ITO v. Makrupa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.

SUMAN GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - CC- 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2015

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3860 & 3859/Mum/2018 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Smt. Suman Gupta, Dy. Cit Cc-4(2), 6Th New Harileela House, Air India Building, 19Th Mint Road, Fort, Vs. Floor, Room No. 1918, Mumbai-400 001. Nariman Point, Mumbai-21. Pan No. Ahqpg 0220 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bhupendra Karkhanis & Mr. Aakash Marthak & Mr. Vijay Bhatt, Ars Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 27/04/2023 Order

…the property in question. regarding the Municipal value of the property in question. we find that Tribunal in the case of ITO V/s Makrupa Chemicals ITO V/s Makrupa Chemicals we find that Tribunal in the case of (P) Ltd reported in 108 ITD (P) Ltd reported in 108 ITD 95/110 TTJ (MUM)489 95/110 TTJ (MUM)489 after considering the various decisions of Hon’ble High Courts and considering the various decisions of Hon’ble High considering the various decisions of Hon’ble High supreme court held that the municipal ratable value is not binding supreme court held that the municipal ratable value is not binding supreme cou…

MARINE CONTAINER SERVICES,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 12 (2), MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Marine Container Services, Dy.Cit, Circle-17(2), Room No. 123, 1St Floor, 71, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400005. Mumbai-20. Pan: Aaafm9838J Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri B.V. Jhaveri (Ar) Respondent By : Shri T.A. Khan (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 16.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.08.2018 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh;

…f municipal valuation. 23. As far as decisions relied upon by the learned D.R. in the case of Baker Technical Services (P) Ltd. (supra), we find that the same is based on the decision of the ITAT Mumbai bench in the case of ITO Vs. Makrupa Chemicals (P) Ltd. 108 ITD 95 (Mumbai). In the case of Makrupa Chemicals, in para-14 of the decision it has been clearly held that rateable value, if correctly determined under the municipal laws can be taken as ALV u/s.23(1)(a) of the Act and in this regard the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sheila Kaushish(supra) has been followed. It has further been o…

SATYPAL JAIKUMAR JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit, Satyapal Jaikumar Jain, Cc-39, R. No.32(1), 82, Maker Chambers-Iii, बनाम/ Ground Floor, Nariman Point, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aabpj1888Q Assessment Year: 2010-11 Satyapal Jaikumar Jain, Acit, 82, Maker Chambers-Iii, Cc-39, R. No.32(1), बनाम/ Nariman Point, Ground Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aabpj1888Q

…he sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let out from year to year, therefore, the municipal valuation is not binding upon the Department for determining the reasonable rent, by following the decision in ITO vs Makrupa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. 108 ITD 95 (Bom.). The ld. Assessing Officer hold that the rateable value adopted by the assessee, as per municipal laws, is not reasonable within the meaning of section 23(1)(a) of the Act. Without going into much deliberation, we find that in the aforesaid case of the assessee itself, the Tribunal, for A.Y. 2009-10, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed,…

ACIT CC 39, MUMBAI vs. SATYPAL JAIN, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit, Satyapal Jaikumar Jain, Cc-39, R. No.32(1), 82, Maker Chambers-Iii, बनाम/ Ground Floor, Nariman Point, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aabpj1888Q Assessment Year: 2010-11 Satyapal Jaikumar Jain, Acit, 82, Maker Chambers-Iii, Cc-39, R. No.32(1), बनाम/ Nariman Point, Ground Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aabpj1888Q

…he sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let out from year to year, therefore, the municipal valuation is not binding upon the Department for determining the reasonable rent, by following the decision in ITO vs Makrupa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. 108 ITD 95 (Bom.). The ld. Assessing Officer hold that the rateable value adopted by the assessee, as per municipal laws, is not reasonable within the meaning of section 23(1)(a) of the Act. Without going into much deliberation, we find that in the aforesaid case of the assessee itself, the Tribunal, for A.Y. 2009-10, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed,…

MAKRUPA CHEMICALS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 1(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result this appeal by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.4376/Mum./2012 (Assessment Year: 2002-03) Makrupa Chemicals P. Ltd., New India Centre, 5th Floor, ……………. Appellant 17 Cooperage Road, Mumbai 400039. PAN AAACM2746A v/s ITO 1(2)(3) ……………. Respondent Mumbai 400020 Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri. Suman Kumar Date of Hearing –24.04.2017 Date of Order -26.04.2017 O R D E R PER: SHAMIM YAHYA This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of Ld. CIT-A dated 03.05.2012 and pertains to assessment year 2002-03. 2.…

ACIT 17(2), MUMBAI vs. JAGSHI J CHHEDA, MUMBAI

In the result, all of the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,J ,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI "ी अ"मत शु"ला, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"वनी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2008-09 Jagshi J. Chheda, ACIT, 17(2) Prop. Silver Developers, Piramal Chambers बनाम/ 9001, Meru Heights, 268, Mumbai- Vs. Telang Road, Matunga (CR), Mumbai-400019 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.ACYPC2992B Assessment Year: 2008-09 ACIT, 17(2) Jagshi J. Chheda, Piramal Chambers बनाम/ Prop. Silver Developers, Mumbai- 9001, Meru Heights, 268, Tel…

JAGSHI J. CHHEDA,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CIRCLE - 17(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all of the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,J ,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI "ी अ"मत शु"ला, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"वनी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2008-09 Jagshi J. Chheda, ACIT, 17(2) Prop. Silver Developers, Piramal Chambers बनाम/ 9001, Meru Heights, 268, Mumbai- Vs. Telang Road, Matunga (CR), Mumbai-400019 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.ACYPC2992B Assessment Year: 2008-09 ACIT, 17(2) Jagshi J. Chheda, Piramal Chambers बनाम/ Prop. Silver Developers, Mumbai- 9001, Meru Heights, 268, Tel…

ACIT CC 39, MUMBAI vs. LAXMI SATYAPAL JAIN, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

…he sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let out from year to year, therefore, the municipal valuation is not binding upon the Department for determining the reasonable rent, by following the decision in ITO vs Makrupa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. 108 ITD 95 (Bom.). The ld. Assessing Officer hold that the rateable value adopted by the assessee, as per municipal laws, is not reasonable within the meaning of section 23(1)(a) of the Act. Without going into much deliberation, we find that in the aforesaid case of the assessee itself, the Tribunal, for A.Y. 2009-10, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed,…