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

section 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act vide his order dated 08.03.2021 at the assessed income of Rs.11,68

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 :

3A) & 143(3B) of I.T. Act, 1961 for the A.Y. 2018-19 by addingRs.3,55,23,487/- to the retuned income of nil instead of Rs.Rs.1,50,35,886 which was the excess of income over expenditure. 5. That the orders passed are bad in law as the appellant has been granted registration under section 12AB

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. BEEKAY ENTERPRISES,, SOLAPUR

In the result, the legal ground taken in the assessee’s cross objection which goes to the root of the matter is allowed and the ground on merits therefore, becomes academic in nature

3A Murarji Peth, Solapur – 413 001 PAN ; AABFB4783A : Cross Objector Vs. The Asstt. C.I.T. Cir. 2, Solapur : Appellant in appeal. Assessee by : Shri S.N. Puranik Department by : Shri Deepak Garg Date of Hearing : 17-03-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 22-03-2022 ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM : This appeal preferred by the Revenue and the Cross Objection

SUNIL VILAS BHOSALE,SANGLI vs. ITO WARD 1, SANGLI

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2675/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19

3A) & 143(3B) of the Act. 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine being barred by limitation on account of delay of 87 days in filing of the appeal. He stated that the delay was on account of covid-19 pandemic prevailed across the country and therefore prayed

OLIVE TREE TRADING PVT LTD,PUNE vs. ITO, CIRCLE 2, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

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

section 144 r.w.s 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the IT Act, determining the total income of the appellant at Rs. 3,01,14,580 as against the declared loss of Rs. 4,03,68

SAS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (INDIA) PVT. LTD ,PUNE vs. ADDITIONAL / JOINT/ DEPUTY/ASISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INT TAX), DELHI ADDITIONAL / JOINT/ DEPUTY/ASISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INT TAX), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.255/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Sas Research & The Additional / Joint / Development(India) Private Vs Deputy / Assistant Limited, Commissioner Of Income Level 1, 2A & 3, Tower 5, Tax / Income-Tax Officer, Cybercity, Magarpatta City, National E-Assessment Hadapsar, Pune – 411013. Centre, Delhi. Pan: Aaecs 8099 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajendra Agiwal– Ar Revenue By Shri Shivraj B Moray – Dr Date Of Hearing 03/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 01/11/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Additional/Joint/ Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi, Dated 06.04.2021For The A.Y. 2016-17 Emanating From The Order Of The Dispute Resolution Panel-3, Mumbai, Dated 24/03/2020. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Sas Research & Development (India) Private Limited (‘Appellant’) Respectfully Craves Leave To Prefer An Appeal Against The Order Passed By The National E- Assessment Center, Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(13),144C(13),143(3A) & 143(3B) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dated 6 April 2021 Pursuant To The Directions Issued By Hon’Ble Dispute Resolution Panel - 3 (‘Hon’Ble Drp’), Mumbai, Under Section 144C(5) Of The Act Dated 19 February 2021, On The Following Sas Research & Development (India) Pvt. Ltd., [A]

3A) & 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) dated 6 April 2021 pursuant to the directions issued by Hon’ble Dispute Resolution Panel - 3 (‘Hon’ble DRP’), Mumbai, under section 144C(5) of the Act dated 19 February 2021, on the following SAS Research and Development (India) Pvt. Ltd., [A] grounds, which are independent

BRAHM PRECISION MATERIALS PVT LTD,AURANGABAD vs. CIT(A), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

3A) &\n143(3B)/u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act for A.Y. 2018-19 and\nA.Y. 2020-21 respectively.\n2. Registry has informed that ITA No.425/PUN/2025 is\nbarred by limitation as the assessee has filed this appeal with a\ndelay of 445 days. Assessee has filed condonation application\nexplaining the reasons for delay and the contents of the same\nare reproduced

BRAHM PRECISION MATERIALS PVT. LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

3A) &\n143(3B)/u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act for A.Y. 2018-19 and\nA.Y. 2020-21 respectively.\n\n2. Registry has informed that ITA No.425/PUN/2025 is\nbarred by limitation as the assessee has filed this appeal with a\ndelay of 445 days. Assessee has filed condonation application\nexplaining the reasons for delay and the contents of the same\nare

LOKMANGAL KARMACHARYANCHI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,SOLAPUR vs. ITO WARD2(3), SOLAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1083/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

3A) & 143(3B) of the Act. 2. In the instant appeal, assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Assessing Officer erred in rejecting deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) for a sum of Rs.11,68

AUM CITISCAPES LLP,PUNE vs. THE ITO WARD 7(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”), which is arising out of assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act, dated 01/03/2021 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. 2 ITA.No.1160/PUN/2025 (AUM Citiscapes LLP) 2. Assessee has raised five grounds of appeal, but the sole grievance is against the finding

SIDHESH MOHAN RAIKAR,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, BANGLORE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.294/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2023-24

68,31,328 The claim of the assessee that he is a resident of Goa and is governed by Portuguese Civil Code 1860 is not in dispute before this Tribunal. Section 5A of the I.T. Act has a direct bearing on the issue in hand and the same reads as under: “Apportionment of income between spouses governed by Portuguese

NANDU ATMARAM WAJEKAR,PANVEL RAIGAD DISTRICT vs. ACIT CIRCLE PANVEL, PANVEL RAIGAD

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

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

68,050/- Business Income 2014-15 Rs.3,91,758/- Interest Income 2015-16 Rs.2,09,51,187/- Business Income 2015-16 Rs.8,90,146/- Interest Income Total Rs.11,59,01,141/- Thus, the assessee has admitted to have undisclosed income of Rs.11,59,01,141/- in form of business income & interest income for A.Ys.2014-15 & 2015-16. However, keeping

JAKRAYA MULTI STATE CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCEITY LIMITED,SOLAPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE

The appeal of the assessee stands ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 1423/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19

3A & 3B) of the Act for assessment year 2018-19 [‘AY’ hereinafter]. ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 8 Jakraya Multi-State Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. Vs ITO ITA No.1423/PUN/2024 AY:2018-19 2. The case was called twice; none appeared at the behest of the appellant and on the primary briefing from the Ld. DR, we deem

KAI FAKIRA JAIRAM PATIL SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT SHAHADA,NANDURBAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, DHULE, DHULE

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

3A) & 143(3B) of the Act at a total income of Rs.42,09,784/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer denied the exemption u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) in respect of interest income on deposits made out of the surplus funds in cooperative banks and scheduled banks on the ground that the said income does not qualify for deduction

CASTLEMAINE PREMISES CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,PUNE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, PUNE, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 576/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Castlemaine Premises Co-Op Society Ltd., Godrej Castlemaine, 42, Sassoon Rd., Next To Ruby Hall Clinic, Pune. Pan: Aaaac5155H . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle- 4, Pune . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 15/06/2023 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 15/06/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2018-19 Is Assailed Against The Revisionary Order Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Dt. 17/03/2023 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Ascended Out Of Assessment Order Dt. 24/02/2021 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 143(3A) & 143(3B) By The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi, [For Short “Ao”].

3A) & 143(3B) by the National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi, [for short “AO”]. ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 7 Castlemaine Premises Co-op Society Ltd., ITA No.576/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2018-19 2. The appellant raised following grounds through the appeal memo: 1. Ground No.1 – Order u/s 263 is passed without jurisdiction On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

KUNDALIKA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT ,ROHA vs. ITO, WARD 1, PANVEL, PANVEL

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.576/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

3A) & 143 (3B) of the Act determining total income at Rs.11,66,355/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer had brought to tax the interest income of Rs.26,57,669/- earned on FDs with other co-operative banks holding that the said interest does not qualify for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved

SHRI T S NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.433/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

3A) & 143 (3B) of the Act determining total income at Rs.9,70,022/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer had brought to tax the interest earned on FDs with other co- operative banks holding that the said interest does not qualify for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before

ADARSH GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LIMITED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1536/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

3A) & 143(3B) of the Act assessing total income at Rs.28,56,900/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer had brought to tax the interest income of Rs.26,06,783/- earned on FDs with Bank of Maharashtra holding that the said interest does not qualify for deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal