MRS SHANTABAI JASRAJ LODHA,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: the AO as follows:

prices. So I deposited same amount including addition of Rs.30,000/- out of my saving account on 22.11.2016.” 4. The ld. AO did not accept the submissions of assessee and on further verification of Bank of Maharashtra‟s statement, he found out that there was some cash deposit of Rs.16.36 lakhs on 08.06.2016 and on 09.06.2016 and there was withdrawal

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

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

transferred from the ITO, Ward\n2(2), Jalgaon to DCIT, Circle – 2, Jalgaon (now Circle – 1, Jalgaon) on 08.04.2019\nas per jurisdiction. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act on 20.05.2019 along with\nquestionnaire asking the assessee to file certain details regarding the scrutiny\nassessment.\nSecond notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 31.10.2019\nrequesting the assessee

SEMPERTRANS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,ROHA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, PANVEL

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

transfer pricing, etc.;\nMonitoring of worldwide tax rate and optimization of tax burden\nfor Semperit's local entities;\nCoordination on local tax compliance;\nTax compliance and monitoring of TP documentation\nEngineering\nand\nMaintenance\nAE assures a group-wide standard with main focus on:\ndesign and strategic planning of investment-projects of Group\ncompanies;\nsupport, installation and engineering on site

SONAL SANDEEP SATAV,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-2, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of arm's length price in respect of international transactions reported for the relevant assessment year. Then paragraph 4, along with its sub paragraphs 4.1 to 47 deal with disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) in the context of commission exceeding Re. 18.00 crore paid by the Assessee during the relevant assessment year, even though

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. VISTA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

cash deposits were made in the Jamakharchi accounts of individuals as well as shell companies having no business activities / fixed assets. M/S. VISTA NIRMAN PRIVATE LIMITED is one such entity where such routed transaction took place. An inquiry was made in terms of running data analysis from e-records available in the ITBA database. As the financial analysis

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

price is more than the stamp duty value of the property, we find merit in the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that there is no case for making addition u/s 56(2)(x) of the Act. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC is set aside on this issue and the grounds of appeal No.7

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AURANGBAD, AURANGBAD vs. SANJAY SUGANCHAND KASLIWAL, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed\nand the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed as\nper terms indicated above

deposited in his bank account nor there is\npurchase of any land or other asset in cash which could\ncorroborate the receipt of such a huge amount. Further it was\nrequested that to verify the veracity of the claim made by Mr.\nPankaj Radheshyam Agrawal before the police authorities the\nAssessing Officer should call for the income-tax return, financial

ACIT CIRCLE-12, PUNE, PUNE vs. DHIRAJ BHAUSAHEB NIKAM, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle – 12, Pune Dhiraj Bhausaheb Nikam Vs. 515/516, Purva Plaza, Sadashiv Peth, Pune – 411030 Pan: Aahpn5137C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia, Jcit (Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing : 10-02-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-02-2026 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

prices of M/s. Anukaran Commercial Enterprises Ltd has been jagged up through cartel of interlinked companies controlled and managed by entry operators for the purpose of providing accommodation entry of 5 bogus long term capital gain. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee and relying on various decisions, the Assessing Officer rejected the claim of exemption

SHREENATH MHASKOBA CREDIT CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD.,PUNE vs. THE PCIT, PUNE-4, PUNE

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

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

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, if, in the opinion of the Principal (Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner- (a) the order is passed without making inquiries or verification which should have been made

MR SHAIKH SHAKIL SHAIKH IBRAHIM BAGWAN,JALGAON vs. ITO, WRD-1(4), JALGAON, JALGAON

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

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2160/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mr. Shaikh Shakil Shaikh Vs Ito, Ward-1(4), Ibrahim Bagwan, Jalgaon Prop. Of Javed Vegetable Company (Jvc), Barbhai Galli, Bodwad-425310, Dist-Jalgaon Maharashtra Pan-Attpb3077C Appellant Respondent

cash deposits and withdrawals, Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) issued valid notice u/s 148 of the Act. In response assessee furnished the return of income on 04.10.2024 declaring income of Rs. 2,44,180/- During the course of reassessment proceedings assessee did not responded to the communication dated 04.10.2024. Ld. AO called information from the Axis Bank

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

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

deposited in the bank accounts of lenders before money is lent to the assessee. He also filed the profit & loss account and balance sheet of the lender companies. D. Finally, it is contended that since the loans were repaid through the banking channels after deducting the TDS on the interest, it can be concluded that the loans received are genuine

SHAHU SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, LATUR,LATUR vs. ACIT (EXMP.) CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

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

transfer the net\namount payable to each teaching and non teaching staff to their\nsavings account on the same day.\nYour honour, it is obvious that, there is a direct nexus of income and\nexpenditure specifically relatable to salary grant and salary\nexpenditure.\nIn support of this claim, the assessee trust is submitting following\ndocuments.\na) A copy

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

prices. (iii) that, MITCON consultancy and engineering services Ltd was listed on the SME platform of the National Stock Exchange, Mumbai and as such a reliable organisation for submitting the valuation report on the computation of premium. M/s. Accord Mediplus Pvt. Ltd. 3. As can be seen from the above, the assessee was not able to substantiate the abnormal rise

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

prices. (iii) that, MITCON consultancy and engineering services Ltd was listed on the SME platform of the National Stock Exchange, Mumbai and as such a reliable organisation for submitting the valuation report on the computation of premium. M/s. Accord Mediplus Pvt. Ltd. 3. As can be seen from the above, the assessee was not able to substantiate the abnormal rise

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

prices. (iii) that, MITCON consultancy and engineering services Ltd was listed on the SME platform of the National Stock Exchange, Mumbai and as such a reliable organisation for submitting the valuation report on the computation of premium. M/s. Accord Mediplus Pvt. Ltd. 3. As can be seen from the above, the assessee was not able to substantiate the abnormal rise

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

prices. (iii) that, MITCON consultancy and engineering services Ltd was listed on the SME platform of the National Stock Exchange, Mumbai and as such a reliable organisation for submitting the valuation report on the computation of premium. M/s. Accord Mediplus Pvt. Ltd. 3. As can be seen from the above, the assessee was not able to substantiate the abnormal rise

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

price per share was not even determined in the\nvaluation report of the CA as per DCF method submitted during\nthe course of the assessment proceedings:\niii. It is further seen from the verification of the valuation report\nthat huge projection of the revenue and profit were made to create\nfree cash flow even though, as a matter of fact

DINESHKUMAR RAMCHANDRA TULSYAN (HUF),,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dineshkumar Ramchandra Tulsyan (Huf) Ito, Ward 1(5), 214B, Laxmi Niwas, Mahatma Nagar, Vs. Nashik Nashik – 422007 Pan: Aachd5953R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Sumandevi Dineshkumar Tulsyan Ito, Ward 1(5), 214B, Laxmi Niwas, Mahatma Nagar, Vs. Nashik Nashik – 422007 Pan: Ackpt1322Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

transferred to D-mat account on 28.12.2012 and sold through IIFL and the amount of Rs.1,01,12,902/- received in lieu of sale consideration was deposited in ICICI Bank. The Assessing Officer sought directions from the JCIT u/s 144A of the Act vide letter dated 26.12.2016 who gave directions which have been reproduced by the Assessing Officer