RIETER INDIA PVT.LTD,,SATARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rieter India Private Limited, Vs. Acit, Gat No.768/2, Circle-5, Shindewadi-Bhor Road, Pune Village Wing, Taluka Khandala, District Satara – 412 801 Pan : Aaacr3556P Appellant Respondent

deposit, we hold that the authorities below rightly took it as a part of non-operating revenue. 7.2. The other item is `Recovery of contribution to Provident Fund on behalf of employees‟ amounting to Rs.15,79,187/-. On 9 Rieter India Private Limited being called upon to explain the nature of this item, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee

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

SANGEETA BASAVRAJ MANGRULE,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, AURANGABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

transferred to the beneficiaries via share broker‟s account. Almost all the proprietorship accounts where cash was deposited never filed their return of income tax. Moreover they tended to close such accounts very often, so that they could evade any STR/FIU/Income Tax Authorities. If one went through the KYCs of such proprietorship accounts, it could be seen that they were

SARIKA AMIT SANAP,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 3,, AURANGABAD

In the result, assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

transferred to the beneficiaries via share broker's account. Almost all the proprietorship accounts where cash was deposited never filed their return of income tax. Moreover they tended to close such accounts very often, so that they could evade any STR/FIU/income Tax Authorities. If one went through the KYCs of such proprietorship accounts, it could be seen that they were

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,, NASHIK vs. M/S. ASHOKA BUILDCON LTD,, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1088/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12

prices were paid through banking channels. The Assessing Officer, however, enquired with the banks of these suppliers and noted that immediately after the deposit of cheques issued by the assessee, the cash was either withdrawn immediately or amount was transferred

ASHOKA BUILDCON LIMITED,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1088/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12

prices were paid through banking channels. The Assessing Officer, however, enquired with the banks of these suppliers and noted that immediately after the deposit of cheques issued by the assessee, the cash was either withdrawn immediately or amount was transferred

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

MANGAL ANNASAHEB JADHAV,,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, Ground No.1 and 2 are dismissed and Ground

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.665/Pun/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mangal A. Jadhav, The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, M/S.Shah Khandelwal Jain & Vs Ahmednagar. Associates, Level 3, Riverside Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, Near Rto, Pune - 411001. Pan: Ahypj 9285 D Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee Assessee By Shri Rajiv Thakkar – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 19/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Pune Dated 09.12.2016For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions Fit Scheme Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) It Be Held That Addition Of Rs. 10,57,073/- Made By The Ao, Doubting The Opening Cash Balance Which Is Further Deposited Into Bank & Upheld By Cit(A), Is Merely On- Guesswork & Conjectures & Is Improper, Unjustified, Incorrect & Contrary To Provisions Of Law & Facts Prevailing In The Case. No Such Addition Is Warranted In The Case Of The Appellant. The Addition Made By The Ao & Upheld By Cit (A) Be Deleted. The Appellant Be Granted Just & Proper Relief In This Respect. 2. On Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions & Scheme Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) It Be Held That Addition Of Rs. 60,00,000/- Made By Theao, Doubting The Advances Against Booking Of Flats Received In Cash In Which Were Further Deposited Into Bank & Upheld By Cit(A), Is Merely On Guesswork & Conjectures & Is Improper, Unjustified, Incorrect & Contrary To Provisions Of Law & Facts Prevailing

deposited into bank, and upheldby CIT(A), is merely on guesswork & conjectures and is improper, unjustified, incorrect and contrary to provisions of law and facts prevailing in the case. No such addition is warranted in the case of the appellant. The addition made by the AO and upheld by CIT(A) be deleted. The appellant be granted just and proper

GANPAT MUKUNDRAO MURKUTE,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

transfer of land of Rs.4,85,75,000/- to have been received by the assessee and thus made an addition of Rs.2,35,54,470/- on account of net short term capital gains. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who upheld the order of AO by holding as under : “3.4 The submission made

SH. MAHENDRA R. VITKAR,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 10(2),, PUNE

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

transfer of land of Rs.4,85,75,000/- to have been received by the assessee and thus made an addition of Rs.2,35,54,470/- on account of net short term capital gains. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who upheld the order of AO by holding as under : “3.4 The submission made

ITO WARD 9(4),, PUNE vs. SH. MAHENDRA R. VITKAR, PUNE

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

transfer of land of Rs.4,85,75,000/- to have been received by the assessee and thus made an addition of Rs.2,35,54,470/- on account of net short term capital gains. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who upheld the order of AO by holding as under : “3.4 The submission made

AMIT BHASKARRAO SANAP,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -3, , AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.78/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Amit Bhaskarrao Sanap, The Assistant A-2, N-4, Cidco, Aurangabad, Vs Commissioner Of Income Maharashtra – 431001. Tax, Circle-3, Aurangabad. Pan: Auips 4177 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe & Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 25/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Aurangabad, Dated 13.11.2018 For The A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner (A), Aurangabad Confirming The Addition Of Rs.1,93.17.241/- Made By The A.O. In Computing The Income U/S 56 Instead Of Exempt U S. 10(38) Of The Act Of The Appellant Is Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case.

deposited in various bank accounts and hen finally, we used to transfer it to party / beneficiaries bank account. For doing so, e used to get a commission income in cash from party @ 0.10 paisa per 100 Rupees of cheque amount. Our companies buy the shares ITA No.78/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2015-16 Amit Bhaskarrao Sanap Vs. ACIT, Circle-3, (A) afterthe

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