Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT

DCIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Future Retail Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5959/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Vinay Ramakant Sapte, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3830, 3831, 4546 & 5594/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2013-14) Dcit Cc-7(1), Room No. Shri Vinay Ramakant 653, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Sapte, बिधम/ 61/62, Tower A, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai400 022 Vs. Kalpataru Residency, Opp. Cine Planet, Sion (E), Mumbai-400 022 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aadps6169H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Prashant Kumar Gupta, Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Ms. Pooja Shah, Shri Kiran Kapadia, Ars. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 04.03.2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 11.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman ():

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

DCIT - 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kalsha Builders Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sooddcit-15(2)(1) M/S Kalsha Builders Pvt. Ltd. R. No. 357, 3Rd Floor, A-1, Ashian Sector-17, Vashi, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan,M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 705 Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 020 Pan – Aaack3955F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…of concluding the hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT (2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom) wherein it was inter alia, observed as under: “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that behalf. We ho…

Maritime Vanguard Pte Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (International Taxation) -3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5999/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Maritime Vanguard Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit (International C/O Srbc & Associates, Taxation)-3(2)(1) Vs. Llp, 14Th Floor, The Ruby, Room No.1615, 16Th Floor, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Air India Building, Nariman Dadar (W), Mumbai-400028. Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajcm3609F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M. P. Lohia (Ar) Revenue By: Shri Sanjay Singh (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/08/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S.144C(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ( In Short “The Act”) In Pursuance Of The Directions Of Dispute Resolution Panel – 3, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Drp”] Dated 27.06.2019 Relevant To The A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “General 1. Erred In Assessing Total Income At Rs39,66,00,300 As Against Returned Income Of Rs Nil; Taxability Under The Income Tax Act. 1961 ('Act) A.Y.2016-17

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

Jsm Corporation P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 6(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3236/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Jsm Corporation Pvt. बिधम/ Acit-6(3) Ltd. Mumbai. Vs. Todi Estate, A Wing, 3Rd Floor, Sunmill Compound, Sitaram Jadhav Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabch5026K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Pramita Rathi/ Ishwer P. Rathi Revenue By: Shri Padma Ram (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/08/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 10.03.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2010-11. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - 2. “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of The Revenue Expenses Of Rs.1,92,30,263/- Only Oil Ground That The Assessee Has Shown The Expenses Under The Head Preoperative Expenses In The Books Of Account.

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

Asst CIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Doka India P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1912/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit-15(1)(2) बिधम/ M/S. Doka India Pvt. Ltd. 483A, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Plot No. 26A, Sector-7, 601 Vs. Bhavan, Mumbai-400021. To 606, Mahavir Landmark Bldg, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai-410210. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccd7895H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Anand Mohan (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Dharmesh Shah/ Dhaval Shah सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/08/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S.144C(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ( In Short “The Act”) In Pursuance Of The Directions Of Dispute Resolution Panel – I, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Drp”] Dated 29.12.2015 Relevant To The A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate 9 A.Y.2011-12 administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribu…

DCIT Cen Cir -5(1), Mumbai vs. Cikura Properties Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Ramlal Negi & Co. No. 181/Mum/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 457/Mum/2018) Dcit, Circle – 5(1) बनाम/ Cikura Properties Ltd., Room No. 1928, 19Th Vs. 324, Master Mind Iv, Royal Floor, Air India Building Palms, Aarey Milk Colony, Nariman Point, Mumbai - Goregaon (E), Mumbai – 65 21 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccc4109P Appellant/Respondent .. Respondent/Appellant अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri K. Madhusudan, Cit(Dr) ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondentby: Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 04/03/2020 06/08 /2020 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar- Am: The Appeal Of The Revenue & Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee Are Arising Out Of Thecommon Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-53, Mumbai. The Revenue Has Challenged The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) On Merit, Whereas, The Assessee Has Challenged The Jurisdiction

…y” has been used ITA No. 457/Mum/2018, CO No. 181/Muml/2018. Cikura Properties Ltd., Mumbai in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] and has been duly considered by the Coordinate bench in the case of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s. Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. ITA No.3743/Mum/2016 Assessment year: wherein it has decided that for the 2010-11 extraordinary period the period of 90 days shall stand extended. The operative part is reproduced:- 7. However, before we p…

Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumar: A.Y : 2006-07

…90 days from the date of concluding the hearing as the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] and has been duly considered by the Coordinate bench in the case of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s. Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. ITA No.3743/Mum/2016 Assessment year: 2010-11 wherein it has decided that for the extraordinary period the period of 90 days shall stand extended. 13. Accordingly we exclude the period of Covid -19 being…

Goldmohur Design and Apparel Park Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. Comm. of Income Tax - 7, Mumbai

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodgoldmohar Design & Pr. Cit-7 R. No. 628, 6Th Floor, Apparel Park Ltd. 145, Goldmohar Mill, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Dada Saheb Phalke Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Dadar (E), Mumbai- 400 014 Pan – Aadcg1613M (Appellant) (Respondent)

…of concluding the hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression ―ordinarily‖ has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon‘ble High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein it was inter alia, observed as under: ―We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that behalf. We ho…

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Mahindra & Mahindra Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Limited Income-Tax Mahindra Towers Circle – 2(2) Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Limited Income-Tax Mahindra Towers Circle – 2(2) Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Marg Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No. AAACM3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Urvi Mehta Revenue by Shri A Mohan Date of Hearing 04/03/2020 Date of Pronouncement 29/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.6961/Mum/2012 for A.Y.2003-04 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, in a…

Rivendell Pe, Llc, Mumbai vs. ACIT (It)-4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms as indicated above

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the Benches of the Tribunal in Rivendell…

J. B. Boda Reinsurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the Benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

JCIT (OSD) - 7(3), Mumbai vs. Tirupati Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Jcit (Osd) – 7(3) Vs. M/S. Tirupati Constructions Mumbai 214, Laxmi Plaza, Laxmi Industrial Estate New Link Road, Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400 053 Pan/Gir No.Aafft0513J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) C.O.No.23/Mum/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.69/Mum/2019) (Assessment Year: 2008-09)

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

ACIT 27 (2), Mumbai vs. Shri. Pradhyumn Prataparai Thakkar, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1489/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

ITO Ward 1(4), Kalyan vs. M/S Sumangala Machineries, Kalyan

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shris. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1300 & 1301/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11)

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

ITO Ward 3 (2), Thane vs. M/S Plus Suppliers, Thane

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1261/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

…he hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression “ordinarily” has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that “We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…