DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, MAN,SATARA

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

68,141/- from its\ninvestments with Co-operative Banks. In the computation of total income\nsubmitted during course of scrutiny, the assessee claimed that it is a Co-\noperative Society and as such income of Rs.5,15,78,931/- from above-stated\ninterest receipts is deductible under section 80P of the Act. The Ld. AO held\nthat section

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA, SATARA vs. SHRI SIDDHANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYA DAHIWADI, TAL. MAN SATARA

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

68,141/- from its\ninvestments with Co-operative Banks. In the computation of total income\nsubmitted during course of scrutiny, the assessee claimed that it is a Co-\noperative Society and as such income of Rs.5,15,78,931/- from above-stated\ninterest receipts is deductible under section 80P of the Act. The Ld. AO held\nthat section

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. KESHAVSMURTI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LTD.,, RAIGAD

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.936/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ward 5, Panvel …. Vs. Keshavsmurti Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Shop No.1G/F, Anpurna Niwas, Shivaji Road, Tal – Panvel, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Dist – Raigad – 410206 Pan: Aaaak7390L प्रत्याक्षेप सं./Co No.30/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 (Out Of Ita No.936/Pun/2015) Keshavsmurti Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Shop No.1G/F, Anpurna Niwas, Shivaji Road, Tal – Panvel, … प्रत्याक्षेऩक/ Cross Objector Dist – Raigad – 410206 Pan: Aaaak7390L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 5, Panvel

section 80P(2)(d) of the Act and no amount was assessed in the hands of the assessee except the dividend received from UTI Mutual Funds and Sundaram Finance of Rs.87,087/- and Rs.88,519/-. The assessee has placed on record its balance sheet along with Profit & Loss account for the year under consideration at pages

MANOJ JAIKUMAR TIBREWALA,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1,, NASHIK

Accordingly. We make it clear that the assessee shall be at liberty to file all the relevant details in consequential proceedings. This last appeal ITA No. 609/Pun/2019 is allowed for statistical p...

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteit(Ss)A Nos. 06 & 07/Pun/2017 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) Shri Manoj Jaikumar Tibrewala Acit, Central Circle-1 Vastu Shilp, Ground Floor Kendriya Rajaswa Bhavan Godavari Housing Society Vs. Gadkari Chowk Boys Town School Road Old Agra Road, Nashik Nashik 422005 Pan – Aakpt7009G Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Pamod S. Shingte Respondent By: Shri S.P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing: 25.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.05.2022

56 ITR 42). that profits do not accrue from day to day or even from month to month and have to be ascertained by a comparison of assets at two stated points. Unless the right to profits comes into existence there is no accrual of profits and the destination of profits must be determined by the title thereto

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -5, PUNE vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT LTD.,, PUNE

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

56 the Apex Court has held as under: "...The Allahabad High Court specifically considered the effect of introduction of Explanation (aa ) to section 80HHC(4A) of the Act and had taken the view in Ram Babu & Sons v. Union of India [1996] 222 ITR 606 that this Explanation means that for the purpose of this section, there will

HARISHCHANDRA NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “income from other sources” is clearly mentioned. The words are clear and unambiguous and if there is nothing in the Act detracting from the width of the said terms, it is clear that, the interest received on enhanced

SANJAY NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “income from other sources” is clearly mentioned. The words are clear and unambiguous and if there is nothing in the Act detracting from the width of the said terms, it is clear that, the interest received on enhanced

RAMCHANDRA NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “income from other sources” is clearly mentioned. The words are clear and unambiguous and if there is nothing in the Act detracting from the width of the said terms, it is clear that, the interest received on enhanced

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

2%-3% commission from the beneficiaries on the\namount of LTCG provided. However, there were various expenses payments\nmade by me. I had to pay commission to the exit providers and various other\nexpenses Including trading loss. I had not disclosed this income in my return\nof Income. After taking in to account the abovementioned expenses I had\nearned approx

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

2%-3% commission from the beneficiaries on the\namount of LTCG provided. However, there were various expenses payments\nmade by me. I had to pay commission to the exit providers and various other\nexpenses Including trading loss.1 had not disclosed this income in my return\nof Income. After taking in to account the abovementioned expenses 1 had\nearned approx

KRISH WINES,JALGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1,, JALGAON

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

68,15,700/- during the demonization period out of which an amount\nof Rs.13,56,000/- was Specified Bank Notes deposited in the account maintained\nwith the Hasti Co-op. Bank Ltd., Chalisgaon and an amount of Rs.20,10,000/-\nSBN deposited in the bank account maintained with Godavari Laxmi Co-op. Ltd.,\nJalgaon. Thus, the total cash deposited

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE vs. SAGAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is allowed

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

68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act and also made further 26 CO No.43/PUN/2025 addition of the interest paid of Rs.17,80,059/- by invoking the provisions of section 37 of the Act. We find before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee, apart from challenging the addition on merit, challenged the validity of reopening of the assessment

KAPIL ALCOTECH LLP,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1, AURANGABAD

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2020-21

section 250(1) of I.T. Act, 1961. 2) The order passed by CIT(A) is without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard and is in violation of principles of natural justice. No video conferencing is allowed even though specific request was made in written submission uploaded on 29/08/2023. 3) The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding various additions made

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

56 (Bombay) various shareholders, in view of fact that summons served to shareholders under section 131 were unserved with remark that addressees were not available, and, moreover, those shareholders were first time assessees and were not earning enough income to make deposits in question, impugned addition made by AO under sec. 68, was to be confirmed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. TARADEVI RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

2%-3% commission from the beneficiaries on the\namount of LTCG provided. However, there were various expenses payments\nmade by me. I had to pay commission to the exit providers and various other\nexpenses Including trading loss.1 had not disclosed this income in my return\nof Income. After taking in to account the abovementioned expenses 1 had\nearned approx

MR. VIJAY BAJIRAO BALWADKAR,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 2(2) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated above

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

56(2)(viib) of the Act is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Accordingly, the addition so made be kindly deleted and Appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect. 3. On the facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') Appellant

NASHIK DISTRICT PRIMARY TEACHERS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

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

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

56 as income from other sources. The AO is hereby directed to allow the deduction u/s 80P to the extent of the order of the Apex court in the above mentioned case as much applicable in this case. Hence, the relevant grounds of appeal raised in this regard are hereby partly allowed.” 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the impugned

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:

2] The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the learned A.O. in taxing the amount of Rs.1,24,26,820/- u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 3] The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the amount of Rs.1,24,26,820/- was rightly offered by the assessee as his business income and there

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:

2] The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the learned A.O. in taxing the amount of Rs.1,24,26,820/- u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 3] The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the amount of Rs.1,24,26,820/- was rightly offered by the assessee as his business income and there