Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT

DCIT 3(2), Mumbai vs. Indian Refrigerator Co. Ltd, Aurangabad

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenues’ appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Arora & Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.941/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Indian Refrigerator बनाम/ Income Tax Range 3(2), Company Ltd. Vs. R. No.674, 6th Floor, Auto Cars Compound, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Adalat Road, Mumbai - 400020 Aurangabad - 431005 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3949/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Indian Refrigerator Dy. Commissioner of बनाम/ Company Ltd. Income Tax Range 3(2), Vs. R. No.674, 6th Floor, Auto…

Indian Regrigerator Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the Revenues’ appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Arora & Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.941/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Indian Refrigerator बनाम/ Income Tax Range 3(2), Company Ltd. Vs. R. No.674, 6th Floor, Auto Cars Compound, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Adalat Road, Mumbai - 400020 Aurangabad - 431005 आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3949/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Indian Refrigerator Dy. Commissioner of बनाम/ Company Ltd. Income Tax Range 3(2), Vs. R. No.674, 6th Floor, Auto…

Ghanshyam Share & Stock Brokers, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3573/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ghanshyam Share & Stock Brokers Dy. Cit, Range 4(1), Aayakar Bhavan, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ C/O. D. C. Jain & Co., R. N. 640, M. K. Road, 75, Bombay Mutual Bldg., 1St Floor, Mumbai Vs. D. N. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg 3561 H (Assessee) (Revenue) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3762/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dy. Cit, Range 4(1), Ghanshyam Share & Stock Brokers बनाम/ Room Ni. 640, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., 24, 2Nd Fanaswadi, D. A. Lane, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai-400 004 (Revenue) (Assessee) : Assessee By : Shri D. C. Jain Revenue By : Shri Airiju Jaikaran सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 23.06.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 04.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 13.03.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S

…; taxation of income; and consistency, which the former endorses. Further, lest one considers us as having, in so directing, travelled outside the scope of the appeal, we may advert to the decisions, inter alia, in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC) and Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB). The reliance on J.K. Charitable Trust (supra) and 12 ITA Nos. 3573 & 3762/Mum/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) Ghanshyam Share & Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Satish Panalal Shah (supra) is, as would be apparent from the foregoing, completely misplaced. 5.5 We decide accordingly. Revenu…

Imtiyaz Amirullah Khan, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2018/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Imtiyaz Amirullah Khan Ito-17(2)(4), Gr. Floor, R. No. 1A, Mumbai बनाम/ Near Municiple Market, Ch-011, Vs. Gate No. 6, Sewree Cross Road, Wadala, Mumbai-400 031 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Azpk 9500 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Shekhar Gupta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Suman Ratnam Darsi सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 04.8.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 26.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 18.2.2016, Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010- 11 Vide Order Dated 20.3.2013. 2. The Sole Issue Arising In The Instant Case Is The Extent Of Income Liable To Be Brought To Tax Against Undisclosed Cash Deposits In The Assessee’S Bank Account With Icici Bank, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai (Account Number 087401500061).

…may reiterate, is bound to act reasonably, and by drawing inferences as permissible in law. Lest we be considered as having travelled outside the scope of this appeal, we may advert to the decisions, inter alia, in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC) and Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom)(FB). We decide accordingly. 5 Imtiyaz Amirullah Khan vs. ITO 5. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms. Order pronounced in the open court on August 26, 2016 (Amarjit Singh) (Sanjay Arora) "या"यक सद"य / Judicial Member लेखा सद"य / Accountant…

Kolon Investment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 8, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2870/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Kolon Investment Pvt. Ltd. Cit-8, बनाम/ 417-419, 4Th Floor, Room No. 259, Aayakar Bhavan, M. V. Road, Andheri (E), M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaack 9118 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Girish Dave & Ms. Kadambari Dave ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri H. N. Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 23.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: The Instant Appeal By The Assessee Agitates The Revision U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 31.3.2014 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax-8, Mumbai (‘Cit’ For Short) Qua Its Assessment U/S. 143(3) Dated 01.12.2011 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10. 2. The Basis Of The Revision In The Present Case Is The Acceptance By The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Of The Assessee’S Claim For Short Term Capital Gain (Stcg) On The Non- Exercise Of The Option To Subscribe To The (Equity) Share Capital In Sintex Industries

…956) 29 ITR 661 (SC); Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363 (SC)]. Further, lest we be considered as having travelled outside the scope of this appeal, we may advert to the decisions, inter alia, in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC) and Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom)(FB). 5. We decide accordingly (refer paras 3.1 through 3.5, and 4). 6. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed. प"रणामतः "नधा"रती क" अपील खा"रज क" जाती है । Order pronounced in the open court on August 23, 2016 (Pawan Singh) (Sanjay Arora) "या"यक सद"य / Judicial…

Suman Kadam, Thane vs. ITO WD 2(4), Thane

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2777/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Suman Kadam Ito, Ward 2(4), बनाम/ Vardaan, 6Th Floor, S/1, Narmada Apartment, Cabin Cross Road, Bhayandar (E), Ashar I. T. Park, Road No. 16-Z, Vs. Thane-401 105 Wagle Indl. Estate, Thane-400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Afipk 3600 D (Assessee) (Revenue) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3256/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Ito, Ward 2(2), Suman Kadam Thane-400 604 Thane-401 105 Vs. (Revenue) : (Assessee) : Shri Vijay Shah Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Debabrata Baidya सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 12.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 08.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Arising Out Of The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Thane (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 27.2.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09 Vide Order Dated 31.12.2010. 2

…ile issuing the directions with which the matter is restored to the file of the assessing authority, we may advert to the 9 ITA Nos. 2777 & 3256/Mum/2014 (A.Y. 2008-09) Suman Kadam vs. ITO decisions, inter alia, in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC) and Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom)(FB). 4. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on August 08, 2016 (Pawan Singh) (Sanjay Arora) "या"यक सद"य / Judicial Member लेखा सद"य…

ITO 13(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Paresh Chemicals, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4676/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Ito-13(2)-3, Paresh Chemicals, बनाम/ R. No. 425, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Plot No. 236, 1St Floor, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-20 Samuel Street, Mumbai-400 003 Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaefp 2676 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Kumar Sani ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : None

…f the) said credit balance appearing in the assessee’s books of account as income under the Act. Further, lest one considers us as having travelled outside the scope of the appeal, we may advert to the decisions in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC) and Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom)(FB). We decide accordingly. 8 ITO vs. Paresh Chemicals 7. In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. प"रणामतः राज"व क" अपील सां"यक"य उ"दे"य के "लए "वीकृत क" जाती है । Order pronounced in the open court on July 15. 2016 (Mahavir Singh) (Sanjay Ar…

ITO 14(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Lachhmandas U Talreja (HUF), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.7644 & 7645/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06) Ito-14(2)-3, Lachhmandas U Talreja (Huf) बनाम/ Earnest House, R. No. 306, 3Rd Floor, 282, Kalbadevi Road, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaahl 0990 E (राज"व/ Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.6581 & 6582/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06) Lachhmandas U Talreja (Huf) Ito-14(2)-3, बनाम/ Earnest House, R. No. 306, 3Rd Floor, 282, Kalbadevi Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 002 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaahl 0990 E ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व/ Revenue) : राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidya "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Deepak Tralshwala सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 18.4.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 11.7.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is A Set Of Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, For Two Consecutive Years, Being Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2004-05 & 2005-06, Preferred U/S. 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter). The Issues Arising Being (A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06) Lachhmandas U Talreja (Huf) Common, The Same Were Listed For Hearing & Were Accordingly Heard Together – The Facts & Circumstances As Well As The Respective Cases Of The Parties Being Also The Same & Are Being Disposed Of Vide A Common, Consolidated Order.

…) is, in any case, confirmed. Further, lest one considers us as having travelled outside the scope of the appeal, we may advert to the decisions, inter alia, in the case of Kapurchand (A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06) Lachhmandas U Talreja (HUF) Shrimal v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC) and Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom)(FB). We decide accordingly. 8. In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on July 11, 2016 (Pawan Singh) (Sanja…

Kartik Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO 22(2)(1), Vashi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, i

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “ए” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3310/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Kartik Bharat Doshi, ITO-22(2)(1), बनाम/ 4th Floor, Tower No. 6, 1206, C Wing, Krushal Towers, Near Shoppers Stop, Vashi Station Complex, Vs. Chembur Tower, Mumbai-75 Vashi "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AETPD 6457 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Jayant Bhatt ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri S. R. Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 0…

Anushakti Chemical and Drugs Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Ramlal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4340/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Anushakti Chemical & Drugs Ltd. Addl. Cit-10(3), 2Nd Floor, Udyog Kshetra, Mumbai बनाम/ Mulund, Goregaon Link Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 080 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaeca 4760 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Mohd. Javed

…The matter under reference is a matter of fact, relevant to the issue, and on which we observe no finding by the Revenue. Reference for the purpose of law in the matter may be made to the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Kapurchand Shrimal v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC) and by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom)(FB), rendered relying on a series of decisions by the Apex Court. 5. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. प"रणामतः "नधा"रती क" अपील आं"शक "वीकृत क" जाती है । Order pronounced in the open court on May 18, 2016 (R…

Kantadevi Gupta, Mumbai vs. ITO 14(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Sanjay Aroraassessment Year:2007-08 Santlal Gupta, Ito-14(2)(2), 404, A Waghwadi, Mumbai Kalbadevi Mumbai ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabpg6320Q Assessment Year:2007-08 Kantadevi Gupta, Ito-14(2)(2), 404, A Waghwadi, Mumbai Kalbadevi Mumbai ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Ahrpg7451P

…well as to meet that of the Revenue, which shall make available thereto all the materials being relied upon by it. Reference in this context may be made to, among others, the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal vs. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC). I decide accordingly. 5. In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.” In the light of the aforesaid discussion and the judicial pronouncement discussed hereinabove, there is categorical finding in para 3.3.3 of the impugned order that both the assessees before us are beneficiary of accommodation entry provided by…

Santlal Gupta, Mumbai vs. ITO 14(2)(2)

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Sanjay Aroraassessment Year:2007-08 Santlal Gupta, Ito-14(2)(2), 404, A Waghwadi, Mumbai Kalbadevi Mumbai ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabpg6320Q Assessment Year:2007-08 Kantadevi Gupta, Ito-14(2)(2), 404, A Waghwadi, Mumbai Kalbadevi Mumbai ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Ahrpg7451P

…well as to meet that of the Revenue, which shall make available thereto all the materials being relied upon by it. Reference in this context may be made to, among others, the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal vs. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC). I decide accordingly. 5. In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.” In the light of the aforesaid discussion and the judicial pronouncement discussed hereinabove, there is categorical finding in para 3.3.3 of the impugned order that both the assessees before us are beneficiary of accommodation entry provided by…

Hassan Ali Khan, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am Sr. No.

…ishes to rely upon, particularly with regard to the payment aspect of the matter, and decide by issuing definite findings of fact. Reference in this context may be made to the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal vs. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC), wherein it stands explained that unless forbidden from doing so by the statute, the tribunal, as an appellate authority, has the jurisdiction and is duty bound to direct the assessing authority to make fresh assessment in accordance with the law. That was a case where there was a clear violation of the procedure prescribed by law, so that t…

Manish C Jogani HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7344/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Manish C. Jogani, Huf Ito-16(2)(2), बनाम/ C/21, Shree Ganeshprasad Chs Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Sleater Road, Grant Road, Mumbai-400 007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aafhm 8076 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7345/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Sandeep C. Jogani (Huf) Ito-16(2)(2), Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aalhs 2461 Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7346/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Girish C. Jogani (Huf) Ito-16(2)(2), Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadhg 0062 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7347/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Champaklal D. Jogani (Huf) Ito-16(2)(2), Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaahj 8938 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : (A.Y. 2008-09) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Jayesh Dadia ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Bharati Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 02.11.2015 Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2015 Date Of Order आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is A Set Of Four Appeals By Different Assessees, Agitating The Dismissal Of Their Appeals Contesting Their Respective Assessments U/S. 143(3) R/W S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 07.2.2014 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Vide His Separate Orders Of Even Date (20.10.2014). The Issue/S Arising Being Common, The Appeals Were Posted For Hearing & Were Accordingly, Heard Together.

…well as to meet that of the Revenue, which shall make available thereto all the materials being relied upon by it. Reference in this context may be made to, among others, the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kapurchand Shrimal vs. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 451 (SC). I decide accordingly. 5. In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on November 02, 2015 (Sanjay Arora) लेखा सद"य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांक Dated : 16.11.2015 (A.Y. 2008-09) व."न.स./Roshani, Sr. PS आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" /…