ITO v. Roborant Investments (P) Ltd.

Asst CIT 17(3), Mumbai vs. Sane & Doshi Enterprises, Mumbai

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ ई” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं, राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं राम राम लाल लाल नेगी नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./1093/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" ACIT-17(3)…

M/S. DDIT (I.T.) - 1(2), Mumbai vs. Dhl Operations B.V., Netherlands, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

…a penalty under section 271(1){iii) may be imposed, it has to be proved that the assessee has consciously made the concealment or furnished inaccurate particulars of his income': 7.6. The Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Roborant Investments (P) Ltd. 7 SOT 181 has held that the cases involving genuine difference of opinion on matters of law between the assessee and the AO are clearly outside the scope of Explanation 1 to Sec. 271(1)(c). The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.C. M/s.DHL Operations BV Netherlands Builders, 265 ITR 562 (SC), has held that mere omission from the return of an item of rece…

Col Amarjit D Nagi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 20

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

…rly stated that wherever the issues are debatable, the question of imposition of penalty does not .arise. Reference is invited to decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of ITO Vs Roborant Investments (P) Ltd. ITA No. 3937/Mum.l2002, in the ITAT Mumbai Bench 7 SOT 181(Mum.), the relevant extract of which reads as under:- “It was a debatable issue as to whether the rental income/service charge was assessable " income from business or income from house property. The assessee, instead of giving up its claim, preferred to argue before the departmental authorities that the said income was assessable as income from bu…

The DCIT 8(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Nutech Coporate Services Ltd (Formerly Known As Iit Capital Services Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

…rly stated that wherever the issues are debatable, the question of imposition of penalty does not .arise. Reference is invited to decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of ITO Vs Roborant Investments (P) Ltd. ITA No. 3937/Mum.l2002, in the ITAT Mumbai Bench 7 SOT 181(Mum.), the relevant extract of which reads as under:- “It was a debatable issue as to whether the rental income/service charge was assessable " income from business or income from house property. The assessee, instead of giving up its claim, preferred to argue before the departmental authorities that the said income was assessable as income from bu…

B.S.N. Consultants (P)Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward No.8(1)(2) Now Ward 13(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.1639 & 1640/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) M/S B S N Consultants (P) Ltd. बिाम/ The Income Tax Officer, 81, B Wig Park Plaza, Ward 8(1)(2), Room Bo.225, Vs. 8Th Road, 7 Banglows, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri (W), M K Road, Miumbai-400061 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccb1907E

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “ए” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE S/SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM), AND RAJESH KUMAR,(AM) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.1639 and 1640/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) M/s B S N Consultants (P) Ltd. बिाम/ The Income Tax Officer, 81, B Wig Park Plaza, ward 8(1)(2), Room Bo.225, Vs. 8th Road, 7 Banglows, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri (W), M K Road, Miumbai-400061 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं./PAN/GIR No. :AACCB1907E अऩीराथी ओय से / Appellant by: Shri Dinesh Shah प…

B.S.N. Consultants (P)Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 8(1)(2) Now Ward 13(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.1639 & 1640/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) M/S B S N Consultants (P) Ltd. बिाम/ The Income Tax Officer, 81, B Wig Park Plaza, Ward 8(1)(2), Room Bo.225, Vs. 8Th Road, 7 Banglows, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri (W), M K Road, Miumbai-400061 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccb1907E

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “ए” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE S/SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM), AND RAJESH KUMAR,(AM) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.1639 and 1640/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) M/s B S N Consultants (P) Ltd. बिाम/ The Income Tax Officer, 81, B Wig Park Plaza, ward 8(1)(2), Room Bo.225, Vs. 8th Road, 7 Banglows, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri (W), M K Road, Miumbai-400061 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थामी रेखा सं./जीआइआय सं./PAN/GIR No. :AACCB1907E अऩीराथी ओय से / Appellant by: Shri Dinesh Shah प…

Dilip Shirodkar, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Ashwani Taneja ()

…d on the following judgements in support of the argument that no penalty should be levied under such circumstances. 1. Bennet Coleman & Co Ltd ITA No. 2117 of 2012 (Bombay High Court) 2. Chandrapal Bagga 261 ITR 67 (Raj) 3. ITO vs Roborant Investments (P) Ltd 7 SOT 181 (Mum) 6 4. CIT vs Caplin Point Laboratories Ltd 293 ITR 524 (Mad) 9. We have considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case. This fact is not denied that the land was situated in a village. Further, this fact is also not denied that the impugned land is described as agricultural land in the land records maintained with the local authori…

ACIT 15(3), Mumbai vs. Neelkanth Palm Realty, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

…he Legislature. " 3.12 It is further argued that since all material facts have been adequately disclosed to the Revenue, penalty cannot be levied. Reference is made to the decision of jurisdictional Mumbai Tribunal in cases of ITO v. Roborant Investment P Ltd 7 SOT 181, DCIT v. Ushdeve' Internation Ltd 137 TTJ 337, WaUer Saldhana v. DCIT 44 SOT 26 and Unit Design JewelleryP Ltd v. DCIT 6 ITR 10 and also Delhi High Court in case of Devsons Pvt Ltd 196 Taxman 21 (Del) and others. In case of Devsons Pvt Ltd, Hon'ble Delhi HC has held as under: "29. We find no substance in the aforesaid contention as it is well settl…