How many judgments cite CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd.?

57 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. (249 ITR 47), spanning 2012 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 22, Section 27, Section 56(2)(iii), Section 10, Section 115JAA.

CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd.

249 ITR 47High Court2001#2023 most cited

What is CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Income from letting out immovable property, even with ancillary services, is taxable as 'Income from House Property' if the dominant intention is to exploit the property itself, not to run a complex business providing integrated services. The classification depends on the assessee's primary object in exploiting the property.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. · 249 ITR 47 · Section 22 · Income from House Property · Business income · Dominant intention · Primary object · Exploitation of property · Letting out property with services · Rental income vs business income · Ancillary facilities · 263 ITR 143

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 22 Section 27 Section 56(2)(iii)Section 10 Section 115JAA Section 115JB Section 12

Issues it is cited on

section 35dda section 36(1)(ii)annual value rule of consistency section 3(1)employees contribution to pf disallowance of interest expenditure section 22 section 36(1)(iii)book profits section 56(2)disallowance under section 14a

Judgments citing CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd.

MULCHAND SHAMJI CHHEDA HUF ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -26(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1700/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 271BSection 40Section 44A

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n&\nSHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nITA N0.1700/MUM/2025\n(A.Y. 2016-17)\nMulchand Shamji\nChheda HUF\nv/s.\nIncome Tax Officer – 26(2)(3)\nबनाम\nPratyakshakar Bhavan, C-11,\nGround Floor, 16/76, Next\nto Hotel Bawa Regency,\nGokuldas Pasta Road,\nBandra Kurla Complex, Bandra\n(East), Mumbai – 400051,\nDadar(East), Mumbai\nMaharashtra\n400 014, Maharashtra\nस्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAАНН2523М\nAppellant/अपीलार्थी\n..\nRespondent/प्रतिवादी\nAppellant by\nShri K. Gopal, Adv.…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1), , GUNTUR vs. BBM ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED, GUNTUR

In the result, Revenue appeal is allowed and the C

ITA 185/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam01 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri S. Balakrishnan.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.185/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Vs. Bbm Estates (P) Ltd Circle 1(1) Guntur Guntur Pan: Aaace2607G (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O No.12/Viz/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1895/Viz/2024) Bbm Estates (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Guntur Circle 1(1) Pan: Aaace2607G Guntur (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Satyasai Rath, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 01/04/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Satyasai Rath, DR

…ITA No 185 of 2024 and CO 12 of 2024 BBM Estates P Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Visakhapatnam Benches, Visakhapatnam Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri S. Balakrishnan. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.185/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) ACIT Vs. BBM Estates (P) Ltd Circle 1(1) Guntur Guntur PAN: AAACE2607G (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O No.12/Viz/2024 (Arising out of ITA No.1895/Viz/2024) BBM Estates (P) Ltd Vs. ACIT Guntur Circle 1(1) PAN: AAACE2607G Guntur (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri G.V.N. Hari, CA राज" व "ारा/Revenue by:: Shr…

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Sri N.Sai Baba Naidu

ITTA/319/2012HC Telangana06 Jan 2025

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 56Section 56(2)(iii)

…ITA 319/2012 Page 1 of 9 $~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 22nd November, 2012 + ITA 319/2012 GARG DYEING & PROCESSING INDUSTRIES ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajiv Saxena with Mr. Rajat Joseph, Advs. versus ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, sr. standing counsel with Mr. Puneet Gupta, jr. standing counsel CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V.…

TODI INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 8(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 895/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 22Section 37

…e is to exploit a commercial asset, the income received should be treated as income from business. The assessee has not shown that its dominant intention was to exploit the asset commercially. He further referred to the case of M/s Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd.(249 ITR 47), and held that although the occupiers were allotted table space in effect the right given to this occupiers were to enjoy furnished accommodation in the said immovable property. The other amenities like providing watch and ward staff, electricity and water were consequential to the principal right given to those occupiers under the said agreement…

DCIT- 8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. PIRAMAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2019/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Mr. Ronak Doshi a/w Priyank GandhiFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT/DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 24Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2018 & 2019/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17 DCIT-8(2)(1), Mumbai Piramal Estates Private Limited 8th Floor, Piramal Tower, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai- 400013. PAN: AACCA 7777 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Mr. Ronak Doshi a/w Priyank Gandhi Revenue by : Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT/DR Date of Hearing : 30.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:…

DCIT- 8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. PIRAMAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

ITA 2018/MUM/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 24Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2018 & 2019/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17 DCIT-8(2)(1), Mumbai Piramal Estates Private Vs. Limited (Appellant) Present for: Assessee by Revenue by Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement ORDER PER AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Both these appeals filed by the revenue are directed against different orders of ld. CIT(A), NFAC pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 & 2016- 17 respectively. Since common issue on identical facts are involved in these appeals…

PRABHAT KUMAR,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 275/PAT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 263

…ITA No. 275/PAT/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Prabhat Kumar IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Hybrid Court Hearing] Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 275/PAT/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Prabhat Kumar,……………………….…………… Appellant Prop. M/s. Recon, Sudha Sadan, West of Gandhi Murti, Dujra, Budha Colony, Patna-800001 [PAN: AJSPK2293G] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2,..Respondent Patna Appearances by: Shri Abhi Sarkar, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D.R., appeared…

M/S ACTIVE SECURITIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 2335/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Puneet Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 24

…e present case, is in the course of and as a part of business of company and enterprise which it has entered upon is of providing special facilities. 23. We also find that decision Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd reported in 249 ITR 47, which was approved by Hon'ble Supreme Court in judgment reported at 263 ITR 143, their Lordships had an occasion to elaborately deal with judicial precedents on whether rental income could be taxed under head business profits, and their Lordships concluded as follows: "Taking a sum total of aforesaid discussions, it clearly appears that merely be…

DCIT- 8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. PIRAMAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2015/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi/Priyank Gandhi/MsFor Respondent: Shri N. V. Nadkarni, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 24Section 250

…and PT Annexe) as Income from House Property instead of Income from Business and Professions by placing a strong reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Piramal Estates Pvt. Ltd. Shambhu Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 249 ITR 47 affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in [2003] 263 ITR 143. Further the AO in para 5.10 of the AO's order, observed that security deposit was covering the entire cost of the aforementioned immovable property. III. Action of the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals) ["the CIT (A)"1: 1. The Ld. CIT (A) has allowed the Assessee's Appeal after caref…

DELTA COLONIZERS LTD.,NEWDELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE -7(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed on ground no

ITA 1423/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv

Section 24

…and for AY 2013-14 the ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee and directing the Assessing Officer to treat the same as income from house property by following the judgment of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shambhu Investment P. Ltd. 249 ITR 47 (Cal.) therefore claim of assessee for immediately succeeding present assessment year 2014-15 under identical facts and circumstances deserves to be allowed. 4. The learned counsel precisely reiterated assessee’s written submissions dated 02.03.2023 and submitted that as per various judgments and orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court & High Court and co…

SAURASHTRA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1182/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande (Sr. AR)

Section 11Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 24Section 263

…from house property relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Shambu Investments (2631TR 143) which affirmed the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the 5 A.Y. 2017-18 Saurashtra Trust case of M/s. Shambu Investments (249 ITR 47) wherein the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court while deciding the case of M/s. Shambu Investments (supra) applied the test as laid by the Hon’ble Constitution Bench (five Judges) of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sultan Brothers Pvt Ltd. (51 ITR 353) where in it was held that where the prime object of the assessee under the agreement was to le…

ADDL CIT RG 10(2), MUMBAI vs. GEOMETRIC SOFTWAR SOLUTIONS CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground no

ITA 6219/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm M/S Geometric Software The Acit Solutions Company Ltd. Ward 10(2), [ Now Merged With Hcl Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Technologies Limited ] Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, 806, Sidharth, 96 Nehru Mumbai-400 020 Place, New Delhi 19 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aabcg 0066 A Co No. 157/Mum/2011 (Arising In Ita No.6219/Mum/2010 For A.Y. 2005–06) M/S Geometric Software Solutions Company Ltd. The Acit (Now Gemetric Ltd.) [ Now Ward 10(2), Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Merged With Hcl Vs. Technologies Limited] Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 806, Sidharth, 96 Nehru Place, New Delhi 19 (Respondent) (Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri Porus F. Kaka & Shri Manish Kanth, Ars‟ Revenue By : Shri Sumit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022

For Appellant: Shri Porus F. Kaka &For Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR

Section 10ASection 14A

…gorically stated that provisions of Sec. 56(2)(iii) are not applicable on the facts of the case. 11. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the rival parties. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Shambu Investment Pvt. Ltd. 249 ITR 47 has held as under: “Where prime object of the assessee under the agreement was to let out the portion of the said property to various occupants by giving them additional right of using the furniture and fixtures and other common facilities for which rent was being paid month by month. Income derived from the said property is an income from propert…

GEOMETRIC SOFTWARE SOLUTINS CO. LTD ( NOW GEMETRIC LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 10(2), MUMBAI

In the result, ground no

ITA 5975/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Porus F. Kaka &For Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar, DR

Section 10ASection 14A

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4369/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…g out of the premises and therefore were receipts taxable together with the property rental income to be taxed under the head 'income from house property. Ld. CIT(A) erred to not appreciate that the ratio decendi in CIT vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. (Cal) [249 ITR 47] (affirmed by SC) was applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case." 57. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 are similar to Ground No. 1 and 2 of grounds of appeal raised by the revenue for the A.Y. 2006-07 respectively, therefore, the decision taken therein shall apply mutatis-mutandis to the appeal for the A.Y. 2007-08. We order accordingly. 58. In…

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6963/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6085/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

WEL INTERTRADE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1460/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2011-12 Wel Intertrade Private Vs. Acit, Circle-27(2), Limited, New Delhi. 5,E Local Shopping Centre Masjid Moth, Greater Kailash Part 2, New Delhi – 110 048 Pan Aaacw10187F (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…he position of law. Therefore, we agree with the submissions of the assessee that in its case, it is expedient to follow the rule of consistency. 6.10.4 We have gone through the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT vs. Shambhu Investments Pvt. Ltd. 249 ITR 47 (Calcutta). In that case the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court observed that merely because income is attached to any immovable property that cannot be the sole factor for assessment of such income as income from property. What has to be seen is what was the primary object of the assessee while exploiting the property. If it is found applying such test…

SHRI MAHESH DEVDUTTA GUPTA,,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3),, NAGPUR

In the result, the addition so made is directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 143/NAG/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Jun 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh V.Loya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal Bhosale, JCIT

Section 68

…ssee is factually incorrect. Further, reliance was placed on the Hon’ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT v/s. National Storage (P) Ltd. 48 ITR 577 as well as decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of CIT v/s. Shambhu Investments(P) Ltd. 249 ITR 47. It was submitted that both the decisions have subsequently been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 8 ITANo.143/Nag/2017 4. Per contra, the ld. DR has relied on the findings of the Assessing Officer as well as the ld.CIT(A). 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. On close reading and examination…

TUBE ROSE ESTATES PVT. LTD. ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result ground number one – three of the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3136/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 24

…nd circumstances under which a view was taken by the taxman and the facts and circumstances of the assessment year in question calling to depart from earlier view. 7.3 The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shamuh Investment Pvt. Ltd. (2001), 249 ITR 47 held that merely because income is attached to any immovable property that cannot be sole factors for assessment of such income as income from property. What has to be seen is what was the primary object of the assessee while exploiting the property. If it is found applying such test that the main intention is for Jetting out the property or any p…

TRENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. C.I.T.-2(3), MUMBAI

ITA 5775/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Trent Ltd., V. Add. Cit – 2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Cit – 2(3) V. M/S. Trent Ltd., Room No. 556, 5Th Floor Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai - 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Trent Ltd., V. Dy. Cit – 2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 35DSection 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Trent Ltd., v. Add. CIT – 2(3) Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. CIT – 2(3) v. M/s. Trent Ltd., Room No. 556, 5th Floor Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai - 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Trent Ltd., v. Dy. CIT – 2(3) Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aa…

Showing 1–20 of 57 · Page 1 of 3