Raj Dadarkar & Associates v. ACIT

ACIT-24(1), MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBER vs. AKRUTI SMC JOINT VENTURE, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“A” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP &\nMS PADMAVATHY S, AM\nI.T.A. No. 4567/Mum/2025\n(Assessment Year: 2017-18)\nACIT-24(1),\nAkruti SMC Joint Venture,\nRoom No. 601, 6th Floor,\n101, Akruti SMC, LBS Marg,\nPiramal Chambers, Lalbaug,\nVs.\nKhopat, Thane (West),\nParel, Mumbai-400012.\nMumbai-400601.\nPAN: AAAAA7862R\n(Revenue)\n(Assessee)\nRevenue by\n:\nShri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR\nAssessee by\n:\nShri Neelkanth Khandelwal\n(Virtually appear)\nDate of Hearing\n:\n18.11.2025\nDate of Pronouncement\n:\n02.12.2025\nORDER\nPer Padmavathy S, AM:\nT…

H & M HOUSING FINANCE AND LEASING PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, ground No. 1 and 2 of the assessee‟s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year : 2017-18 H&M Housing Finance & Deputy Commissioner Of Leasing Private Limited, Income Tax, C/62, 9Th Floor, Vibgyor Towers, Vs. Circle–7(1)(2), Bandra Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra (East), M.K.Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan : Aabch4398E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri Nishith Khatri Revenue By : Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr.Dr

…h a view to emphasize on the point of distinction between the case of Chennai Properties and Investment Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the present case, the Ld.AR also relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Raj Dadarkar and Associates vs. ACIT 394 ITR 592. In the said case, the assessee, who developed a market and constructed 95 shops and 30 stalls urged that the rental income generated should be assessed as profits and gains of business for which reliance was placed on the object clause in the partnership deed, vide paragraph 8 at pages 78 and 79. However, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court clarified that…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

…as Business\nincome and income from house property was treated as Nil.\n4.3 On the other hand the appellant in its submission made during appeal\nproceedings has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the\ncase of Raj Dadarkar & Associates Vs CIT (394 ITR 592) (SC). In\naddition to that, the appellant has relied on some other judicial\npronouncements also which are discussed later in this order.\n4.4\nI have gone through the order of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Raj\nDadarkar & Associates and have come to the conclusion that the facts of that\ncase are different from the case of the appellant as…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

…as Business\nincome and income from house property was treated as Nil.\n4.3 On the other hand the appellant in its submission made during appeal\nproceedings has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the\ncase of Raj Dadarkar & Associates Vs CIT (394 ITR 592) (SC). In\naddition to that, the appellant has relied on some other judicial\npronouncements also which are discussed later in this order.\n4.4 I have gone through the order of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Raj\nDadarkar & Associates and have come to the conclusion that the facts of that\ncase are different from the case of the appellant as i…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

…as Business\nincome and income from house property was treated as Nil.\n4.3 On the other hand the appellant in its submission made during appeal\nproceedings has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the\ncase of Raj Dadarkar & Associates Vs CIT (394 ITR 592) (SC). In\naddition to that, the appellant has relied on some other judicial\npronouncements also which are discussed later in this order.\n4.4 I have gone through the order of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Raj\nDadarkar & Associates and have come to the conclusion that the facts of that\ncase are different from the case of the appellant as i…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1 , KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

…as Business\nincome and income from house property was treated as Nil.\n4.3 On the other hand the appellant in its submission made during appeal\nproceedings has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the\ncase of Raj Dadarkar & Associates Vs CIT (394 ITR 592) (SC). In\naddition to that, the appellant has relied on some other judicial\npronouncements also which are discussed later in this order.\n4.4 I have gone through the order of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Raj\nDadarkar & Associates and have come to the conclusion that the facts of that\ncase are different from the case of the appellant as i…