Hanumanbox v. Commissioner of Wealth-tax

Cherie Tandon Saldahna, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 23(1), Mumbai

…property in the case of assessee's wife with similar transactions has been accepted by the same A.O without any addition for the same A.Y. Here we would like to rely on the decision of Hon'ble Gauhati HC. "Gulabrai Hanumanbox. vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax [198 ITR 131 (Gauhati) (HC).]Two different Assessees having similar/identical facts w.r.t valuation of property cannot be assessed with different rates for the same property. Thereby, the order passed by the Assessing officer for co-sharer of property is arbitrary and unjustified in law" 15. Keeping in view the facts of the case, chronology of events and resp…

Danish Sheikh, Usa vs. Income Tax Officer Intl Tax Ward 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 1034/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Danish Sheikh V/S. Ito International Tax, 18, Old Planters Road, बिाम Ward 4(2)(1) Beverly, Usa-999999 Kautilya Bhavan, 6Th Floor, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Fjxps3005Q Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Pradip Kapasi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr.

…property in the case of assessee's wife with similar transactions has been accepted by the same A.O without any addition for the same A.Y. Here we would like to rely on the decision of Hon'ble Gauhati HC. "Gulabrai Hanumanbox, vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax [198 ITR 131 (Gauhati) (HC).] Two different Assessees having similar/ identical facts w.r.t valuation of property cannot be assessed with different rates for the same property. Thereby, the order passed by the Assessing officer for co-sharer of property is arbitrary and unjustified in law" 15. Keeping in view the facts of the case, chronology of events and re…

Valukko Infrastrusture Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 11(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 1034/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Danish Sheikh V/S. Ito International Tax, 18, Old Planters Road, बिाम Ward 4(2)(1) Beverly, Usa-999999 Kautilya Bhavan, 6Th Floor, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Fjxps3005Q Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Pradip Kapasi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr.

…property in the case of assessee's wife with similar transactions has been accepted by the same A.O without any addition for the same A.Y. Here we would like to rely on the decision of Hon'ble Gauhati HC. "Gulabrai Hanumanbox, vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax [198 ITR 131 (Gauhati) (HC).] Two different Assessees having similar/ identical facts w.r.t valuation of property cannot be assessed with different rates for the same property. Thereby, the order passed by the Assessing officer for co-sharer of property is arbitrary and unjustified in law" 15. Keeping in view the facts of the case, chronology of events and re…

Smt. Pinki Chetan Shah, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT, ITO-20(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 3629/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Pinki Chetan Shah Additional/Joint/Deputy/ “B” Wing 1504, Matoshree Pride, Assistant Commissioner of 15th Floor, G D Ambekar Marg, Vs. Income Tax/ITO-20(2)(1), Parel (East), Mumbai- 400012 Piramal Chamber, PAN : CCHPS6796L Mumbai-400013 Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant/Assessee by : Shri Govind Prasad, CA Revenue/Respondent by : Dr. Yogendra T. Wakare, DR : 22.02.2024 Date of Hearing : 27.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, AM: T…

Sulochana Saijan Modi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-National E-Assessment Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh& Shri Om Prakash Kantsulochana Saijan Modi, Ito, A-501, Akar Apartment, National E- बनाम/ Film City Road, Malad Assessment Centre, Vs. East, Mumbai-400097. Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaopm0887F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Shashi Tulsian ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Ajay Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 11/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Om Prakash Kant - Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.01.2023 Passed By Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi [“Ld.Cit(A)”] For Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2018-19. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: -

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH“G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sulochana Saijan Modi, ITO, A-501, Akar Apartment, National E- बनाम/ Film City Road, Malad Assessment Centre, Vs. East, Mumbai-400097. Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. : AAOPM0887F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Shashi Tulsian ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent by: Shri Ajay Singh, Sr.AR सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of Hearing 11/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 23/05/2023 आदेश / ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT - AM: This appea…

Swati Atul Kadakia, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleswati Atul Kadakia V. Income Tax Officer – 16(3)(1) Room No. 447 1302, Vasant Aradhana Tower Aayakar Bhavan, New Marine Lines Mahavir Nagar, Kandivali (W) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400067 Pan: Aabpk8725D (Appellant) (Respondent)

…property in the case of assessee’s wife with similar transactions has been accepted by the same A.O without any addition for the same A.Y. Here we would like to rely on the decision of Hon’ble Gauhati HC. “Gulabrai Hanumanbox. vs. Commissioner of Wealth- tax [198 ITR 131 (Gauhati) (HC).] Two different Assessees having similar/identical facts w.r.t valuation of property cannot be assessed with different rates for the same property. Thereby, the order passed by the Assessing officer for co-sharer of property is arbitrary and unjustified in law” 15. Keeping in view the facts of the case, chronology of events and res…

Parth Dashrath Gandhi, Mumbai vs. Additional /Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer, NFAC., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of above

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘C’ BENCH, MUMBAI. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 1990/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2018-19) Vs. Addl./Deputy/Asst. Parth Dashrath Gandhi G Wing, Flat No. 79 Commissioner of Gujarati Society Income Tax Nehru Road, Vile Parle-E NAFC, Delhi Mumbai-400 057. PAN : AABPG0664K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Aarti Visanji Department by Shri B. Bagchi Date of Hearing 30.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement 31.01.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 09.06.2022 passed by Ld…

Mr. Sajjanraj Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-21(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no-4 is also allowed with a direction to the A

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalmr. Sajjanraj Mehta C/O. M. Mehta & Co., Shop No. 19, Palamsojal Building, Dadar (W), Mumbai-400028. Pan: Aabpm9430B ...... Appellant Vs. Ito, Ward-21(3)(2) Room No. 206, 2Nd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai-400012. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Ajay Singh Respondent By : Sh. Pramod Nikalje Date Of Hearing : 14/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-33, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As (‘Cit(A)’] Dated 11.02.2020 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

…property in the case of assessee’s wife with similar transactions has been accepted by the same A.O without any addition for the same A.Y. Here we would like to rely on the decision of Hon’ble Gauhati HC. “Gulabrai Hanumanbox. vs. Commissioner of Wealth –tax [198 ITR 131 (Gauhati) (HC).] Two different Assessees having similar/ identical facts w.r.t valuation of property cannot be assessed with different rates for the same property. Thereby, the order passed by the Assessing officer for co-sharer of property is arbitrary and unjustified in law” 15. Keeping in view the facts of the case, chronology of events and r…