Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT

DCIT (TDS) - 2(3), Mumbai vs. Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

…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…

Ims Ag vs. DCIT (Intl. Tax) Range 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

…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…

Jt CIT (OSD) Cir 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

…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…

Raju J Soomaney, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…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…

Rak Construction Project Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 3 (3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

…e 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- C.Circle, 4(2), Mumbai vs. Ilesh Amrutlal Gadhia, Mumbai

Appeals stand partly allowed to the extent indicated in the order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…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…

Income Tax Officer 26(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Mohd. Irsad Mohd. Samiullah Alam, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalita No.155/Mum./2018 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Income Tax Officer ……………. Appellant Ward–26(2)(3), Mumbai V/S Mohd. Irsad Mohd. Samiullah Alam D–103, Penat Galaxy, Fire Brigade ……………. Respondent Antop Hill, Mumbai 400 037 Pan –Ahhpa4000G Revenue By : Shri Sunil Kumar Jha Assessee By : Shri Shubham Rathi Date Of Hearing – 25.02.2020 Date Of Order – 13.07.2020

…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 15 Mohd. Irsad Mohd.…

Ims Ag, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) 2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

…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 24 (2), Mumbai vs. Juneja Global, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5502/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit-24(2) बिधम/ M/S. Juneja Global A/36, Midc, 2Nd Street, Income Tax-24(2), Room Vs. No. 413, Piramal Chambers, Andheri (E), Mumbai- Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai- 400093. 400012. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaafj1087C (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Choudhary Arunkumar Singh (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Bipin B. Shah (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 31.05.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -36, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] 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 administrative directions to all the benches of the Tribunal in that beha…

Harshvardhan Constructions, Mumbai vs. ITO 23(1)(5), Mumbai

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodharshvardhan Constructions Income Tax Officer 11, Happy Home, 244 Waterfield Road; Ward 23(1)(5), 1St Floor, Vs. Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai – 400 007. Pan– Aadfh6590D (Appellant) (Respondent) Income Tax Officer Vs. Harshvardhan Construvctions Ward 23(1)(5), 1St Floor , 11, Happy Home, 244 Waterfield Road; Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050. Mumbai – 400 007. Pan– Aadfh6590D Harshvardhan Constructions Income Tax Officer 11, Happy Home, 244 Waterfield Road; Ward 23(1)(5), 1St Floor, Vs. Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai – 400 007. Pan– Aadfh6590D

…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…

The Childrens Aid Society Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 27 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, in the terms indicated above

…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 Assessment year: 2011-12 Page 4 of 7…

Jamsetji Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. ACIT (E) I-1, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1010/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Jamsetji Tata Trust बिधम/ Acit (E) 1-1 Bombay House, Homi Mody Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. Street, Mumbai-400001. Road, Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatj0095N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sukhsagar Syal Revenue By: Shri Shishir Dhamija (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 24.12.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 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 23(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Harshvardhan Constructions, Mumbai

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodharshvardhan Constructions Income Tax Officer 11, Happy Home, 244 Waterfield Road; Ward 23(1)(5), 1St Floor, Vs. Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai – 400 007. Pan– Aadfh6590D (Appellant) (Respondent) Income Tax Officer Vs. Harshvardhan Construvctions Ward 23(1)(5), 1St Floor , 11, Happy Home, 244 Waterfield Road; Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050. Mumbai – 400 007. Pan– Aadfh6590D Harshvardhan Constructions Income Tax Officer 11, Happy Home, 244 Waterfield Road; Ward 23(1)(5), 1St Floor, Vs. Bandra West, Mumbai – 400 050. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai – 400 007. Pan– Aadfh6590D

…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…

Federal Mogul Anand Bearnig India Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ITO 2(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.463/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Federal Mogul Anand बिधम/ Dcit, Ito Ward 2(1)(3) Bearing India Ltd. (Formerly Mumbai. Vs. Known As Federal Mogul Bearings India Ltd.) Paras Twin Towers, 10Th Floor, Tower B, Golf Course Road Sector-54, Gurgaon- 122002. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagca3784Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Bhavya Goyal Revenue By: Shri Anand Mohan (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/07/2020 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(5) 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 20.10.2015 Relevant To The A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer A.Y.2011-12

…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, 14 A.Y.2011-12 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 Trib…

Tata Steel Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT- 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N.Prasad, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Tata Steel Limited Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Bombay House Income Tax-2(3) Aayakar Bhavan, 5Th Floor 24, Homi Mody Street Fort, Room No.522, Mumbai-400001 Maharshi Karve Marg, Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaact2803M (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N.PRASAD, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM M/s. Tata Steel Limited Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Bombay House Income Tax-2(3) Aayakar Bhavan, 5th Floor 24, Homi Mody Street Fort, Room No.522, Mumbai-400001 Maharshi Karve Marg, Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAACT2803M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Kirit Kamdar Revenue by Shri Manjunathaswamy, CIT DR Date of Hearing 16/03/2020 Date of Pronouncement 08/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.6104/Mum/2018 for A.Y.1985-86 arises out of the order by the ld.…

Value Line Equities P. Ltd ( Formerly Knwoan As M.S Sb & T Securities P.Ltd), Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), 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. 4605/Mumbai/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / 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…

Kewal Kiran Enterparises, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1376/Mum/2018 (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…

Hdfc Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 2(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Hdfc Bank Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Hdfc Bank House, Income Tax – 2(3) Room No.615, 6Th Floor Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400 013 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2702H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assistant Commissioner Vs. Hdfc Bank Ltd., Of Income Tax – 2(3) Hdfc Bank House, Room No.615, 6Th Floor Senapati Bapat Marg Aayakar Bhavan Lower Parel, M.K. Road, Mumbai - Mumbai – 400 013 400020 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2702H (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM HDFC Bank Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of HDFC Bank House, Income Tax – 2(3) Room No.615, 6th Floor Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400 013 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 PAN/GIR No. AAACH2702H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assistant Commissioner Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., of Income Tax – 2(3) HDFC Bank House, Room No.615, 6th Floor Senapati Bapat Marg Aayakar Bhavan Lower Parel, M.K. Road, Mumbai - Mumbai – 400 013 400020 PAN/GIR No. AAACH2702H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri…

Patel L&T Consortium, Mumbai vs. ACIT 17(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5285 & 5286/Mum/2016 (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…

ACIT 6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Cpec Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Acit 6(2)(1) Vs. M/S. Cpec Limited 5Th Room No.504/563-C, 11,211/219, P.D.Mello Road Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K.Road, Churchgate Maharashtra Mumbai – 400020 Maharashtra Pan/Gir No.Aaacc2089A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…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…