1. Mrs. Sheila Kaushish Vs. CIT 131 ITR 435 (SC) 2. Diwan Daulat Kapoor v. New Delhi Municipal Committee

JUBILIANT ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 3 (2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6578/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. बिधम/ Acit-3(2)(1) Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. 11-B, Mittal Tower, B-Wing, 400020. Free Press Journal Marg, Mumbai-400021. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6048/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Acit-3(2)(1) बिधम/ Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. Room No.674, 6Th Floor, Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 11-B, Mittal Tower, B- Road, Mumbai-400020. Wing, Free Press Journal Marg, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj4688D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Shri Sunil Deshpande (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/04/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/06/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee As Well As Revenue Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 18.07.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -08, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2006-07. Ita Nos. 6578/M/2019 6048/M/2019 A.Y.2006-07

…n of ALV u/s 23 (1) (a) of the Income Tax Act He, in this respect also referred to the following decisions: I. Mrs. Sheila Kaushish Vs. CIT 131 ITR 435 (SC) 2. Diwan Daulat Kapoor Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee 122 ITR 700 (SC) 3. C/T Vs. Moni Kumar Subba 240 CTR 97 (Del) (FB) and 4. Smitaben N. Ambani Vs CWT 323 ITR 104 (Bom) properties at Corporate Park at Rs.4,44,27,866/- and in respect of the properties at Kamala Mill Compound at Rs.1,44,92,240/-. The AO further noted that even if, notional interest @16% of the deposits is taken and added to the rental value declared by the assessee, then the annual rent…

SYNCHEM CHEMICALS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

…be expected to be let out as the actual rent received was very nominal and much less than fair rent” 7.2. “On the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to apply the ratio of the decision in the case of Moni Kumar Subba Rao (240 CTR 97(FB) (Del) and Tiroli Investments (130 ITD 521) (Mum), wherein it has been held that A.O. has powers to determine the fair rent when he finds that actual rent received is much less than amount for which property might be reasonably let out from year to year.” 8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, vary, omit or substitute any of the aforesaid…

JUBILIANT ENTERPRISES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee and the appeal of the

Bench: Sri G. S. Pannu & Sri Sanjay Gargthe Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. Income-Tax, Central Circle- Ltd/., 11-B, B Wing, Mittal 6(4)[Old Cc 39], Room Towers, Nariman Point, No.32(1), Ground Floor, Mumbai 400001 Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Pan:Aaabcj 4688D Mumbai 400001 Appellant .. Respondent M/S. Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. Ltd/., Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of 11-B, B Wing, Mittal Towers, Income-Tax, Central Circle- Nariman Point, Mumbai 400001 6(4)[Old Cc 39], Room Pan:Aaabcj 4688D No.32(1), Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai 400001 Appellant .. Respondent Revenue By: Shri Prakash Patnade, Dr Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar Date Of Hearing: 23-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 20-07-2016

…f ALV u/s 23 (1) (a) of the Income 7 Tax Act. He, in this respect also referred to the following decisions: 1. Mrs. Sheila Kaushish Vs. CIT 131 ITR 435 (SC) 2. Diwan Daulat Kapoor Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee 122 ITR 700 (SC) 3. CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subba 240 CTR 97 (Del) (FB) and 4. Smitaben N. Ambani Vs CWT 323 ITR 104 (Bom) He further observed that whatever benefits were derived by the assessee form the interest free deposits that were duly reflected and offered for taxation in the return of income as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. He further relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High…

ACIT CC 6(4), MUMBAI vs. JUBLIANT ENTERPRISES P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee and the appeal of the

Bench: Sri G. S. Pannu & Sri Sanjay Gargthe Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. Income-Tax, Central Circle- Ltd/., 11-B, B Wing, Mittal 6(4)[Old Cc 39], Room Towers, Nariman Point, No.32(1), Ground Floor, Mumbai 400001 Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Pan:Aaabcj 4688D Mumbai 400001 Appellant .. Respondent M/S. Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. Ltd/., Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of 11-B, B Wing, Mittal Towers, Income-Tax, Central Circle- Nariman Point, Mumbai 400001 6(4)[Old Cc 39], Room Pan:Aaabcj 4688D No.32(1), Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai 400001 Appellant .. Respondent Revenue By: Shri Prakash Patnade, Dr Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar Date Of Hearing: 23-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 20-07-2016

…f ALV u/s 23 (1) (a) of the Income 7 Tax Act. He, in this respect also referred to the following decisions: 1. Mrs. Sheila Kaushish Vs. CIT 131 ITR 435 (SC) 2. Diwan Daulat Kapoor Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee 122 ITR 700 (SC) 3. CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subba 240 CTR 97 (Del) (FB) and 4. Smitaben N. Ambani Vs CWT 323 ITR 104 (Bom) He further observed that whatever benefits were derived by the assessee form the interest free deposits that were duly reflected and offered for taxation in the return of income as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. He further relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High…