LATE PRATAPSINGH KARTARSINGH WALIA REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAR HEIR MRS. AMARJEETKAUR PRATAPSINGH WALIA ,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(4), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

68 are not applicable to the facts of this case as no books of account have been maintained. The addition be deleted. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the leaned AO and CIT(A) was not justified in allowing/upholding 7 days withdrawal preceding to cash deposit as a source of cash deposits. The addition

LATE PRATAPSINGH KARTARSINGH WALIA REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAR HEIR MRS. AMARJEETKAUR PRATAPSINGH WALIA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(4), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

68 are not applicable to the facts of this case as no books of account have been maintained. The addition be deleted. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the leaned AO and CIT(A) was not justified in allowing/upholding 7 days withdrawal preceding to cash deposit as a source of cash deposits. The addition

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

68, 69 and 69A, 69B and 69C of the said Act arises as the same have not been invoked by the Department. It is an admitted position between the parties as reflected even in the order of the AO that undisclosed income was in fact received by the respondent in the course of carrying out its business activities

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

68, 69 and 69A, 69B and 69C of the said Act arises as the same have not been invoked by the Department. It is an admitted position between the parties as reflected even in the order of the AO that undisclosed income was in fact received by the respondent in the course of carrying out its business activities

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

68, 69 and 69A, 69B and 69C of the said Act arises as the same have not been invoked by the Department. It is an admitted position between the parties as reflected even in the order of the AO that undisclosed income was in fact received by the respondent in the course of carrying out its business activities

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

68, 69 and 69A, 69B and 69C of the said Act arises as the same have not been invoked by the Department. It is an admitted position between the parties as reflected even in the order of the AO that undisclosed income was in fact received by the respondent in the course of carrying out its business activities

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

68, 69 and 69A, 69B and 69C of the said Act arises as the same have not been invoked by the Department. It is an admitted position between the parties as reflected even in the order of the AO that undisclosed income was in fact received by the respondent in the course of carrying out its business activities

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

68, 69 and 69A, 69B and 69C of the said Act arises as the same have not been invoked by the Department. It is an admitted position between the parties as reflected even in the order of the AO that undisclosed income was in fact received by the respondent in the course of carrying out its business activities

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, KOLHAPUR vs. VIJAYKUMAR RAJARAM SHAH,, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

68, 69 and 69A, 69B and 69C of the said Act arises as the same have not been invoked by the Department. It is an admitted position between the parties as reflected even in the order of the AO that undisclosed income was in fact received by the respondent in the course of carrying out its business activities

THE JALGAON PEOPLE'S CO.OP BANK LTD,,JALGAON vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -2,, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.698/Pun/2019 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Jalgaon People‟S Co-Op Bank Ltd. 152, Polan Peth Dana Bazar, Jalgaon-425 001 Pan : Aacat1603M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

68,490/- separately to the profit & loss account as bad debts written off, but the same have not been added back to the computation of income. However, in view of the proviso to Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act, it is established position in law that in case of an assessee to whom provisions of Section

COOPER CORPORATION PVT. LTD.,,SATARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

248/- u/s 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) being one and one-half of the eligible expenditure incurred without appreciating the fact that the appellant had duly complied with all the conditions laid down u/s 35(2AB). The appellant hereby prays that the deduction under section 35(2AB) may please be allowed

PUNE MATHADI HAMAL AND OTHER MANUAL WORKERS BOARD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1012/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pune Mathadihamal & Other The Income Tax Manual Workers Board, V Officer, Shramashakti Bhavan, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Coomercial Plot No.1, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aaalp0097L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vipul Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Shri Rajesh Gawali– Dr’S Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Orders Of Ld.Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Act Dated 14.07.2023 :

68 taxmann.com 152 (Cochin - Trib.)]- Para 7.2 / 7.3 (ii) Prem Prakash Mandal Sewa Trust v. ITO (Exemptions) - [(2021) 132 taxmann.com 269 (Raipur - Trib.)] (iii) Dera Baba Bhai Gurdas Ji Udasin Trust (Regd) (Mansa) v. ITO [(2022) 145 taxmann.com 278 (Amritsar - Trib.)] (iv) Alpha Educational Trust v. DCIT (E) [(2023) 150 taxmann.com 20 (Chennai - Trib.)] II. Proposition 2 : Where an application

GOODYEAR SOUTH ASIA TYRES PVT.LTD,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, AURANGABAD

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

68,644/- in respect of international transaction of Goodyear South Asia Tyres Pvt. Ltd., payment of Regional Service Charges pertaining to five intra- group services, whose ALP has been determined by the TPO at Nil. 6. The TPO in para 9.18 of his order took note of the fact that the issue is similar to that pertaining to the assessment

GOODYEAR SOUTH ASIA TYRES PVT.LTD,,AURNAGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, AURANGABAD

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

68,644/- in respect of international transaction of Goodyear South Asia Tyres Pvt. Ltd., payment of Regional Service Charges pertaining to five intra- group services, whose ALP has been determined by the TPO at Nil. 6. The TPO in para 9.18 of his order took note of the fact that the issue is similar to that pertaining to the assessment

M/S. GANGA ELECTRICALS,,NASHIK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX.-1, , NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 263 in the present case. 3. The learned PCIT failed to appreciate that the view taken by the A.O. after carrying out detailed verification and after application of mind to the submissions made by the assessee, was certainly a possible view and therefore, the revision order passed u/s 263 on the above facts was not justified

VEGA INDIA LEVEL AND PRESSURE MEASUREMENT P LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -12, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

section (1) gives five specific methods including the RPM and the TNMM and one general method for the ALP determination. The Act does not stipulate application of any specific method in any specific situation. Mechanism for determining the ALP under the five specific methods has been set out in Rule 10B of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The modus

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

68,000. Thereafter, the AO imposed penalty with reference to the amount offered during the course of Survey and included suo motu by the assessee in total income. The ld. CIT(A) sustained the penalty. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. We have heard the ld. DR through the Virtual Court and scanned

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

68,000. Thereafter, the AO imposed penalty with reference to the amount offered during the course of Survey and included suo motu by the assessee in total income. The ld. CIT(A) sustained the penalty. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. We have heard the ld. DR through the Virtual Court and scanned