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

56(2)(x) of I.T. Act, 1961 at Rs.33,47,987/- without making reference to valuation officer is illegal, invalid and bad in law. 9) The addition made by learned A.O. and upheld by CIT(A) at Rs.24,010/- and Rs.5,53,295/- on account of disallowance of travelling expenses is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 4 10) The addition made

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

x) With regard to the disallowance of expenditure on account of Freebies/Incentives to doctors amounting to Rs.2,90,94,637/-, the ld. CIT(A) considering the fact that this expenditure is only discount and incentives given to doctors following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 allowed the claim

M/S KIRAN SANRAN ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

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

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

56,225/- 27,41,121/- 3.1 Further, on perusal of assessment records, it is found that there is substantial variation between consideration received or accrued and value adopted or assessed or assessable. The same difference is corroborated by the Index-II submitted with respect to the concerned sales. However, during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee had relied

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"

section 54F of the Act for the following reasons: A. Referring to the legal expenditure of Rs.2,68,500/-, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the said amount was paid for (i) title search (ii) property consultancy (iii) legal consultancy. All these were incurred in connection with the investment of capital gains in the residential bungalow located

FINOLEX PLASSON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

56,352 x 2008-09 6,93,916 43,80,017 10,41,130 4,93,705 44,06,176 2009-10 x x x 10,41,130 x 2011-12 x 1,23,88,257 x x x The Department in appeals has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on solitary issue of allowing „Bad Debts

FINOLEX PLASSON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

56,352 x 2008-09 6,93,916 43,80,017 10,41,130 4,93,705 44,06,176 2009-10 x x x 10,41,130 x 2011-12 x 1,23,88,257 x x x The Department in appeals has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on solitary issue of allowing „Bad Debts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. FINOLEX PLASSON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

56,352 x 2008-09 6,93,916 43,80,017 10,41,130 4,93,705 44,06,176 2009-10 x x x 10,41,130 x 2011-12 x 1,23,88,257 x x x The Department in appeals has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on solitary issue of allowing „Bad Debts

FINOLEX PLASSON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

56,352 x 2008-09 6,93,916 43,80,017 10,41,130 4,93,705 44,06,176 2009-10 x x x 10,41,130 x 2011-12 x 1,23,88,257 x x x The Department in appeals has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on solitary issue of allowing „Bad Debts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. FINOLEX PLASSON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

56,352 x 2008-09 6,93,916 43,80,017 10,41,130 4,93,705 44,06,176 2009-10 x x x 10,41,130 x 2011-12 x 1,23,88,257 x x x The Department in appeals has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on solitary issue of allowing „Bad Debts

FINOLEX PLASSON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

56,352 x 2008-09 6,93,916 43,80,017 10,41,130 4,93,705 44,06,176 2009-10 x x x 10,41,130 x 2011-12 x 1,23,88,257 x x x The Department in appeals has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on solitary issue of allowing „Bad Debts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. FINOLEX PLASSON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

56,352 x 2008-09 6,93,916 43,80,017 10,41,130 4,93,705 44,06,176 2009-10 x x x 10,41,130 x 2011-12 x 1,23,88,257 x x x The Department in appeals has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on solitary issue of allowing „Bad Debts

FINOLEX PLASSON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

56,352 x 2008-09 6,93,916 43,80,017 10,41,130 4,93,705 44,06,176 2009-10 x x x 10,41,130 x 2011-12 x 1,23,88,257 x x x The Department in appeals has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on solitary issue of allowing „Bad Debts

SILVER OAK BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT-6, PUNE, PUNE

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

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

x) of the Act made addition of Rs.11,556/- to the total income of the assessee. The assessee accepted the above additions and no appeal was filed. 3 6. In the meantime, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act on account of under-reporting of its income in consequence of mis-reporting to the extent

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, KOLHAPUR vs. VIJAYKUMAR RAJARAM SHAH,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

x) in the case of the employees’ contribution which has been deemed to be the income of the assessee. The plain consequence of the disallowance and the add back that has been made by the Assessing Officer is an increase in the business profits of the assessee. The contention of the Revenue that in computing the deduction under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

x) in the case of the employees’ contribution which has been deemed to be the income of the assessee. The plain consequence of the disallowance and the add back that has been made by the Assessing Officer is an increase in the business profits of the assessee. The contention of the Revenue that in computing the deduction under section

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

x) in the case of the employees’ contribution which has been deemed to be the income of the assessee. The plain consequence of the disallowance and the add back that has been made by the Assessing Officer is an increase in the business profits of the assessee. The contention of the Revenue that in computing the deduction under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,, KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

x) in the case of the employees’ contribution which has been deemed to be the income of the assessee. The plain consequence of the disallowance and the add back that has been made by the Assessing Officer is an increase in the business profits of the assessee. The contention of the Revenue that in computing the deduction under section

LAXMI CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

x) in the case of the employees’ contribution which has been deemed to be the income of the assessee. The plain consequence of the disallowance and the add back that has been made by the Assessing Officer is an increase in the business profits of the assessee. The contention of the Revenue that in computing the deduction under section