Itxa/1426/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-I Pune v. Patangarao Kadam Pratisthan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1426 OF 2012WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1429 OF 2012WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1430 OF 2012WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1431 OF 2012WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1432 OF 2012WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1590 OF 2012 … Commissioner of Income Tax-1Pune ...Appellant v/s.Patangrao Kadam Pratisthan,Bharati Vidyapeeth BhawanPune ...Respondent … Mr.Vimal Gupta, Sr.Counsel /b Mr.Vipul Arun Bajpayee for the Appellant.Mr.Mandar Vaidya for the Respondent. … CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 31 OCTOBER 2014 P.C.: Heard Mr.Vimal Gupta, learned Sr.Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue. 2.In all these Appeals, the question of law is common to several other Appeals and of some of the similar Assessees, namely Education Institutions or deemed Universities. In regard to itxa-1426-12.doc those, we have found that the Tribunal's concurrent finding is that the Assessing Officer could not have issued the notice automatically and on the basis of any seized documents. On 10[th ]June 2014, a similar finding of the Tribunal was upheld by us in Income Tax Appeal No.36 of 2012 and connected Appeals. Similarly, in Income Tax Appeal No.854 of 2012, decided on 12[th ]September 2014, we had taken an identical view. 3.In the present case, the controversy is identical to the cases of Bharati Vidyapeeth and Bharati Vidyapeeth Medical Foundation. For the reasons recorded by us in those orders, even these Appeals fail and do not raise any substantial question of law. 4.Appeals are, accordingly, dismissed. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.)