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

ITO, WARD-6(1), PUNE vs. M/S. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

68 and section 56(2)(viib)/Rule 11UA. The AO passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 26.12.2018 assessing

MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

Section 80IA/IB of the Act.\nIt must follow that there is due application of mind by the Assessing\nOfficer to the issue raised.\nThe above observations apply on all fours to this Petition, so far as the\nRevenue's submission of no change of opinion is concerned.\n11. The further submission of Mr. Walve that in the absence

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

Section 80IA/IB of the Act.\nIt must follow that there is due application of mind by the Assessing\nOfficer to the issue raised.\nThe above observations apply on all fours to this Petition, so far as the\nRevenue's submission of no change of opinion is concerned.\n11. The further submission of Mr. Walve that in the absence