BHADANES HITECH TECHNOLOGY COMPUTER PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, NASHIK

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhadanes Hitech Technology Vs. Ito, Ward Computer Pvt. Ltd. 1(1), Nashik Flat No.10, Padmavishwa Plaza, Nashik Pune Road, Tagore Nagar, Nashik – 422006 Pan : Aadcb9102E Appellant Respondent

29-03-2017 passed in case No. Nsk/CIT(A)-1/737/2015-16 involving proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in short „the Act‟. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee‟s first and foremost substantive ground raised in the instant appeal challenges correctness of both the lower authorities action making section

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

68 of the Act. The tribunal while dismissing the appeals filed\nby the Revenue also observed on facts that these shares were purchased by\nrespondent on the floor of Stock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries\nwere taken, contract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of\nStock Exchange. The ITAT therefore

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

Section 68 of the Act. The tribunal while dismissing the appeals filed\nby the Revenue also observed on facts that these shares were purchased by\nrespondent on the floor of Stock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries\nwere taken, contract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of\nStock Exchange. The ITAT therefore

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

68 of the Income Tax Act. [4] On the facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case as well as in law, the learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts of case and in confirming the addition of Rs.8,40,00,000/-, u/s.68 of the IT Act, for the following reasons: (a) Merely on doubt, assumption, presumption

MADANLAL LALCHAND JAIN,NANDURBAR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2021-22 Acit, Central Circle-2, Madanlal Lalchand Jain Nashik Vibhare Building, Vs. Near City Police Station, Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.42/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2022-23 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-11-2025 O R D E R Per Bench:

section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act cannot be attracted to the additional income declared during the course of search. 26. Even otherwise also the assessee during the course of search in his statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act has stated to have obtained loans from various persons as per the seized document. 27. We find

MADANLAL LALCHAND JAIN,NANDURBAR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2021-22 Acit, Central Circle-2, Madanlal Lalchand Jain Nashik Vibhare Building, Vs. Near City Police Station, Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.42/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2022-23 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-11-2025 O R D E R Per Bench:

section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act cannot be attracted to the additional income declared during the course of search. 26. Even otherwise also the assessee during the course of search in his statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act has stated to have obtained loans from various persons as per the seized document. 27. We find

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK, NASHIK vs. MADANLAL LALCHAND JAIN, NANDURBAR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2021-22 Acit, Central Circle-2, Madanlal Lalchand Jain Nashik Vibhare Building, Vs. Near City Police Station, Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.42/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2022-23 Madanlal Lalchand Jain Acit, Central Circle-2, Vibhare Building, Nashik Near City Police Station, Vs. Hat Darwaja Station Road, Nandurbar – 425412 Pan: Abkpj3633K (Appellant) (Respondent) : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-11-2025 O R D E R Per Bench:

section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act cannot be attracted to the additional income declared during the course of search. 26. Even otherwise also the assessee during the course of search in his statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act has stated to have obtained loans from various persons as per the seized document. 27. We find

NILESH POPATLAL GADA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(4) , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

68 (Mumbai Trib.)  Hon'ble Amritsar Tribunal in case of Sh. Satbir Singh Bhullar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(4), Amritsar. (Ι.Τ.Α. No.258/Asr/2022).  Hon'ble Lucknow Tribunal in case of Income-tax Officer, Barabanki v. Kamal Kumar Mishra [2013] 33 taxmann.com 610 (Lucknow Trib.)  Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in case of Roopak Jain Versus ITO, Ward

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

29, New Mondha, Bus Stand, Jalna HO, Vs. Jalna – 431203 PAN: AAQPJ5374E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 06-01-2025 Date of pronouncement : 27-02-2025 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated

SHRIJEET FINANCE P LTD,BEED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE, JALNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.439/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shrijeet Finance Private Limited, The Assistant Ambejogai Road, Parli, V Commissioner Of Maharashtra – 431515. S Income Tax, Circle, Pan: Aaqcs2652F Jalna. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 22/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 25.10.2021 Emanating From Assessment Order Dated 27.12.2019 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.6,66,151/- Shrijeet Finance Private Limited [A]

section 68 of the Act made by the AO without appreciating the following important facts: a. The amount received are not credit instead are the payment received towards the regular monthly instalment of outstanding loan account. b. The said amounts are received towards the regular monthly instalment and not specifically due to demonetisation. c. The cash against loan

DATTATRAY HANMANTRAO DESAI,KARAD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

section 68 6 Hanmant 5,16,30,000/- Unsigned copy No document in support of Bajirao Desai ITR-V for AY identity proof is available. 2018-19 showing ITR-V and declaration are returned income deficient, name of the bank at Rs.2,15,670 & branch not mentioned in Confirmation, the bank statement, further extract of at the debit

YASH CONSTRUCTION CO.,LATUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

29-07-2024 Date of 31-07-2024 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM : These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 676 & 677/PUN/2024 for assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-12, Pune [in short the “CIT(A)”]’s common DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1061040447(1), dated 16.02.2024, involving proceedings

YASH CONSTRUCTION CO. ,NANDED vs. ACIT, CIRCLE , NANDED

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

29-07-2024 Date of 31-07-2024 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM : These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 676 & 677/PUN/2024 for assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-12, Pune [in short the “CIT(A)”]’s common DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1061040447(1), dated 16.02.2024, involving proceedings

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 115BBE of the Act. 4.11 The Appellant has not filed any new arguments different than the ones made during the assessment proceedings. It has merely reiterated the contentions made before the AO. The crux of the arguments of the appellant is that whatever additions are made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act would still be entitled

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD vs. SHRI. BALAJI RAMCHANDRA ANDE, LATUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

68,900/-, whereas on Page 145 of dairy A-6, total payment found only at Rs.24,83,292/-. Thus, declaration was insisted of difference amount at Rs.63,85,608/-and obtained. (d) Labour charges found recorded at Rs.2,16,14,000/-, whereas on Page 147-149 of dairy A-6, total payment found only at Rs.89,10,871/-. Thus, declaration

RAJENDRA MOHANLAL AGRAWAL,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA

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

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

29-01-2025 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19.01.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A), Pune-11 relating to assessment year 2017-18. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order

INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHULE vs. DHULE ZILHA PARISHAD KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT DHULE, DHULE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 68 of the Act. The relevant observations and findings of the Ld. CIT(A) recorded in para 6.2 and 6.3 of the appellate order is reproduced below : “6.2. I have considered the facts of the case, assessment order and appellant’s submissions. The AO made the addition of Rs. 29

UNIQUE AUTOMOBILES ,,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, SANGLI

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.477/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Unique Automobiles, The Cit(A), Kolhapur. 32, Jayraj, Near Tata Petrol Vs Pump, Vishrambag, Sangli – . 416416. Pan: Aaafu 3563 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri M.G.Jansnani - Dr Date Of Hearing 11/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 05/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2004-05 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Kolhapur’S Order Dated 01.11.2017 Passed In Appeal No. Sli/093/10- 11, In Proceedings U/S.271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

29 1 section 271 FA ,] 30[ section 271FB, ] 3.1 [ section 271G.1] clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A. sub- section (1) of section 272AA1 or 32 [ section 272B or] 33 [sub- section (1) of section 272BB or] 34 [subsection

VIVEK NARESH SHAH L/H OF DECEASED NARESH UMEDLAL SHAH,SANGLI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 & 2, SANGLI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2010-11

section 159 r.w.s. 2(29) of the Act and in view of decision of this bench rendered in Yogesh Bhomraj 3 Vivek Naresh Shah Ponval Vs PCIT [vide dt. 01/11/2023] is maintainable in law? 3. Whether in facts and circumstance and in law the appellant is entitled to prosecute the present appeal without establishing on record with cogent evidences