All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. v. DCIT

Kamla Park Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT (3)(4) Central Circle, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2009-10,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1616 To 1618 & 1620 To 1621/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years:2009-10 To 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Kamla Park Developers बनाम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) 19Th Floor, Air India Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400057. Mumbai-400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahfk7627G (अपीलधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 07.01.2019 For A.Y. 2009-10 To 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Kamla Park Developers The Revenu…

Kamla Park Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT (3)(4) Central Circle, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2009-10,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1616 To 1618 & 1620 To 1621/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years:2009-10 To 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Kamla Park Developers बनाम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) 19Th Floor, Air India Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400057. Mumbai-400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahfk7627G (अपीलधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 07.01.2019 For A.Y. 2009-10 To 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15 Kamla Park Developers The Revenu…

Kamla Landmarc Estate, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4) Central Circle, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2008-09 is allowed and the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. Nos.1608 & 1612/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 & 2012-13) Kamlalandmarc Estate बनाम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaifk1567A (अपीलधथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Shri Rashmikant Modi Assessee By: Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha(Dr) सुिवधईकीतधरीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोर्णधकीतधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 07-01-2019 For A.Ys. 2008- 09 & Ay. 2012-13. Since Issues Involved Are Common, Both These Appeals For The Two Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose These Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended that, the decisions relied upon by the assessee…

Kamlashri Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended that, the decisions relied upon by the assessee…

Kamlashri Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended that, the decisions relied upon by the assessee…

Kamlashri Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended that, the decisions relied upon by the assessee…

Kamlashri Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended that, the decisions relied upon by the assessee…

Kamlashri Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended that, the decisions relied upon by the assessee…

Kamla Ankur Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT (3)(4), Central Circle, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. Nos.1280 To 1286/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2014-15) Kamla Ankur Venture बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaifk4902H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.12.2018 For A.Y. 2008-09 To Ay. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2014-15 Kamla Ankur Ventures The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended…

Kamla Ankur Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. Nos.1280 To 1286/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2014-15) Kamla Ankur Venture बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaifk4902H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.12.2018 For A.Y. 2008-09 To Ay. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2014-15 Kamla Ankur Ventures The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended…

Kamla Ankur Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. Nos.1280 To 1286/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2014-15) Kamla Ankur Venture बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaifk4902H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.12.2018 For A.Y. 2008-09 To Ay. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2014-15 Kamla Ankur Ventures The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended…

Kamla Ankur Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Cirle-(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. Nos.1280 To 1286/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2014-15) Kamla Ankur Venture बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaifk4902H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.12.2018 For A.Y. 2008-09 To Ay. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2014-15 Kamla Ankur Ventures The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended…

Kamla Ankur Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. Nos.1280 To 1286/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2014-15) Kamla Ankur Venture बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaifk4902H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.12.2018 For A.Y. 2008-09 To Ay. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2014-15 Kamla Ankur Ventures The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended…

Kamla Ankur Venture, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Central Circle, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. Nos.1280 To 1286/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2014-15) Kamla Ankur Venture बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaifk4902H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.12.2018 For A.Y. 2008-09 To Ay. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2014-15 Kamla Ankur Ventures The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended…

Kamla Ankur, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. Nos.1280 To 1286/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2014-15) Kamla Ankur Venture बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaifk4902H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 24.12.2018 For A.Y. 2008-09 To Ay. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

…d by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd (supra), CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (49 taxmann.com 172) and the Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd vs DCIT (137 ITD 287). A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2014-15 Kamla Ankur Ventures The Revenue had alternatively contended that, the statements recorded u/s 132(4) carries sufficient evidentiary value and therefore any admission by the assessee to any wrong doing itself constitutes incriminating material to justify additions in unabated assessments. The Revenue further contended…

M/S. Burlington Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-3(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (JM) I.T.A. No. 1039/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1195/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1196/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2014-15) Vs. DCIT, Central M/s. Bazigar Trading Pvt. Ltd. Office No. 20, 8th Floor Circle-3(1) 3 Navjivan Commercial 19th Floor Premises Co-operative Society Air India Building Ltd., lamington Road Nariman Point Mumbai-400 008. Mumbai-400 021. PAN : AABCB3052B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 1266/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1294/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1267/Mum/2021 (A.Y.…

M/S. Burlington Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, Central Circle-3(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (JM) I.T.A. No. 1039/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1195/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1196/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2014-15) Vs. DCIT, Central M/s. Bazigar Trading Pvt. Ltd. Office No. 20, 8th Floor Circle-3(1) 3 Navjivan Commercial 19th Floor Premises Co-operative Society Air India Building Ltd., lamington Road Nariman Point Mumbai-400 008. Mumbai-400 021. PAN : AABCB3052B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 1266/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1294/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1267/Mum/2021 (A.Y.…

M/S. Burlington Finance Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, Central Circle-3(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (JM) I.T.A. No. 1039/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1195/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1196/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2014-15) Vs. DCIT, Central M/s. Bazigar Trading Pvt. Ltd. Office No. 20, 8th Floor Circle-3(1) 3 Navjivan Commercial 19th Floor Premises Co-operative Society Air India Building Ltd., lamington Road Nariman Point Mumbai-400 008. Mumbai-400 021. PAN : AABCB3052B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 1266/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1294/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1267/Mum/2021 (A.Y.…

M/S. Bazigar Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-3(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (JM) I.T.A. No. 1039/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1195/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1196/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2014-15) Vs. DCIT, Central M/s. Bazigar Trading Pvt. Ltd. Office No. 20, 8th Floor Circle-3(1) 3 Navjivan Commercial 19th Floor Premises Co-operative Society Air India Building Ltd., lamington Road Nariman Point Mumbai-400 008. Mumbai-400 021. PAN : AABCB3052B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 1266/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1294/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1267/Mum/2021 (A.Y.…

M/S. Bazigar Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-3(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (JM) I.T.A. No. 1039/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1195/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1196/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2014-15) Vs. DCIT, Central M/s. Bazigar Trading Pvt. Ltd. Office No. 20, 8th Floor Circle-3(1) 3 Navjivan Commercial 19th Floor Premises Co-operative Society Air India Building Ltd., lamington Road Nariman Point Mumbai-400 008. Mumbai-400 021. PAN : AABCB3052B (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 1266/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 1294/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1267/Mum/2021 (A.Y.…