Major Metals Ltd. v. Union of India

ITO 16(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Mediavest India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2012-13

…as the same have already been noted by us in the earlier part of this order. Apart therefrom, the Grounds of appeal have been reiterated wherein reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Major Metal Ltd. vs UOI, 359 ITR 450 (Bom.). 6. On the other hand, the learned representative for the respondent- assessee referred to the Paper Book filed, wherein is placed the material on the basis of which the CIT(A) came to conclude that assessee had discharged its onus of explaining satisfactorily the credits in question in terms of the requirement of Sec. 68 of the Act. It i…

DCIT- 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jagaon Franchisee Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…of the Act as introduced by the Finance Act,2012 w.e.f 01.04.2013 is clarificatory and retrospective. The learned assessing officer found support for his conclusion from the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Major Metals Ltd. vs. Union of India 359 ITR 450 (Bom.). Finally, the learned assessing officer on the basis of all the aforesaid conclusions treated the share premium 9 ITA No.2998/Mum/2016 Jalgam Franchisee Put Ltd. as non-genuine and added the same u/s 68 of the Act. 2.8. On appeal, before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), various contentions of the assessee were considered an…

ITO 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Robinsons Cargo & Logistics P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.117/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Asst. Cit-1(3)(1), M/S. Robinsons Cargo & Logistics Room No. 564, 5Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Canara Bank Building, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. 15/17, Adi Marzan Path, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aagcs 9709 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ram Tiwari ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Rajeev Wagle सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 22.01.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 28.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 30.10.2015 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2012- 13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: “Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5,65,31,290/- Made U/S. 68 Of The Act On The Account Of Share Premium Charged By The Appellant Assessee Without

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “डी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.117/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Asst. CIT-1(3)(1), M/s. Robinsons Cargo & Logistics Room No. 564, 5th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Canara Bank Building, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. 15/17, Adi Marzan Path, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAGCS 9709 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Ram Tiwari ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent b…

DCIT Cir 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Tulip Hotels P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dcit Cir 3(3)(2) Vs. M/S. Tulip Hotels Pvt.Ltd., R.No.609, 6Th Floor Chandermukhi Building Aayakar Bhavan (Basement), Behind The M.K.Road, Oberoi Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaact9446Q Appellant) .. Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM DCIT CIR 3(3)(2) Vs. M/s. Tulip Hotels Pvt.Ltd., R.No.609, 6th Floor Chandermukhi Building Aayakar Bhavan (Basement), Behind the M.K.Road, Oberoi Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN/GIR No. AAACT9446Q Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ram Tiwari Revenue by Shri Vijay Mehta Date of Hearing 05/01/2018 Date of Pronouncement 14/03/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER SANDEEP GOSAIN (J.M): This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of CIT(A) - 8, Mumbai dated 25/08/2015 for A.Y…

ITO 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vinaylene Textile Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the issue stands remitted to the file of the assessing officer

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3240/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ito-14(3)(2), M/S. Vinaylene Textile Industries 458, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Gala No. 8, 1St Floor, Mumbai-400 020 Kuntal Modi Estate, L.B.S. Marg, Vs. Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai-400 086 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 1653 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Aarjoo Goradia ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. K. Shivaram & Shri Rahul K. Hakani सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 07.12.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 23.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. "On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.70,00,000/- On A/C Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68. The Companies From Which The Assessee Has Accepted Shares Application Money Of Rs.70,00,000/- Were Controlled & 2 Ito Vs. M/S. Vinaylene Textile Industries Pvt. Ltd. Operated By Shri Praveen Kumar Jain, Who Admitted In His Statement Recorded During The Course Of Search & Seizure Action That The Concerns/Companies Controlled By Him Were Only Engaged In Providing Accommodation Entries To Various Parties Of Which The Assessee Is Also One Of The Beneficiaries. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Vary, Omit Or Substitute The Aforesaid Ground Of Appeal At Any Time Before Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.

…rned 10 ITO vs. M/s. Vinaylene Textile Industries Pvt. Ltd. counsel of the assessee were not in connection with bogus accommodation entry provider. As a matter of fact Hon’ble High Court’s decision in the case of Major Metals Ltd. vs. Union of India [2013] 359 ITR 450 (Bom) has upheld the settlement commission's order where in unjustified huge share premiums where added as bogus accommodation entry. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) has also expounded that revenue should not put upon blinkers and should loo…

Asst CIT 1(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sankalp Corporate P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.118/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Asst. Cit-1(3)(1) M/S. Sankalp Corporate Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 564, 5Th Floor, Ground Floor, Sunbeam Chambers, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhawan, Opp. Liberty Cinema, New Marine Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Lines, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aancs 3998 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri V. Justin ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “ई” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.118/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Asst. CIT-1(3)(1) M/s. Sankalp Corporate Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 564, 5th Floor, Ground Floor, Sunbeam Chambers, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhawan, Opp. Liberty Cinema, New Marine Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Lines, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AANCS 3998 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri V. Justin ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by :…

Jasamrit Constructions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginer Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S. Jasamrit Constructions Income Tax Officer-6(3)(2) Private Ltd. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor Flat No. 901, Building 'B' Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Ashok Tower, Near Itc Hotel Mumbai 400020 Parel, Mumbai 400017 Pan – Aabcj8295L Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "J" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Joginer Singh, Judicial Member and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member M/s. Jasamrit Constructions Income Tax Officer-6(3)(2) Private Ltd. Room No. 503, 5th Floor Flat No. 901, Building 'B' Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Ashok Tower, Near ITC Hotel Mumbai 400020 Parel, Mumbai 400017 PAN – AABCJ8295L Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Vijay Mehta Respondent by: Shri Aarju Goradia Date of Hearing: 28.12.2017 Date of Pronouncement: 08.02.2018 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the…

Ajay J Doshi (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO 12(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Ajay J. Doshi-Huf, Income Tax Officer-12(2)(4), 21, Marker Tower ‘L’ Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ G.D. Somani Marg, M.K. Road, Vs. Cuff Parade, Mumbai Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aacha8912M

…amount cannot be subjected to tax as income. 10. Mr. Malhotra, learned Counsel for the Revenue submits that Vodafone India Services Ltd. (Supra) will not apply and places reliance upon the decision of this Court in Major Metals Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. 359 ITR 450 and the decision of this Court in M/s. Alliance Space Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Income Tax Officer 6(1)(1), Mumbai & Ors. (Writ Petition (L) No. 735 of 2015) rendered on 27th March, 2013. Primafacie, both the decisions do not take the Revenue's case any further as they are inapplicable. So far as decision in the case of Major Metals Ltd. (Supra) is conce…

Addl CIT RG 24(2), Mumbai vs. Saraswati Developers, Mumbai

In the result, 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. 8337/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dy. Cit-24(2), Saraswati Developers Room No. 601, 6Th Floor, 54/55, Rani Sati Marg, बनाम/ Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 Bandra-Kurla Complex, Vs. Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaofs 5105 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kailash Gaikwad ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Viraj Shah

…artment cannot, however, act unreasonably (see pp. 804H. 805A – C).)’ [emphasis, ours] The decision in the case of Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (supra) was also referred to by the hon'ble jurisdictional high court in Major Metals Ltd. vs. Union of India [2013] 359 ITR 450 (Bom) (at pgs. 447 - 478) to emphasize that the doubtful nature of the transaction and the manner in which the sums were found credited in the books of account maintained by the assessee are to be duly taken into consideration by the Revenue authorities. Reference was also made by it to the decision in the case of Vijay Kumar Talwar vs. CIT [2011…

Bermaco Energy Systems Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeal for A

…ty nor could assessee prove during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings. Ld. CIT DR relied on the decision in the case of Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd., 342 ITR 169, Independent Media Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 82 CCH 133 Delhi and Major Metal Ltd. (2012) 251 CTR 385. 18. With respect to the loan received from GIPTECH of Rs.90 lakhs, addition was made u/s.68. During the course of assessment the AO observed that in response to the show cause, notice issued by AO to explain credit of this amount, Assessee company has submitted Loan Confirmation from GIPTECH on the company's letter head wherein it has been confi…

Bermaco Energy Systems Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeal for A

…ty nor could assessee prove during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings. Ld. CIT DR relied on the decision in the case of Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd., 342 ITR 169, Independent Media Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 82 CCH 133 Delhi and Major Metal Ltd. (2012) 251 CTR 385. 18. With respect to the loan received from GIPTECH of Rs.90 lakhs, addition was made u/s.68. During the course of assessment the AO observed that in response to the show cause, notice issued by AO to explain credit of this amount, Assessee company has submitted Loan Confirmation from GIPTECH on the company's letter head wherein it has been confi…

Bermaco Energy Systems Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeal for A

…ty nor could assessee prove during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings. Ld. CIT DR relied on the decision in the case of Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd., 342 ITR 169, Independent Media Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 82 CCH 133 Delhi and Major Metal Ltd. (2012) 251 CTR 385. 18. With respect to the loan received from GIPTECH of Rs.90 lakhs, addition was made u/s.68. During the course of assessment the AO observed that in response to the show cause, notice issued by AO to explain credit of this amount, Assessee company has submitted Loan Confirmation from GIPTECH on the company's letter head wherein it has been confi…

ITO 10(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Jinit Properties P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

Bench: S/Shjoginder Singh & Rajendraआयकर अपील सं./Ita/3989/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2007-08 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income Tax Officer-10(3)2 Jinit Properties Pvt. Ltd. Room No.456,4Th Floor 301, Bhag Chs Ltd. Plot No.29 Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Sector-14, Navi Mumbai-400 705. Mumbai-400 020. Pan:Aabcj 5056 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ashish Heliwal Assessee By: Shri Rahul R. Sarda सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29.03.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 29.03.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) अनुसार Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dtd.25/03/2014 Of The Cit (A)-22,Mumbai The Assessing Officer(Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 3/10/ 2007, Declaring Total Income At Rupees Nil.The Ao Completed The Assessment,U/S.143(3) Of The Act, On 30/12/2010, Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 54.99 Lakhs.

…tions issued u/s.250(4), that the burden of proving all the three elements had shifted to the AO, that the AO was duty bound to investigate the creditworthiness of the subscribers. The FAA relied upon the cases of lovely Exports (299 ITR 268) and Major Metals(359 ITR 450)and held that it was the duty of the AO to make enquiries with the subscribers,that the AO had purely gone by the SEBI order based on its own investigation,that he did not bring any material on record to prove that assessee had given cash which in turn was routed and got invested as share application money,that in absence of any evidence gathered…

Elder It Solutions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 4, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

…fficer had not made any inquiry and that revenue. The learned DR had relied upon following decisions:- i. CIT v Infosys Technologies 341 ITR 293 ii. CIT v Hindustan Lever 343 ITR 161 iii. Frick India Ltd. v DCIT 6 ITR 82 iv. Major Metals Ltd. v Union of India 359 ITR 450 v. Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v CIT 243 ITR 83 vi. South India Steel Rolling Mills v CIT 224 ITR 654 34. After considering the arguments and submissions of both sides, the Tribunal in assessee‟s own case for lA.Y.2009-2010, held as under :- “8.We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The assessment in this…