Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT

National Realty P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals i

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am National Reality P Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 11-16 Ashoka Shopping Centre, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Near Mumbai-20 G.T. Hospital, Mumbai-400 011 .. Appellant Respondent Pan No. Aaacn1433D Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Reality P Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 11-16 Ashoka Shopping Mumbai-20 Vs. Centre, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Near G.T. Hospital, Mumbai-400 011 .. Appellant Respondent Pan No. Aaacn1433D

…39/Mum/2012 dated 29.06.2016 for A.Y. 2009-10, we too are of the view that the matter of controversy is required to be re-examined/verified afresh in view of the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC). In this view of the matter we set aside the finding of the learned CIT(A) on this issue and restore this matter to the file of the AO to reconsider the matter of controversy in the light of the guidelines laid down in the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. (supra), after affording the ass…

Mega Venture Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed as indicated above

…and recording systems, cabin furniture, workstation (tables) conference table, EPBA Box and condition system. In defense of his arguments, the ld.AR placed reliance in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd vs. CIT (Supreme Court) reported in [2015] 373 ITR 673 (SC) and prayed that the actions of the lower authorities should be reversed and the AO should be business income. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR, while objecting the arguments of the ld.AR submitted that the assessee in order to circumvent various provisions of law entered into two separate agreements in order to show the income under differe…

Ioto 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bakul Investment P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. 650/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Bakul Investment Pvt.Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 63, Sonawala Building, Ward 2(1)(1), फनधभ/ Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Bombay Samachar Marg, Fort, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400001 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Applicant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…2015, wherein the issue has been decided by remitting the 3 and 672/Mum/2015 issue back to the file of the AO to decide the issue afresh in the light of decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd vs. CIT [2015] 373 ITR 673 (SC), dated 9th April, 2015. The ld. DR also fairly appeared to be agreed with the submissions of the ld.AR. 4. We have carefully considered the rival contentions, perused the material placed before us during the course of hearing including the decisions of authorities below as also the decisions relied upon by the ld. AR. We find that the Co-or…

Bakul Investment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. 650/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Bakul Investment Pvt.Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 63, Sonawala Building, Ward 2(1)(1), फनधभ/ Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Bombay Samachar Marg, Fort, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400001 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Applicant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…2015, wherein the issue has been decided by remitting the 3 and 672/Mum/2015 issue back to the file of the AO to decide the issue afresh in the light of decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd vs. CIT [2015] 373 ITR 673 (SC), dated 9th April, 2015. The ld. DR also fairly appeared to be agreed with the submissions of the ld.AR. 4. We have carefully considered the rival contentions, perused the material placed before us during the course of hearing including the decisions of authorities below as also the decisions relied upon by the ld. AR. We find that the Co-or…

The Bharat Line Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, these six appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.7924/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) ITA No.6384 /Mum/2010 (A.Y:2006-07) ITA No.7926/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2008-09) ITA No.858 /Mum/2013 (A.Y:2009-10) M/s The Bharat Line Ltd., Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Bharat House, 104 Mumbai Vs. Samachar Marg, Fort Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 PAN No.AAACT3601R Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Mayur Kisnadwala, AR Assessee by Revenue by .. Shri. Rampriya Raghavan, DR .. Date of hearing 24-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 25-01-2017 O…

The Bharat Line Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, these six appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.7924/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) ITA No.6384 /Mum/2010 (A.Y:2006-07) ITA No.7926/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2008-09) ITA No.858 /Mum/2013 (A.Y:2009-10) M/s The Bharat Line Ltd., Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Bharat House, 104 Mumbai Vs. Samachar Marg, Fort Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 PAN No.AAACT3601R Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Mayur Kisnadwala, AR Assessee by Revenue by .. Shri. Rampriya Raghavan, DR .. Date of hearing 24-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 25-01-2017 O…

The Bharat Line Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, these six appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.7924/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) ITA No.6384 /Mum/2010 (A.Y:2006-07) ITA No.7926/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2008-09) ITA No.858 /Mum/2013 (A.Y:2009-10) M/s The Bharat Line Ltd., Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Bharat House, 104 Mumbai Vs. Samachar Marg, Fort Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 PAN No.AAACT3601R Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Mayur Kisnadwala, AR Assessee by Revenue by .. Shri. Rampriya Raghavan, DR .. Date of hearing 24-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 25-01-2017 O…

The Bharat Line Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, these six appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.7924/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) ITA No.6384 /Mum/2010 (A.Y:2006-07) ITA No.7926/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2008-09) ITA No.858 /Mum/2013 (A.Y:2009-10) M/s The Bharat Line Ltd., Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Bharat House, 104 Mumbai Vs. Samachar Marg, Fort Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 PAN No.AAACT3601R Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Mayur Kisnadwala, AR Assessee by Revenue by .. Shri. Rampriya Raghavan, DR .. Date of hearing 24-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 25-01-2017 O…

The Bharat Line Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD) 2(1, Mumbai

In the result, these six appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.7924/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) ITA No.6384 /Mum/2010 (A.Y:2006-07) ITA No.7926/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2008-09) ITA No.858 /Mum/2013 (A.Y:2009-10) M/s The Bharat Line Ltd., Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Bharat House, 104 Mumbai Vs. Samachar Marg, Fort Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 PAN No.AAACT3601R Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Mayur Kisnadwala, AR Assessee by Revenue by .. Shri. Rampriya Raghavan, DR .. Date of hearing 24-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 25-01-2017 O…

The Bharat Line Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, these six appeals of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI ASHWANI TANEJA, AM ITA No.7924/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2005-06) ITA No.6384 /Mum/2010 (A.Y:2006-07) ITA No.7926/Mum/2011 (A.Y:2008-09) ITA No.858 /Mum/2013 (A.Y:2009-10) M/s The Bharat Line Ltd., Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Bharat House, 104 Mumbai Vs. Samachar Marg, Fort Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 PAN No.AAACT3601R Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Mayur Kisnadwala, AR Assessee by Revenue by .. Shri. Rampriya Raghavan, DR .. Date of hearing 24-11-2016 Date of pronouncement .. 25-01-2017 O…

West Pioneer Properties (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Ram Lal Negi

…he authorities below. We have also gone through the judicial decisions relied upon by the Ld. Counsel. The entire dispute has to be considered in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd Vs CIT 373 ITR 673 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that letting out of the properties being the business of the assessee, the income from which has to be treated as income from business. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has further observed that the Memorandum of association of the assessee company clearly mentions that main objects is to acquire and hold the prop…

ACIT 13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Smruta Engineering Indusries P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amarjit Singhacit 13(2)(1), फनाभ/ M/S. Smruta Engineering R.No. 146A, 1St Floor, Aayakar Industries Pvt Ltd., Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai–20. 501, Seven Star Apartment, Jairaj Nagar, Borivali, Mumbai – 400 092. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aadcs8541G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ACIT 13(2)(1), फनाभ/ M/s. Smruta Engineering R.No. 146A, 1st Floor, Aayakar Industries Pvt Ltd., Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai–20. 501, Seven Star Apartment, Jairaj Nagar, Borivali, Mumbai – 400 092. स्थामी रेखा सं./ PAN : AADCS8541G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant by : Shri Tufail Ahmad Khan, DR प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent by : Shri Vimal Punmiya सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 12.01.2017 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pro…

M/S. Chandragupta Traders P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO - 3(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…premises only with the intention to let it out. He submitted that the clause 107 of Other Objects clause permit the assessee to lease land, buildings etc. He submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd (2015)(373 ITR 673) has held that the renting of building can constitute business activity. He submitted that both the tax authorities have not 4 Chandragupta Traders Private Limited accepted the claim of the assessee only for the reason that the assessee has let out a single premises. He submitted that letting out of single premises can also constitute as business…

M/S. Chandragupta Traders P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO - 3(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…premises only with the intention to let it out. He submitted that the clause 107 of Other Objects clause permit the assessee to lease land, buildings etc. He submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd (2015)(373 ITR 673) has held that the renting of building can constitute business activity. He submitted that both the tax authorities have not 4 Chandragupta Traders Private Limited accepted the claim of the assessee only for the reason that the assessee has let out a single premises. He submitted that letting out of single premises can also constitute as business…