Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(3), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. M/S.Growmore Research & Asset Management Limited, Mumbai
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed
ITA 1196/MUM/2019[1991-92]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2021AY 1991-92
Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 1991-92 Dcit, M/S. Growmore Research Cent. Cir.-4(3) & Assets Management Central Range-4, Ltd., Room No.1921, 32, Madhuli Apartment, Vs. 19Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Air India Bldg., Dr. Annie Besant Road, Nariman Point, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacg4936C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 1991-92 M/S. Growmore Research Dcit & Assets Management Cent. Cir.-4(3), Ltd., Central Range-4, 32, Madhuli Apartment, Room No.1921, 3Rd Floor, Vs. 19Th Floor, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Air India Bldg., Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Nariman Point, Pan: Aaacg4936C Mumbai - 400021
For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel, D.R
Section 147Section 14ASection 234Section 69
…e not satisfied. In defence of his argument the assessee relied on the following decisions: 40 ITA No.259/M/2019 & ors. M/s. Growmore Research & Assets Management Ltd. 1. Ushakant N. Patel vs. CIT (2006) 282 ITR 553 (Guj) 2. CIT vs. Mrugesh Jaykrishna (2000) 245 ITR 638 (Guj) 3. Dy.CIT vs. Singla Enclave developers (P.) Ltd. (2013) 40 taxmann.com 127 (Chandigarh-Trib.) 53. The Ld. A.R. also submits that AO is duty bound to prove that documents/information relied upon by him in which unrecorded investments were mentioned. Then the AO has to satisfy himself that these investments made by the assessee during the ye…
