GIRAFFE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT - 9 , MUMBAI
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed
ITA 2663/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2014-15
Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalegiraffe Developers Pvt Vs. Pr. Cit – 9, Ltd Room No. 214, 2Nd 111, G Wing, Akruti Floor, Aayakar Commercial Complex, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Next To Akruti Centre Churchgate, Point, Central Road, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Pan/Gir No. : Aaccn2778D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Madhur Agrawal & Shri.Fenil Bhatt.Ar Respondent By : Shri.S.Anbuselvam.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:
For Appellant: Shri.Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri.S.Anbuselvam.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 271BSection 40Section 40A(2)Section 92D
…AO u/s. 263 of the Act (Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 243 IT 83 (SC)]. Both these conditions do exist cumulatively in the case of the assessee in respect of all the three issues, discussed above. Further, in the case of Shripan Land Development Vs. CIT 46 SOT 447 [ITAT-Mum], as per the facts reported the assessee has received interest free security deposit against the premises rented to the bank, yet at the time of making assessment the A0 had not made addition on account of notional interest on interest free deposits under section 23 (1)(a) of the Act. In this regard, while adjudicating the assessee's app…
