Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT

434 ITR 1High Court2021#82 most cited

What is Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT authority for?

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify the exact charge by not striking off the irrelevant limb (concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income). Such an omnibus or vague notice renders the penalty proceedings bad in law, and any penalty imposed on its basis is liable to be quashed.

672

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT · Section 271(1)(c) · Section 274 · defective penalty notice · non-striking off irrelevant limb · non-specification of charge · omnibus notice · vagueness · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · penalty quashed

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 153ASection 250Section 147Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 270a(8)section 271(l)record datesection 271(l)(c)section 274section 270a(9)furnishing inaccurate particularsfurnishing inaccurate particulars of incomeconcealment of incomenon-application of mindpenalty proceedings initiatedpenalty u/s 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT

M/S. R R Industries Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2741/CHNY/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy. S

For Appellant: Mr.M.K. Rangaswamy, CAFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…lowing case laws: 1. CIT vs Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565 (Kar) 2. CIT, Bangalore Vs. SSA Emerald Meadows (2016) 73 Taxmann.com 241 (Kar.) 3. Babuji Jacob reported in 430 ITR 259 (Madras-HC) 4. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (FB) (Bom) (HC) 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the Ld.CIT(A) and has assailed the plea of the Ld.AR of the assessee for cancelling penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act on the ground that the notice issued u/s.274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) of the Act was defective and invalid for the failure on the part of the AO not striking down the l…

Neysa Jewllery Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 5934/MUM/2025[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia(Physical Hearing)

Section 10ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Physical hearing) Neysa Jewellery Limited DCIT, Circle – 2(3)(1), Mumbai (Incorporated as Shreeji Jewellery Vs Aayakar Bhavan, Limited), Plot GJ-11, Seepz, Seepz, Mumbai – 400020. Sez, MIDC, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400096. [PAN : AAECS 1821 N] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Devendra Jain, Advocate Revenue by Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR Date of Institution 26.09.2025 Date of hearing 14.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 12.02.2026 Order under sect…

Shree Sant Savta Gramin Bigar Seti Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Pimpalgaon vs. Assessing Officer, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1597/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1597/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shree Sant Savta Gramin Bigar V Assessment Unit, Seti Sahakari Patsanstha S Income Tax Maryadit, Department, Delhi. Pimpalgaon, Niphad, Maharashtra – 422209. Pan: Aacas4098M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Sadananda – Jcit Date Of Hearing 10/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11/02/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2016-17 Dated 27.11.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The I.T.Act, Dated 05.03.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…urt)] dated 06.08.2025  Yashwant Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit [(2024) 38 NYPTTJ 709 (Pune)] 5 ITA No.1597/PUN/2025 [A]  Sharadchandra Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit [(2025) 39 NYP TTJ 1267 (Pune)]  The Mavilayi Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. [(2021) 43 ITR 1 (SC)] 8. Ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A). Ld.DR also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totagar’s Co-operative Sale Society. 8.1 Thus, we are left with the issue, whether interest income earned by Assessee from Nationalized Banks is eligible…

M/S. M M Brothers, Dhule vs. ITO, Ward 1, Dhule

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

ITA 477/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. VazeFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale (Virtual)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…the A.O. in the asst. order nor in the notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) and therefore, the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) passed in the instant case was bad in law in view of the 2 law laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Mohd. Farhan Shaikh [434 ITR 1] and other decisions. 2. The assessee humbly prays that all the relevant facts pertaining to the legal issue raised in Ground No. 1 are already available on record and hence, the said issue may kindly be decided by Hon'ble ITAT without remanding the matter back to the CIT(A) to adjudicate this legal issue in view of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble J…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Delhi vs. Ambience Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/228/2025HC Delhi05 Feb 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Section 271(1)(c)

…basic ingredients for levy of penalty i.e. inaccurate particulars of income or concealment has not been recorded in the penalty order dated 27.01.2023, as held in the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs. ACIT reported at 434 ITR 1 (Bom) (FB) and the judgment of this Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Sahara Life Insurance Co. Ltd. reported as 432 ITR 82 (Del). This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/02/2026 at 12:…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. Ambience Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/230/2025HC Delhi05 Feb 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Section 271(1)(c)

…basic ingredients for levy of penalty i.e. inaccurate particulars of income or concealment has not been recorded in the penalty order dated 27.01.2023, as held in the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs. ACIT reported at 434 ITR 1 (Bom) (FB) and the judgment of this Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Sahara Life Insurance Co. Ltd. reported as 432 ITR 82 (Del). This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/02/2026 at 12:…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. Ambience Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/229/2025HC Delhi05 Feb 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Section 271(1)(c)

…basic ingredients for levy of penalty i.e. inaccurate particulars of income or concealment has not been recorded in the penalty order dated 27.01.2023, as held in the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs. ACIT reported at 434 ITR 1 (Bom) (FB) and the judgment of this Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Sahara Life Insurance Co. Ltd. reported as 432 ITR 82 (Del). This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/02/2026 at 12:…

Chiragkumar Rajendrabhai Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 30(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 7130/M/2025 is allowed

ITA 7132/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri A K Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, (SR. D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69C

…er section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act, by relying on various judgments, however, it is a fact that the Ld. Commissioner has not considered the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Md. Farhan A Shaikh vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom.) (HC) (FB) and various other judgments of the jurisdictional Benches of the Tribunal, including in the case of Korbusier Kinema Private Limited, ITA Nos.7130,7131,7132/M/2025 5 Chiragkumar Rajendrabhai Shah Juhu vs. NFAC ACIT, Circle-15(1)(2), ITA No. 1016/M/2025, decided on 01.05.2025 wherein, the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal no…

Chiragkumar Rajendrabhai Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 30(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 7130/M/2025 is allowed

ITA 7131/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri A K Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, (SR. D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69C

…er section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act, by relying on various judgments, however, it is a fact that the Ld. Commissioner has not considered the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Md. Farhan A Shaikh vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom.) (HC) (FB) and various other judgments of the jurisdictional Benches of the Tribunal, including in the case of Korbusier Kinema Private Limited, ITA Nos.7130,7131,7132/M/2025 5 Chiragkumar Rajendrabhai Shah Juhu vs. NFAC ACIT, Circle-15(1)(2), ITA No. 1016/M/2025, decided on 01.05.2025 wherein, the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal no…

Chiragkumar Rajendrabhai Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 7130/M/2025 is allowed

ITA 7130/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri A K Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, (SR. D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69C

…er section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act, by relying on various judgments, however, it is a fact that the Ld. Commissioner has not considered the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Md. Farhan A Shaikh vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom.) (HC) (FB) and various other judgments of the jurisdictional Benches of the Tribunal, including in the case of Korbusier Kinema Private Limited, ITA Nos.7130,7131,7132/M/2025 5 Chiragkumar Rajendrabhai Shah Juhu vs. NFAC ACIT, Circle-15(1)(2), ITA No. 1016/M/2025, decided on 01.05.2025 wherein, the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal no…

Tahir Khan, Jhansi vs. Income Tax Officer-2(3)(1), Jhansi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 468/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 292BSection 56(2)(vii)

…. PCIT vs. Blackrock Securities Pvt. Ltd., 2023(12) TMI 714 (Delhi High Court order dated 24.11.2023); (viii). PCIT vs. Times Global Broadcasting Ltd. 2025(3) TMI 229 (Bombay High Court – order dated 27.02.2025 (ix). Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT [2021] 434 ITR 1 (Bombay H.C.) (Full Bench - order dated 11.03.2021). (x). CIT vs. Shri Samson Perinchery (2017) 392 ITR 4 (Bombay HC – order dated 05.01.2017). 7. Learned DR for revenue has supported the orders of the authorities below. 8. We have gone through the penalty notice dated 24.11.2016 issued u/s. 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Act, as placed…

Klin Industries, Sandha Khamidana, Junagadh vs. The ACIT, Circle, Junagadh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 857/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 273BSection 80J

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,राजकोट "ायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH (SMC), RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.857/RJT/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Klin Industries Assistant Commissioner of Saandha, Khamidana, Income-tax, Circle-Junagadh बनाम/ Junagadh-362220 (Gujarat) Vs. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AALFK6145M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri R.B. Shah, AR Respondent by : Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 15/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM…

Jayco Promoters & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 13(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 101/DEL/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarjayco Promoters & Developers Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, Ward-13(3), C-5, Madhu Vihar, Patparganj, Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcj7631E

For Appellant: Shri Vibhu Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ally mentioning the offence committed by the assessee, would become fatal to the penalty proceedings ? This issue is no longer res integra in view of the Full Bench Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Shaikh vs DCIT reported in 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) dated 11.3.2021. The relevant operative portion of the said judgement is reproduced hereunder:- “Question No. 3: What is the effect of the Supreme Court's decision in Dilip N. Shroff Case (supra) on the issue of non-application of mind when the irrelevant portions of the printed notices are not struck off ? 187 In Dilip N. Shroff case (s…

Classic Share & Stock Broking Services Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 4962/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Girish Agrawal, ()

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, (JUDICIAL MEMBER) & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.4962/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Classic Share & Stock Vs. Deputy Broking Services Commissioner of Limited Income-tax, Central 121, RadhaBhuvan, 1st Circle 7(1), Mumbai- Floor, Nagindas Master 400 020 Road, Fort, Mumbai- 400020 PAN: AACCC5754P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Gagan Khandelwal Respondent by ShriVirabhadra S. Mahajan,(SR. D.R.) Date of Hearing 30.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 18.12.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.…

Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5790/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Prabhash Shankareverest Kanto Cylinder V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd. बनाम Income Tax, Circle – 3(4), 204,Raheja Centre, Free World Trade Centre 1, Cuffe Press Journal Marg, Parade, Mumbai – 400005, Nariman Point, Mumbai – Maharashtra 400 021, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace0836F Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar Gupta,ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, (Sr.DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Everest Kanto Cylinder v/s. Deputy Commissioner of Ltd. बनाम Income Tax, Circle – 3(4), 204,Raheja Centre, Free World Trade Centre 1, Cuffe Press Journal Marg, Parade, Mumbai – 400005, Nariman Point, Mumbai – Maharashtra 400 021, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACE0836F Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Appellant by : Shri Shekhar Gupta,AR Respondent by : Shri Hemanshu Joshi, (Sr.DR) Date of Hearing 12.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 10.12.2…

Joseph Abraham Peter Joseph, Madurai vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Revenue Building, Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2722/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.M. Muriga Boopathy, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.R. Raghupathy, Addl.CIT
Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2722/Chny/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 v. Joseph Abraham Peter Joseph, The ITO, 9H Sharon, Pasumpon Street, Non Corporate Circle-2, St. Marutipandi Nagar, Madurai. Narimedu, Madurai-625 002. [PAN: AAYPJ 6586 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.M. Muriga Boopathy, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent b…

Mr. Sachiv Sahni, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-2(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 6070/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6068, 6069 & 6070/Mum/2025 A.Ys: 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23 Mr. Sachiv Sahni Vs The ACIT, CC – 2(3) 151, Somerset House, Room No. 803, 8t Floor Near Breach Candy Pratishtha Bhavan Hospital, Bhulabhai Mumbai - 400020 Desai Road, Peddar Road Peddar Road, Mumbai PAN – AAEPP34499E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Upvan Gupta Revenue by Shri Vivek Permpurna, CIR DR Date of Hearing 25.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 02.12.2025 ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:…

Mr. Sachiv Sahni, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-2(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 6069/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6068, 6069 & 6070/Mum/2025 A.Ys: 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23 Mr. Sachiv Sahni Vs The ACIT, CC – 2(3) 151, Somerset House, Room No. 803, 8t Floor Near Breach Candy Pratishtha Bhavan Hospital, Bhulabhai Mumbai - 400020 Desai Road, Peddar Road Peddar Road, Mumbai PAN – AAEPP34499E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Upvan Gupta Revenue by Shri Vivek Permpurna, CIR DR Date of Hearing 25.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 02.12.2025 ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:…

Mr. Sachiv Sahni, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-2(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed statistical purposes

ITA 6068/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6068, 6069 & 6070/Mum/2025 A.Ys: 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23 Mr. Sachiv Sahni Vs The ACIT, CC – 2(3) 151, Somerset House, Room No. 803, 8t Floor Near Breach Candy Pratishtha Bhavan Hospital, Bhulabhai Mumbai - 400020 Desai Road, Peddar Road Peddar Road, Mumbai PAN – AAEPP34499E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Upvan Gupta Revenue by Shri Vivek Permpurna, CIR DR Date of Hearing 25.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 02.12.2025 ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:…

Income Tax Officer 19.1.1, Piramal Chamber Lal Baug vs. A J Diam, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed in the above terms

ITA 3845/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhanito-19(1)(1), Mumbai A. J. Diam Room No. 501, Piramal Chamber, Vs. 304, 3Rd Floor, Deccan Vikas Chs Lalbaug, Mumbai-400 012. Ltd. 584/1/584, Vithalbhai Patel Road, Kothachiwadi, Mumbai- 400 004 Pan: Aaofa4830G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITO-19(1)(1), Mumbai A. J. Diam Room No. 501, Piramal Chamber, Vs. 304, 3rd Floor, Deccan Vikas CHS Lalbaug, Mumbai-400 012. Ltd. 584/1/584, Vithalbhai Patel Road, Kothachiwadi, Mumbai- 400 004 PAN: AAOFA4830G (Appellant) (Respondent) Department Represented by : Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. DR Assessee Represented by : Shri D. B. Shah, Ld. AR Date of conclusion of Hearing : 01.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.11.2025 O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.): 1. Th…