CIT v. Lady Navajvai R.J. Tata

Raoul Thackersey, Mumbai vs. DCIT 12(1), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawal

…e assessee. This is so because as per section 17(2)(iii)(a) of the Act, the director to whom any benefit or amenity is granted must be an employee of the company. In this context, we may refer to the following decisions:- i) CIT v/s Lady Navajvai R.J. Tata, 15 ITR 8; and ii) CIT v/s Laxmipati Singhania, 92 ITR 598. 9. Moreover, as observed by us earlier, merely on the basis of the difference between stamp duty valuation and actual sale consideration the Assessing Officer has concluded that a benefit in the nature of perquisite has 30 ITA.No.1262/MUM./2017 been given to the assessee by the company. However, ther…

Keshavji B. Gala, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 24(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey

…he assessee. This is so because as per section 17(2)(iii)(a) of the Act, the director to whom any benefit or amenity is granted must be an employee of the company. In this context, we may refer to the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Lady Navajvai R.J. Tata, 15 ITR 8; and ii) CIT v/s Laxmipati Singhania, 92 ITR 598. 10 Shri Keshavji Bhuralal Gala 9. Moreover, as observed by us earlier, merely on the basis of the difference between stamp duty valuation and actual sale consideration the Assessing Officer has concluded that a benefit in the nature of perquisite has been given to the assessee by the company. Howeve…

Radhika Mohan Kamat, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 15(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…atisfy the tests of income and consequently cannot be brought to tax under the residuary head income from other sources merely because it fails the test under other heads. The learned CIT-(A) erred in relying on the decision given in 6. Lady Navajbai R J Tata 15 ITR 8 the facts of which are distinguishable from the case of the appellant. In the alternative and without prejudice to the above grounds 7. the Learned CIT-(A) has erred in law in not appreciating the fact that the said amount of Rs.15 lacs being taxed as income in the hands of the company - M/s Alma Motors Pvt. Ltd., and the said disallowance having be…

ITO (TDS) 3(4), Mumbai vs. Unichem Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4592/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4593/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ito (Tds) 3(4),10Th Floor, Unichem Laboratories Ltd., Room No. 1011, Unichem Bhawan, S.V.Road, बनाम/ Smt. K.G.M. Ayurvedic Hospital 8, Prabhat Estate, Bulidng, Charni Road, Jogeshwari (West), V. Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai – 400 102. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacu0551B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “एफ” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4592/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4593/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ITO (TDS) 3(4),10th Floor, Unichem Laboratories Ltd., Room No. 1011, Unichem Bhawan, S.V.Road, बनाम/ Smt. K.G.M. Ayurvedic Hospital 8, Prabhat Estate, Bulidng, Charni Road, Jogeshwari (West), v. Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai – 400 102. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAACU0551B…