CIT v. Tip Top Typography

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Muktaben G. Kakadia, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by Revenue for AY 2009-10 is dismissed and the appeal for AY 2010-11 is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

…dering the contention of assessee and referring various decision relied before him directed the AO to verify the municipal ratable value in respect of the properties and modify the order accordingly. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Tip Top Typography 368 ITR 330 while deciding the issue relating to fair rental value a prescribed u/s 23(1)(a) held as under: “ i) We are not in agreement with the department that the municipal ratable value cannot be accepted as a bonafide rental value of the property and it must be discarded straightway in all cases. There cannot be a blanket rejection of the same. If tha…

ITO 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Bombay Sealink Builders P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण " जी ” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3117/MUM/2015 : (A.Y : 2006-07) ITA NO.3118/MUM/2015 : (A.Y : 2002-03) ITO 3(1)(2) Vs. M/s Bombay Sealink Builders R.No.666/6668-A Pvt. Ltd 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan 121, Maker Chambers VI M.K.Road 2nd Floor, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN : AAACB2701Q ITA NO.3596/MUM/2015 : (A.Y : 2002-03) M/s Bombay Sealink Builders Vs. ITO 3(1)(2) Pvt. Ltd R.No.666/6668-A 121, Maker Chambers VI 6th Floor, Aay…

Agni Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known As : Agni Commex LLP), Mumbai vs. ITO 3(1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2005-06

…A) upheld the assessment of the AO in making an addition @ 10% of security deposit to the ALV declared by the assessee. 5. Before us, the learned counsel of the assessee relies on the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Tip Top Typography (2014) 368 ITR 330 (Bom), judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Asian Hotels Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 490 (Del), and the order of the ITAT “H” Bench, Mumbai in the case of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 (ITA No. 4591/Mum/2007). 6. Per contra the learned DR relies on the order passed by the learned CIT(A) upholding the addition @ 10% of security deposit…

Anudeep Enterprises P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G S Pannu & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year : 2006-07 Anudeep Enterprises P Ltd Ito Ward 3(1)(1), 801, Shanudeep, Mumbai Vs. 10 Altamount Road, Mumbai- 400 026 Pan Aaaca1338G (Appellant) Respondent)

…mbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1988 is pari materia with section 23(1)(a) of the Act. In support of his arguments, the learned representative also placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 368 ITR 330. Even otherwise, it is made out that income earned from the deposit received from Deutsche Bank has been offered for tax and in this context it 5 M/s. Anudeep Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. was pointed out that the assessee had earned interest income of Rs.10,28,644/-, which is duly credited in the profit & loss account. It was therefore contended that…

DCIT 29(1), Mumbai vs. Dinesh M Shah, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Cn Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja: (A.Y : 2010-11) Dcit 29(1) Vs. Dinesh M Shah R.No.108, 1St Floor, C-10 Bldg., Prop. M/S Mehula Pratyakshakar Bhavan Enterprises Bandra Kurla Complex 104, Arnath Sravodya Nagar Bandra (E) Jain Mandir, Mulund (W) Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 080 Pan : Aagps5149G (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Devendra Jain प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से Revenue By : Mrs Beena Santosh सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2017 घोषणा की तारीख Date Of Pronouncement : 22/02/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N.Prasad (J.M.) : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-40, Mumbai Dated 30.03.2015 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. The Revenue In Its Appeal Has Raised The Following Grounds : “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Salary Of Rs.10,11,674/- Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Has Not Proved As To How The Excess Salary Expenditure Laid For Planning Of Expansion Of The Business & As To How The Same Did

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “जी ” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI CN PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : (A.Y : 2010-11) DCIT 29(1) Vs. Dinesh M Shah R.No.108, 1st Floor, C-10 Bldg., Prop. M/s Mehula Pratyakshakar Bhavan Enterprises Bandra Kurla Complex 104, Arnath Sravodya Nagar Bandra (E) Jain Mandir, Mulund (W) Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 080 PAN : AAGPS5149G (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Devendra Jain प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से Revenue by : Mrs Beena Santosh सुनवाई की त…

Narotam Satyanarayan Sekhsaria, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5318/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Shri Narotam Deputy Commissioner Of Satyanararan Sekhsaria Income Tax- 3(1) बनाम/ Flat No. 3 Room No. 7 Rushilla Chs Ltd. Aaykar Bhavan Vs. 17C, Carmichael Road Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 026. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aalps0205L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Suman Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / : 16/02/2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 17/02/2017 Date Of Pronouncement

…Seksharia proper, justified and hence, did not call for any interference. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. The Ld. Counsel for Assessee [AR], while placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Tip Top Typography [368 ITR 330], contended that the method adopted by AO to arrive at ALV of the first property was not proper and reasonable. The rates quoted on the website were subject to heavy negotiations and rentals of the property was dependent upon number of factors such as location of the property, construction quality, proximity to various facilities etc. and hence,…

Ramniklal S. Gosaliya & Co, Mumbai vs. Jtcit RG 17(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…is not correct, then he can compute the ALV by referring to the market rent as per municipality valuation or the Maharashtra Rent Act. In this context, he relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Tip Top Typography, [2012] 368 ITR 330 (Bom.). 12. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand relying upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and the learned 6 M/s. Ramniklal S. Gosalia & Co. Commissioner (Appeals) submitted, as the assessee has charged different rent for two different premise in the same building, the Assessing Officer was justified in reasonably…

DCIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai vs. Rajendra Barot, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the assessment year 2006-

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2883/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Shri Rajendra Barot, Dcit, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aenpb9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2965/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Dcit, Central Circle 23, Shri Rajendra Barot, R.No. 409, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. Hotel Leela, Andheri Vs. M.K. Marg, Mumbai-20. Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aenpb9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2887 & 2888/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) Mrs.Rekha Barot, फनाभ/ Dcit, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aenpb5677H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2883/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Shri Rajendra Barot, DCIT, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ PAN : AENPB9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2965/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ…

Rekha Barot, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the assessment year 2006-

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2883/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Shri Rajendra Barot, Dcit, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aenpb9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2965/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Dcit, Central Circle 23, Shri Rajendra Barot, R.No. 409, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. Hotel Leela, Andheri Vs. M.K. Marg, Mumbai-20. Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aenpb9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2887 & 2888/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) Mrs.Rekha Barot, फनाभ/ Dcit, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aenpb5677H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2883/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Shri Rajendra Barot, DCIT, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ PAN : AENPB9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2965/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ…

Rekha Barot, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the assessment year 2006-

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2883/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Shri Rajendra Barot, Dcit, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aenpb9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2965/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Dcit, Central Circle 23, Shri Rajendra Barot, R.No. 409, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. Hotel Leela, Andheri Vs. M.K. Marg, Mumbai-20. Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aenpb9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2887 & 2888/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) Mrs.Rekha Barot, फनाभ/ Dcit, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aenpb5677H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2883/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Shri Rajendra Barot, DCIT, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ PAN : AENPB9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2965/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ…

Rajendra Barot, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the assessment year 2006-

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2883/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Shri Rajendra Barot, Dcit, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aenpb9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2965/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Dcit, Central Circle 23, Shri Rajendra Barot, R.No. 409, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp. Hotel Leela, Andheri Vs. M.K. Marg, Mumbai-20. Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aenpb9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2887 & 2888/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) Mrs.Rekha Barot, फनाभ/ Dcit, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aenpb5677H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2883/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ/ Shri Rajendra Barot, DCIT, Central Circle 23, 601, Shri Amba Shanti Chambers, R.No. 409, Vs. Opp. Hotel Leela, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, M.K. Marg, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai – 400 059. स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ PAN : AENPB9154P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.2965/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) फनाभ…

Mahipatray Shah HUF, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pawan Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 5502/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year 2009-10) Mahipatray Shah HUF DCIT, CC-5(1) 6th Floor, 23F Mumbai. Akruti, Doongersey Road Vs. Walkeshwar Mumbai-400 036. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No.AAFHM0519R Assessee by None Department by Shri C.W. Angolkar Date of Hearing 7.11.2016 Date of Pronouncement 7.11.2016 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran (AM) :- The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.7.2015 passed by the learned CIT(A)-53, Mumbai and it relates to A.Y. 209- 10.…

Late Shri Pravin V. Kacharia Through Legal Heir Hiren P. Kacharia, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

…gard to the determination of annual letting value (ALV) for deemed to be let out properties, the Ld A.R submitted that this issue has to be decided on the basis of decision rendered by Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tip Top Typography (2014)(48 Taxmann.com 191). 3 Late Shri Pravin V. Kacharia 5. On the contrary, the Ld D.R submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has confirmed the addition of cash deposits by following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A Govindrajulu Mudaliar (34 ITR 807) and annual value of deemed to be let out properties was determined by following the decisio…

Sanjay Gupta, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1027/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Mr. Sanjay Gupta, The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ Bungalow No. 91-101, Of Income Tax – Central V. Mhada Svp Nagar, Circle – 47, H Bungalow, Andheri (W), Room No. 658, 6 Th Floor, Mumbai – 400 053. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpg 8751F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1027/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Mr. Sanjay Gupta, The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ Bungalow No. 91-101, of Income Tax – Central v. MHADA SVP Nagar, Circle – 47, H Bungalow, Andheri (W), Room No. 658, 6 th floor, Mumbai – 400 053. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AABPG 8751F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Shri Sanjiv M Shah Revenue by…

Anupama Agarwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Saktijit Dey

…inging our attention to the property at Surat, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue of computation of ALV has to be re-examined by the AO in view of the binding jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs Tip Top Typography [2012] 368 ITR 330 (Bom). 11. After hearing both the parties, we direct the AO to apply the said binding judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra) to the facts of the instant case after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We order accordingly. 12. With reference to the propert…

Baker Techncal Services P.Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO-9(1)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amit Shukla

…ith the landlord for the purpose of computing the ALV of the property. In this regard, he fairly submitted that this issue is required to be decided in the light of the binding jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT vs Tip Top Typography [2012] 368 ITR 330 (Bom). 8. We have heard both the parties on this issue of inclusion of notional interest income on the interest free security deposit. It is a settled proposition of law by virtue of the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra) that the notional interest should not be included while computing the…

Multiplex Collapsible Tubes Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

…ies have agreed that the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to determine the annual letting value in accordance with the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of Tip Top Typogrphy (2014) 368 ITR 330 (Bom). Accordingly, we set aside the order of learned CIT(A) and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to determine the annual letting value in accordance with the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court referred above. 4. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes…

Chandbibi Zaidi, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 43, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,सी,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajendra, Accountant Member ITA NOs.358 to 363/Mum/2014 Assessment Year: 2005-06 to 2010-11 Mrs. Chandbibi Zaidi, ACIT, Kennedy House, बनाम/ Central Circle-43, 4th Floor, R. NO.659, 6th Floor, Vs. Goregaonkar Road, Aayakar Bahvan, Mumbai-400007 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No.AAAPZ1431A 2 Chandbibi Zaidi ITA No.358 to 363/Mum/2014 & ITA No.1393 to 1…

Asst CIT CC 43, Mumbai vs. Chandbibi Zaidi, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,सी,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajendra, Accountant Member ITA NOs.358 to 363/Mum/2014 Assessment Year: 2005-06 to 2010-11 Mrs. Chandbibi Zaidi, ACIT, Kennedy House, बनाम/ Central Circle-43, 4th Floor, R. NO.659, 6th Floor, Vs. Goregaonkar Road, Aayakar Bahvan, Mumbai-400007 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No.AAAPZ1431A 2 Chandbibi Zaidi ITA No.358 to 363/Mum/2014 & ITA No.1393 to 1…

Asha Srichand Raheja, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of assessee are allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.1132/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Laxmi Srichand Raheja, 4Th Vs. Ito-16(1)(1), Mumbai- Floor, Hari Bhavan, 64, 400007 Peddar Road, Mumbai- 400026 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabpr 7656 Q (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.1134/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Asha Srichand Raheja, 4Th Vs. Ito-16(1)(1), Mumbai- Floor, Hari Bhavan, 64, 400007 Peddar Road, Mumbai- 400026 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabpr 7655 P (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…puting ALV at 6% of the property value. We do not find any merit in the AO’s action and the matter is restored back to the file of AO for computing ALV as per the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tip Top Typography, 368 ITR 330. We direct accordingly. 8. In the result, both appeals of assessee are allowed in terms indicated hereinabove. Order pronounced in the open court on this 01/06/ 2016. (RAM LAL NEGI) (R.C.SHARMA) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक Dated 01/06/2016 प्र.कु.मभ/pkm, नन.स/ PS आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/…