PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. PARADISE INLAND SHIPPING P. LTD.

M/S. Om Shanti Housing, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 20(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assesse stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

…ghtly deleted additions along with interest paid thereon. 10. Coming back to various case laws relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of PCIT vs Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt.Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 439. We find that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has examined a similar issue in light of provision of section 68 and held that once, assessee has discharge its onus by filing necessary evidences, including name and address of alleged shareholders, then the revenue is free to proceed on loan creditors in accordance with law, but sum so receive…

Income Tax Officer Ward 20(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Om Shanti Residency, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy Svs. Om Shanti Residency Ito, Ward 20(2)(1) Flat No. 3, Ground Floor, Room No. 314, 3Rd B Wing, Maner Kunj, Floor, Piramal Meghwadi, Dr. Ss Rao Chambers, Dr. Ss Rao Marg, Lalbaug, Marg, Lalbaug, Mumbai Mumbai – 400012. – 400012. Pan/Gir No. Aabfo2195D (Applicant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vs. Om Shanti Residency ITO, Ward 20(2)(1) Flat No. 3, Ground Floor, Room No. 314, 3rd B Wing, Maner Kunj, Floor, Piramal Meghwadi, Dr. SS Rao Chambers, Dr. SS Rao Marg, Lalbaug, Marg, Lalbaug, Mumbai Mumbai – 400012. – 400012. PAN/GIR No. AABFO2195D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Anish Shah Revenue by Shri Krishna Kumar, CIT(DR) सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing 06.11.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 13.11.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present…

DCIT-15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Luxora Realtors Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit-15(1)(2) V. Luxora Realtors Pvt. Ltd 459, Ayakar Bhawan Unit No. 150, Avior Corporate Park Nirmal Galaxy Lbs Road M.K. Road, Mumbai- 40020 Mulund (W), Mumbai- 400080 Pan: Aabco3197J (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT-15(1)(2) v. Luxora Realtors Pvt. Ltd 459, Ayakar Bhawan Unit No. 150, Avior Corporate Park Nirmal Galaxy LBS Road M.K. Road, Mumbai- 40020 Mulund (W), Mumbai- 400080 PAN: AABCO3197J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri. K.P. Devani Department Represented by : Ms. Smiti Samant Date of conclusion of Hearing : 15.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by th…

Ams Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent . Cir 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1814/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ams Trading & Investment बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2(3) Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shatrunjay Apartments, 1St Old Cgo Annexe Floor, 28 Sindhi Lane, Building, M. K. Road, Nanubhai Desai Road, Mumbai-400020. Greater Mumbai-400004. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafca6183N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ajay Singh Revenue By: Smt Vranda Matkari सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-48 Dated 26.07.2021 For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Three (3) Grounds Of Appeal. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Share Capital & Share Premium Received To The Tune Of Rs. 30,00,000/- From M/S Emporis Projects Ltd (Herein After “M/S. Epl”). The Facts As Noted By The Ao Is That Assessee Has Filed The Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs. Nil On 09.03.2012; & Later The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Dated 27.03.2015. After Recording The Reason For Reopening Which Shows That He Received Information From The Office Of The Dgit

…AY 2013-14. For such a proposition reliance was placed on the decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Principle CIT vs SDB Estate private Ltd (ITA no 1356-2015) dated 27.03.2015 Bombay and Principle CIT vs. Paradise Inland Shipping P. Ltd (2018) 400 ITR 439, CIT vs Orchid Industries private Ltd 397 ITR 136 and several other cases, and we agree with the assessee that the AO could not have brought to tax the share premium of Rs. 29,40,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. Be that as it may, we also note that assessee has discharged the burden casted on it to prove prima- facie to prove identity by filling the PAN…

Luxora Infrastructure P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 1608/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year 2011-12) Vs. DCIT,CC-2(1) Luxora Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. 1207, 12th Floor Prathishta Bhawan ‘A’ Wing,O2 commercial 8th Floor, Mumbai-400 020 Building, 23-24, Minerva Industrial Estte, Off.LBS Road, Mulund(W) Mumbai-400 080 PAN : AABCL2854K (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri K.P.Dewani Assessee by Department by Shri Abhirama Karthikeyan Date of Hearing 16.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement 09.03.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the assessee is dir…

I.T.O. - 25(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Smt. Leena Haresh Harde, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Hon'Ble & Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 25(2)(5) V. Smt Leena Haresh Harde Room No. 506, C-10, 5Th Floor 502, 5Th Floor, Padmawati Palace Pratyakshakar Bhavan Nanda Patkar Road Bandra Kurla Complex Vile Parle (E), Mumbai – 400 057 Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400 051 Pan: Aaxph1737Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rushabh Mehta Department By : Shri Michael Jerald

…ssee submitted that the addition purely based on bald statements of alleged entry providers without any corroborative evidence is not sustainable in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt Ltd [400 ITR 439]. It is also submitted that the SLP filed by the revenue against this judgement was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT v. Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt Ltd., [255 Taxman 160]. 10. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that it is the finding of the Assessing Officer in the assessment order that copy of statement reco…

Manaz Retail P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2006-07 Manz Retail P. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Range-8(2) Knowledge House, Shyam Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Vs. Nagar, Off. Jogeshwari – Road, Mumbai-400020 Vikhroli Link Road, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai- 400060. Pan No. Aaacm1978J Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2006-07 Dcit-10(2)(2), R. No. Manz Retail P. Ltd. 209, 2Nd Floor, Knowledge House, Shyam Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Nagar, Off. Jogeshwari – Road, Mumbai-400020 Vikhroli Link Road, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai- 400060. Pan No. Aaacm1978J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr.Vipul Joshi,Ar Revenue By : Mr. Neil Philip, Dr Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2018

…299 ITR 268 (Del-HC), CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. [2011] 333 ITR 100 (Bom-HC), CIT v. Green Infra Ltd [2017] 392 ITR 680 (Bom-HC), CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 394 ITR 680 (Bom-HC), PCIT v. Paradise Inland Shipping (P) Ltd. [2017] 400 ITR 439 (Bom-HC), PCIT v. Apeak Info Tech Nagpur & Ors [2017] 397 148 (Bom- HC), CIT v. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom-HC), CIT v. Haresh D. Mehta [2017] 251 Taxman 346 (Bom-HC), PCIT v. Veedhata Tower Pvt. Ltd. [2018] 403 ITR 415 (Bom-HC). 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submits that as the assessee failed to produce the parties fo…

Anusha Trading P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S Anusha Trading Private Ito 9(1)(3), Mumbai. Limited, Nityanand Sadan, Plot- बिधम/ 133, Bardwadi, Cross Lane, Vs. Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 058. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aahca5317L (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Ito 9(1)(3), M/S Anusha Trading Private Room No. 206, 2Nd Floor, Limited, Nityanand Sadan, Plot- बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 133, Bardwadi, Cross Lane, Vs. Mumbai-400058 Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 058. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aahca5317L (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…e said claim of the assessee. The ld. A.R in support of his aforesaid contention took support of the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Panaji Vs. M/s Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 400 ITR 439 (Bom). The ld. A.R also relied on the order of a coordinate bench of the Tribunal, viz. ITAT Mumbai Bench “H”, Mumbai, in the case of Dy. CIT-1(1)(1) Mumbai Vs. M/s Alcon Bioscience Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 1946/Mum/2016, dated 28.02.2018). The ld. D.R in his rejoinder rebutted the case laws relied upon by the counsel for the assessee. The ld. D.R taki…