj By-Pass Road, Pune – 411046 Pan: Aatfs8504N Appellant Respondent

239 was offered towards inadmissible expenses. The assessee filed revised return declaring total income of Rs.1,04,88,260, thereby including the declared income. Accordingly, the assessment order was passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 with a nominal addition, determining total income at Rs.1,05,68,000. Thereafter, the AO imposed penalty with reference to the amount offered during the course