Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

ITO WD 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kesar Petroproducts Ltd, Ratnagiri

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

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

…ipts, which has been assessed by the AO under the head ‘income from other sources’. Reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements. Sr. No. Description Citation 1 C1T--VS- Alom Extrusions Lid. 319 ITR 306 2 Price Water Coopers Pvt. Ltd. -vs- C1T 348 ITR 306 3 ShivLalTak-vs-CIT 251 ITR 37 3 4 National Textiles -vs- CIT 249 H'R 125 5 ITO -vs- Roborant Investments P. Lid. 7 SOT 181 6 Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life \ 15 SOT 722 Insurance Co. Ltd. —vs- ITO 7 ACIT--vs- ShivKadar 15 SOT 57 8 CIT -vs- Ram Commercial Enterprises 246 ITR 568 Ltd. 9 IT. Ashok Paid -vs- CIT 292 ITR 11 10 M/s Climate Systems…

M/S.Robust Transportation Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM I.T.A. No. 3195/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/s. Robust Transportation Private DCIT-3(3)(1), Limited Mumbai Vs. 608, Regent Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 PAN/GIR No. AAECR 0046 G (Appellant) (Respondent) : Appellant by : Shri Ashwani Kumar Respondent by : Shri R. P. Meena : 20.06.2018 Date of Hearing : 23.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai (‘CI…

Swadesh Textiles P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Swadeshi Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Ito-4(3)(4), Mumbai ¾, 1St Floor, Kapadia Vs. Chambers, 599, Jss Road, Chira Bazar, Mumbai- 400002. Pan No. Aagcs2102Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Snehal J. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. V. Justin, Dr Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/08/2018

…s less, while computing the book profits which is again nothing but an inadvertent error on the part of the Chartered Accountant. Swadeshi Textiles Pvt. Ltd. 5 5.1 The Ld. counsel files a copy of the decision in Price Waterhouse Coopers P. Ltd. v. DCIT (SC) [348 ITR 306], CIT v. Compro Technologies (P.) Ltd. [2015] 55 taxmann.com 180 (Del.), T.C.N.S. Ltd. v. ACIT [ITA No. 3069/Del/2013], CIT v. Filtrex Technologies (P.) Ltd. [2015] 59 taxmann.com 371 (Karn.), CIT v. Deep Tools (P&H) 274 ITR 603, CIT v. Dhanabal [2009] 309 ITR 268 (Del.), CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. (322 ITR 158) (SC), T. Ashok Pai v.…

Mseb Holding Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 10(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 853/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2007-08) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 852/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Mseb Holding Company Asst. Commissioner Of Limited Income Tax, 10(1), Hongkong Bank Building, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Vs. Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort, Karve Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra, Pin- Mumbai-400 020 400 001 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaecm2934Q अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J.D. Mistry Shri Niraj Sheth, Ars’ प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Jacinta Zimik Vashai, Cit Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30-07-2018 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03-08-2018

…4. In view of the above facts and circumstances on all the three appellate issues, we are of the view that the case law relied on by the learned Counsel for the assessee of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 306 (SC), clearly shows that wherever bonafide mistakes and inadvertent error is discovered, whether assessee was not guilty either of furnishing of income. Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: - “15. The assessee has filed an affidavit dated 14th September, 2012 in which it is stated that the assessee is engaged in Multidisciplinary Management Cons…

Mseb Holding Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 10(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 853/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2007-08) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 852/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Mseb Holding Company Asst. Commissioner Of Limited Income Tax, 10(1), Hongkong Bank Building, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Vs. Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort, Karve Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra, Pin- Mumbai-400 020 400 001 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaecm2934Q अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J.D. Mistry Shri Niraj Sheth, Ars’ प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Jacinta Zimik Vashai, Cit Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30-07-2018 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03-08-2018

…4. In view of the above facts and circumstances on all the three appellate issues, we are of the view that the case law relied on by the learned Counsel for the assessee of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 306 (SC), clearly shows that wherever bonafide mistakes and inadvertent error is discovered, whether assessee was not guilty either of furnishing of income. Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: - “15. The assessee has filed an affidavit dated 14th September, 2012 in which it is stated that the assessee is engaged in Multidisciplinary Management Cons…

Delux Polymers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 33, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.165/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बिधम/ M/S. Delux Polymers Pvt. Dcit, Central Circle-33 Ltd. 11/12 Raghuvanshi Mill (Passing The Original Order) Vs. Compound, Lower Parel, Dy. Cit (C.C.5(3) Mumbai-400013. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacd4132B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sumit Lalchandani & Salil Kapoor Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07.05.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.09.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2011-12 Wherein The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Upheld.

…long term capital gain. In the said circumstances, the penalty is not leviable in accordance with law. In support of his contention, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon the law settled in Price Water House Coopers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 348 ITR 306 (SC). The copy of order for the A.Y. 2012-13 of the assessee dated 29.07.2016 is on the file in which the matter of controversy has been discussed in para no. 6 which is hereby reproduced below.: - “6.1 During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed from perusal of AIR information that the appellant had sold the immovable property l…

DCIT Cent. Cir. 4(1), Mumbai vs. Oberoi Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5998/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit Central Circle-4(1), बिधम/ M/S. Oberoi Constructions, Mumbai R. No. 1916, 19Th Commerz, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Floor, Air India Building, International Business Park, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Oberoi Garden City, Off. 400021. W.E. Highway, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400063. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaco1805E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari (Ar) Assessee By: Shri Saumil Daru सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08.05.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 22.07.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -52, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - "1. "Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Clt1A} Has Erred In Deleting Penalty U/S 27L(L)(C) On Account Of Penalty Payment Made To Bmc For Unauthorized Construction & Fine Paid To Custom Authorities For Importing Marbles Without A.Y.2011-12

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5998/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) DCIT Central Circle-4(1), बिधम/ M/s. Oberoi Constructions, Mumbai R. No. 1916, 19th Commerz, 3rd Floor, Vs. Floor, Air India Building, International Business Park, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Oberoi Garden City, Off. 400021. W.E. Highway, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400063. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACO1805E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue by: Shri Ram Tiwari (AR) Assessee by: Shri Saumil Daru स…

Ass CIT 8(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Wire and Wirless Tisai Satellite Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

…1 ITA 09/Mum/2016 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI Before Shri Joginder Singh(JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND Shri G Manjunatha (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A No.09/Mum/2016 (Assessment year: 2011-12) ACIT-8(3)(2), Mumbai vs M/s Wire and Wireless Tisai Satellite Ltd, 4th Floor, Madhu Industrial Estate, P. Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-13 PAN : AAACW7197D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri M.V. Rajguru Respondent by Shri Mitesh J Thakkar Date of hearing 26-04-2018 Date of pronouncement 13-06-2018 O R D E R Per G Manjunatha, AM : This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai vs. Shah Rukh Khan, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri N.K.Pradhan, Am Dy. Commissoner Of Income-Tax, Shri Shah Rukh Khan Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai 44-Mannat, B.J. Road, Band बिधम/ (Erstwhile Assistant Commissioner Of Income Stand, Bandra (West), Tax, Central Circle-29, Mumbai) Mumbai-400 050. Vs. R. No. 1918, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aahpk3293L (अऩीराथी /Revenue) (प्रत्मथी / Assessee) :

…ld. A.R in order to support his contention that no penalty under Sec. 271(1)(c) could be imposed on account of a bonafide mistake on the part of an assessee, relied on the following judicial pronouncement:- (i) Price Waterhouse Coopers P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 306 (SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. (2013) 259 CTR 383 (Bom) (iii) CIT Vs. Somany Evergree Knits Ltd. (2013) 352 ITR 592 (Bom). (iv) CIT Vs. Rose Lock Factory (1993) 204 ITR 753 (All) The ld. A.R taking support of the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, submitted that no penalty under Sec. 271(1)(c) in respect of the addition P a g e | 2…

DCIT 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Kshirsagar Construction Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

…s of income or filed inaccurate particulars of income whereas on the other hand the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a very speaking and detailed order. The Ld. A.R. relied on the following decisions in support of his contentions. “i) Price water Coopers (P) Ltd Vs CIT [25 Taxmann.com 400 (SC)]. ii) CIT Vs Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd [189 Taxman 322(SC)] iii) CIT Vs Somany Evergree Knits Ltd [ ITA No. 1332 of 2011(Bom)] iv) Nayan C Shah v. Income Tax Officer [69 Taxmann.com 256(Guj)] v) PCIT Vs. Rana Sugar Ltd [81 Taxmann.com 77(Punjab Haryana)] vi) Narindera Industries v. ACIT [85 Taxmann.com 241(Chandigarh Bench - SMC)…