CIT v. Crescent Export Syndicate

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Ramdarsh Ramkishun Vishwakarma, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit, 19(3) Ramdarsh Ramkishun R.No.305 Floor, Vishwakarma, बनाम/ Piramal Chamber, 2Nd Mangast Chhaya, 15Th Road, Vs. Parel Bandra(W) Mumbai-12 Mumbai-400050 (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No.Aaapv3164C Co No. 50/Mum/2015 (Arising Out Of Ita No.6757/Mum/2012) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ramdarsh Ramkishun Acit, 19(3) Vishwakarma, R.No.305 Floor, Piramal बनाम/ 2Nd Mangast Chhaya, 15Th Chamber, Parel Vs. Road, Bandra(W) Mumbai-12 Mumbai-400050 (Revenue) (Appellant) P.A. No.Aaapv3164C Revenue By Shri B.S. Bist (Dr) Respondent By None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / 23/06/2016 Date Of Hearing : 29/06/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,D,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"वनी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 ACIT, 19(3) Ramdarsh Ramkishun R.No.305 Floor, Vishwakarma, बनाम/ Piramal Chamber, 2nd Mangast Chhaya, 15th Road, Vs. Parel Bandra(W) Mumbai-12 Mumbai-400050 (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No.AAAPV3164C CO NO. 50/Mum/2015 (Arising out of ITA No.6757/Mum/2012) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ramdarsh Ramkishun ACIT, 19(3) Vishwakarma, R.No…

Regina Jayprakash, Mumbai vs. ITO 22(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our order as discussed above

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

…bench in the case of Meryline Shipping and transports (supra) contended that the provisions of sec. 40(a)(ia) shall apply only to amount payable and not to the amount paid. However, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sikandar Khan N Tunvar (357 ITR 312) and the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Crescent Export Syndicate (ITAT 20 of 2013) have held that the decision rendered by the Special Bench in the case of Meryline Shipping & Transports is not a good law. The Ld A.R, however, placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Servi…

Regina Jayprakash, Mumbai vs. I.T.O.22(2)-4, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our order as discussed above

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

…bench in the case of Meryline Shipping and transports (supra) contended that the provisions of sec. 40(a)(ia) shall apply only to amount payable and not to the amount paid. However, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sikandar Khan N Tunvar (357 ITR 312) and the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Crescent Export Syndicate (ITAT 20 of 2013) have held that the decision rendered by the Special Bench in the case of Meryline Shipping & Transports is not a good law. The Ld A.R, however, placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Vector Shipping Servi…

DCIT 7(2), Mumbai vs. Sealord Diving & Salvage P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and the assessee’s cross objection is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 701/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dy. Cit-7(2), Sealord Diving & Salvage Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No. 624, M. K. Rd., Plot No. D-222/34, Ttc Industrial Mumbai-400 020 Area, Midc Shiravane, Nerul (E), Vs. Navi Mumbai-400 026 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aakcs 0916 Q (Revenue) (Assessee) : C.O. No. 160/Mum/2015 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 701/Mum/2013) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sealord Diving & Salvage Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit-7(2), बनाम/ Plot No. D-222/34, Ttc Industrial Room No. 624, M. K. Rd., Area, Midc Shiravane, Nerul (E), Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Navi Mumbai-400 026 (Cross Objector) : (Assessee) Revenue By : Shri Mohammed Rizwan : Shri Shailesh N. Doshi Assessee By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.05.2016 Date Of Hearing : 20.05.2016 Date Of Order आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue & The Cross Objection (Co) By The Assessee Agitating The Part Allowance Of The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated

…esentative (AR), the assessee’s counsel, noting the several decisions by the Tribunal taking a contrary view (i.e., than that expressed in Merilyn Shipping & Transport (supra)) in view of and following the decisions in CIT vs. Crescent Export Syndicate [2013] 216 Taxmann 258 (Cal) and CIT vs. Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar [2013] 357 ITR 312 (Guj), and distinguishing the decision in the case of CIT vs. Vector Shipping Services [2013] 85 CCH 201 (All), to some of which reference was made by him during hearing, would submit that he, in deference to the statement of law as expressed therein, concedes to the same. However, a…

ITO WD 22(3)2, Navi Mumbai vs. Khushal R. Hefa, Vashi

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…our of the revenue. Merilyn Shipping & Transports (ITA 477/Viz./2008, dated March 29, 2012), overruled.” 10. Similar interpretation has been reiterated and explained in detail by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, in CIT v/s Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar & Ors.[ 2013] 357 ITR 312 (Guj.). In this decision, again the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has specifically dealt this issue in a great length and overruled Marilyn Shipping in the following manner:- For the purpose of the said section, the terms "payable" and "paid" are not synonymous. Word "paid" has been defined in Section 43(2) of the Act to mean actually paid or incurr…

Dr. Surendrakumar G. Patva, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4004/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dr. Surendrakumar G. Patva Ito-16(3)(3), बनाम/ C/O. Shind & Co., Mumbai 19/146 Anand Nagar, Vakola Bridge, Vs. Santacruz (E), Mumbai-400 055 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Ahjpp 8546 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Bharati Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 03.11.2015 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 20.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 27.02.2015, Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009- 10 Vide Order Dated 27.12.2011. 2. We Shall Proceed Ground-Wise. The Facts In Relation To Ground 1 Are That The Assessee, A Doctor By Profession, Was During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings

…ndia Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT [2010] 325 ITR 610 (Mad)). The assessee’s reliance in the case of Merilyn Shipping & Transports (supra) is of little consequence in view of the decisions by the Hon’ble Courts, as in the case of CIT vs. Crescent Export Syndicate [2013] 216 Taxmann 258 (Cal) and CIT vs. Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar [2013] 357 ITR 312 (Guj), overruling Merilyn Shipping & Transports (supra). The matter stands also discussed at length by the tribunal, as in the case of Raviraj Relempaadu [2014] 29 ITR 387 (Mum.)(Trib.) and ITO vs. Pratibhuti Viniyog Ltd. (in ITA No. 1689/Mum/2011 dated 22.08.2014), also discussion a…

Elve Corporation, Mumbai vs. ACIT 12(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 4108/Mum/2012 & 6279/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Elve Corporation Asst. Cit-12(3), बनाम/ Elve Chambers, Green Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe 4847 R ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6229/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Asst. Cit-12(3), Elve Corporation बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Elve Chambers, Green Street, Vs. Mumbai Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe 4847 R (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) : राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri M. C. Naniwadekar "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Vivek Anand Perapurna सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 21.08.2015 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 20.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Set Of Three Appeals For Two Consecutive Years, Being Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2008-09 & 2009-10, By The Assessee & The Revenue Respectively

…tion of section 40(a)(i) on freight charges. Two, on merits, the decision in the case of Merilyn Shipping & Transports (supra) holds the field no longer in view of the decisions by the Hon’ble Courts, as in the case of CIT vs. Crescent Export Syndicate [2013] 216 Taxmann 258 (Cal) and CIT vs. Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar [2013] 357 ITR 312 (Guj), overruling Merilyn Shipping & Transports (supra). The matter stands also discussed at length by the tribunal, as in the case of Raviraj Relempaadu [2014] 29 ITR 387 (Mum.)(Trib.) and ITO vs. Pratibhuti Viniyog Ltd. (in ITA No. 1689/Mum/2011 dated 22.08.2014), relied upon by th…

ACIT Cir 12(3), Mumbai vs. Elve Corporation, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 4108/Mum/2012 & 6279/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Elve Corporation Asst. Cit-12(3), बनाम/ Elve Chambers, Green Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe 4847 R ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6229/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Asst. Cit-12(3), Elve Corporation बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Elve Chambers, Green Street, Vs. Mumbai Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe 4847 R (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) : राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri M. C. Naniwadekar "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Vivek Anand Perapurna सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 21.08.2015 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 20.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Set Of Three Appeals For Two Consecutive Years, Being Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2008-09 & 2009-10, By The Assessee & The Revenue Respectively

…tion of section 40(a)(i) on freight charges. Two, on merits, the decision in the case of Merilyn Shipping & Transports (supra) holds the field no longer in view of the decisions by the Hon’ble Courts, as in the case of CIT vs. Crescent Export Syndicate [2013] 216 Taxmann 258 (Cal) and CIT vs. Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar [2013] 357 ITR 312 (Guj), overruling Merilyn Shipping & Transports (supra). The matter stands also discussed at length by the tribunal, as in the case of Raviraj Relempaadu [2014] 29 ITR 387 (Mum.)(Trib.) and ITO vs. Pratibhuti Viniyog Ltd. (in ITA No. 1689/Mum/2011 dated 22.08.2014), relied upon by th…

Elve Corporation, Mumbai vs. ACIT 12(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 4108/Mum/2012 & 6279/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Elve Corporation Asst. Cit-12(3), बनाम/ Elve Chambers, Green Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe 4847 R ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6229/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Asst. Cit-12(3), Elve Corporation बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Elve Chambers, Green Street, Vs. Mumbai Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafe 4847 R (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) : राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri M. C. Naniwadekar "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Vivek Anand Perapurna सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 21.08.2015 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 20.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Set Of Three Appeals For Two Consecutive Years, Being Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2008-09 & 2009-10, By The Assessee & The Revenue Respectively

…tion of section 40(a)(i) on freight charges. Two, on merits, the decision in the case of Merilyn Shipping & Transports (supra) holds the field no longer in view of the decisions by the Hon’ble Courts, as in the case of CIT vs. Crescent Export Syndicate [2013] 216 Taxmann 258 (Cal) and CIT vs. Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar [2013] 357 ITR 312 (Guj), overruling Merilyn Shipping & Transports (supra). The matter stands also discussed at length by the tribunal, as in the case of Raviraj Relempaadu [2014] 29 ITR 387 (Mum.)(Trib.) and ITO vs. Pratibhuti Viniyog Ltd. (in ITA No. 1689/Mum/2011 dated 22.08.2014), relied upon by th…