Western Automobiles (India) v. CIT

Orbit Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all three assessment years i

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 7034, 7035 & 7036/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2010-11, 2008-09 & 2009-10) M/s Orbit Corporation Ltd., v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax The View, 165 Central Circle – 47 Dr. Annie Besant Road Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Worli, Mumbai – 400 012 PAN: AAACO3920A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri Awangshi Gimson Date of Hearing : 28.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 19.02.2020 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These appeals are filed b…

Eon Aviation Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

…"and all facts relating to the same, and material to the computation of his income, have been disclosed by him, will be on the person charged with'.'Concealment. In this connection, further reliance is placed on the case of Western Automobiles (India) Vs CIT (112 ITR 1048) wherein the Bombay High Court has held that where the assessee agree to inclusion of amount, onus shifts on assessee in penalty proceedings to show that the amount was not the concealed income. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Durga Timber Works Vs CIT (79 ITR 63) has held that it would amount to laying an impossible burden1 of proof " o…

Sansui Steels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 7(2)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Sansui Steel Pvt. Ltd. Ito-7(2)(2), 401-C, Gokul Building, Room No. 621-A, Vs. 80A Baroda Street, Ayakar Bhavan, M.K. Iron Market, S.T. Road, Marg, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400009 Pan No.Aaacs8834K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. K. Gopal & Ms. Neha Paranjpe, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27/09/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/11/2017

…micals Factory vs. CIT, (1977) 108 ITR 96 (All), Ayyasami Nadar & Bros. vs. CIT, (1956) 30 ITR 565 (Mad); India Sea Foods vs. CIT, (1978) 114 ITR 124 (Ker); H.V. Venugopal Chettiar vs. CIT, (1985) 153 ITR 376 (Mad); Western Automobiles (India) vs. CIT, (1978) 112 ITR 1048 (Bom); CIT vs. Krishna & Co., (1979) 120 ITR 144 (Mad); CIT vs. P.B. Shah & Co. Pr. Ltd. (1978) 113 ITR 587 (Cal); CIT vs. Dr. R.C. Gupta & Co. (1980) 122 ITR 567 (Raj). 11.3 In Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. (supra), their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court at para 8 have held: “8. Assessee has only stated that he had surrendered the additional sum of…

Bermaco Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-8(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Bermaco Industries Limited The Asst. Commissioner D-73/1, Ttc Industries Area, Of Income Tax Midc, Turbhe Central Circle-8(4), Vs. Navi Mumbai-400 705 Mumbai

…de and all facts relating to the same, and material to the computation of his income, have been disclosed by him, will be on the person charged with concealment. In this connection, further reliance is placed on the case of Western Automobiles (India) Vs CIT (112 ITR 1048) wherein the Bombay High Court has held that where the assessee agree to inclusion of amount, onus shifts on assessee in penalty proceedings to show that the amount was not the concealed income. 10. In a recent decision of the larger bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs M/s. Dharmendra Processors (306 ITR 277) it was held th…

Ramashray S. Yadav, Thane vs. ITO WD 4(3), Thane

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

…agreed to the addition. In these circumstances, in our considered opinion, there is no infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A). In this regard, we place reliance upon the Hon’ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Western India Automobiles v. CIT [112 ITR 1048] for the proposition that when the assessee has agreed the addition before the Assessing Officer, no appeal lies on the same. In the present case, no case has been made out that the assessee’s Counsel has not agreed before the A.O. Accordingly, this ground is decided against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. 9. Apropos ground No.2 unex…

Nandkishor & Co., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-firm in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 8644/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06) Nandkishore & Co., Acit 4(2), बनाम/ Unit No. 208/209, 6 Th Floor, V. Wadala Udyog Bhavan, Aayakar Bhavan, Next To Wadala Telephone M.K. Road, Exchange, Mumbai- 400020. Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 031. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafn5385K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…he case of CIT v. P K Narayanan (1999) 106 taxman 567(Ker.), ITAT, Hyderabad decision in the case of Shivlal Dulichand Agarwal v. ITO (1993) 45 ITD 319(Hyd. Trib.) and Hon’ble Bombay High court decision in the case of Western Automobiles (India) v. CIT (1978) 112 ITR 1048(Bom.) Accordingly, the A.O. levied penalty of Rs. 8,36,850/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on the grounds that it is established that the assessee-firm has concealed its income and furnished inaccurate particulars of income leading to concealment of income within the meaning of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act vide penalty orders 29.3.2010 passed u/s 271…

Amish R. Kapadia, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(30(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1858/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Amish R. Kapadia Ito, Ward – 12(3)(2), बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, 1St Floor, Indian Mercantile Mansion, Madam Kama Road, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 039 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabpk 4127 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Dhirendra M. Shah ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. R. Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 26.4.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 06.5.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 20.01.2010, Confirming The Levy Of Penalty U/S. 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2005-06 Vide Order Dated 31.3.2009. The Only Issue In Appeal Is The Sustainability Or Otherwise In Law Of The Penalty U/S. 271(1)(C), Levied In The Sum Of Rs.6,08,170/-, I.E., At The Minimum Rate Of 100% Of The Tax Sought To Be Evaded.

…to be evaded, relying on the following decisions: CIT vs. M/s. Dharmendra Processors [2008] 306 ITR 277 (SC); CIT vs. A. Sreenivasa Pai [2000] 242 ITR 29 (Ker); Addl. CIT vs. Bhartiya Bhandar [1980] 122 ITR 622 (MP); Western Automobiles (India) vs. CIT [1978] 112 ITR 1048 (Bom); and Durga Timber Works vs. CIT [1971] 79 ITR 63 (Del). The same was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), meeting the assessee’s argument of both sections 68 & 69 being not applicable, relying on the order by the tribunal on quantum and finding the case law cited by the A.O. as relevant and applicable. Aggrieved, the assessee is in second appeal.…

M/S Star Gold Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT, Cir -5(3), Mumbai

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ई’ खंडपीठ मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “E” BENCH सव"ी राजे", लेखा सद" एवं संदीप गोसांई, "ाियक सद" Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Sandeep Gosain,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं/.ITA No.2655/M/2013,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2009-10 M/s. Star Gold Pvt. Ltd. ACIT- Ward-5(3) Mukund M. Chitale & Co. CA Mumbai. 205,Agarwal,Shyamkamal“A”Building, Vs. Vile-Parle (E),Mumbai-400 057. PAN:AAICS 3712 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Anil Sathe (AR) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri M.M. Utture (DR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing…