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 36

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]

36(l)(viia) nor u/s 37(1) of the I.T. Act. In response, the appellant submitted that cash was accepted from the customers who were borrowers and amount was credited in the cutomer loan repayment account during the period 08.11.2016 to 31.12.2016. The appellant had interpreted the circular as the NBFC is financial company like bank so it accepted

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD HINGOLI, WARD HINGOLI (CAMP AT PARBHANI) vs. VISHWAS AGRO PRODUCT PVT LTD, PARBHANI

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

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

68 of the Income tax Act, 1961 and this ground of appeal is accordingly allowed. 2. Ground No.-2: pertain to the addition of Rs.7,26,386/- on payment made to M/s Franco Italy by M/s. Pranav International Ltd. as bogus. The AO disallowed the amount of Rs.7,23,386/- which was incurred by appellant company towards spare parts

JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

viia) 4. The learned C.I.T. Appeals has erred in law and facts in confirming/ not deciding the disallowance of the claim of bad debts amounting to Rs. 53,23,92,280/- U/s. 36 (1)(vii). 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” 9. Ground of appeal no.1 challenges

JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

viia) 4. The learned C.I.T. Appeals has erred in law and facts in confirming/ not deciding the disallowance of the claim of bad debts amounting to Rs. 53,23,92,280/- U/s. 36 (1)(vii). 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” 9. Ground of appeal no.1 challenges

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE vs. M/S. JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

viia) 4. The learned C.I.T. Appeals has erred in law and facts in confirming/ not deciding the disallowance of the claim of bad debts amounting to Rs. 53,23,92,280/- U/s. 36 (1)(vii). 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” 9. Ground of appeal no.1 challenges

RAJENDRA L.AGARWAL,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -I),, PUNE

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2330/Pun/2017 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

36 ITR 215 (SC). Further, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court is very much relevant in the instant case for the following legal propositions: “Expenditure incurred for getting shares registered in the name of the assessee and for conducting suits filed for amending the rules of the company