BACHUBHAI DHARAMSHI ARETHIYA ,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CC 3, THANE
In the result with the above discussion Ground No-4 raised by the assessee is dismissed, as we don’t see any reason to interfere in the findings of Ld
ITA 890/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2022AY 2013-14
Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalbachubhai Dharamshi Arethiya, 230, 2Nd Floor, Big Splash, Plot No. 78-79, Sec.Tor-17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400705. Pan: Adepp8750F ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Cc- 3, Room No. 12, A-Wing, Ashar It Park, 6Th Floor, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane (West)-400604. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Ritika Agarwal, Adv. Respondent By : Sh. Chetan M. Kacha, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 14/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Pune-11 [Hereinafter Referred To As [‘Cit(A)’] Dated 17.01.2020 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961
For Appellant: Ms. Ritika Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Chetan M. Kacha, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 132Section 14ASection 250Section 28
…tand allowed” 13. The finding of the Ld. CIT (A) is based on decision of jurisdictional ITAT in ITA no 28/Mum/2017 in the case of Lakhman M. Charanjiva. We further relied on the decision on honourable Gujarat High Court in the case of Nirmal Kumar Seth Vs CIT 17 Taxmann.com 127. 14. In the result with the above discussion Ground No-4 raised by the assessee is dismissed, as we don’t see any reason to interfere in the findings of Ld. CIT (A). 15. Ground no -5 raised by the assessee about non consideration of Rs 160,061 as expenses incurred on account of legal and other charges while recalculating indexed cost of ac…
