Yuvraj v. Union of India

ITO 19(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Meenakshi N Shah, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit 5(2)(2) Meridian Chem Bond Mumbai Purchase Ltd., बनाम/ 903 Raheja Centre, Free Vs. Press Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. Aaacr1789G

…was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 7.29. It is noted that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Yuvraj vs UOI (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom.) held as under:- “that from the perusal of the order one found no application of mind on the part of the Asstt. Commissioner to the facts of the case, the issue to be dealt with and the reasons for passing the order. The value of the land was not determined by the revenue. The issue relating to capital gain or casual income was also not add…

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Airport Developement. Co Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumard C I T - 3(2)(1) M/S. Maharashtra Airport Room No. 674, 6Th Floor Development Co. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 12Th Floor, World Trade Mumbai 400020 Centre Tower No. 1 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Pan –Aadcm9623M Appellant Respondent Co No. 45/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year:2008-09) M/S. Maharashtra Airport D C I T - 3(2)(1) Development Co. Ltd. Room No. 674, 6Th Floor 12Th Floor, World Trade Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Centre Tower No. 1 Mumbai 400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Pan –Aadcm9623M Cross Objector Appellant In Appeal Revenue By: Shri Abhijit Patankar Assesseeby: Shri Salil Kapoor & Shri Sumit Lal Chandani Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.05.2018 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Jm The Aforesaid Appeal Of The Department & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 11.12.2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai For A.Y. 2008-09. Ita No. 1586/Mum/2016 – A.Y. 2008-09 2. The Basic Grievance Of The Department In This Appeal Is Against The Decision Of The Learned Cit(A) In Holding The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter “The Act”) As Bad In Law & Void.

…ngs. Thus, the learned D.R. submitted that the CIT(A) was not justified in holding the impugned assessment order as bad in law and void. In support of his contention the learned D.R. relied upon the following decisions: - (i) Yuvraj vs. Union of India (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom) (ii) Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT 350 ITR 651 (Bom) The learned D.R. submitted, since in the present case the assessment has been reopened within a period of four years, the proviso to Section 147 of the Act is not applicable and the AO retains the power to reopen the assessment without being fettered by…

Mehta Exports, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 20(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

…ng. The Ld. D.R. heavily relied on the order of authorities below by placing the reliance on the following decisions: 1. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (2013) 30 taxmann.com 211 (Mum- Trib.) 2. Yuvraj vs. Union of India (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bombay.) 8. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the material on record. The undisputed facts are that the assessment in this case was reopened within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year in order to bring to tax the interest on capital account to the tune of Rs.23,35,760/- comprising…

Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 2.28. It is noted that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Yuvraj vs UOI (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom.) held as under:- “that from the perusal of the order one found no application of mind on the part of the Asstt. Commissioner to the facts of the case, the issue to be dealt with and the reasons for passing the order. The value of the land was not determined by the revenue. The issue relating to capital gain or casual income was also not ad…

Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 2.28. It is noted that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Yuvraj vs UOI (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom.) held as under:- “that from the perusal of the order one found no application of mind on the part of the Asstt. Commissioner to the facts of the case, the issue to be dealt with and the reasons for passing the order. The value of the land was not determined by the revenue. The issue relating to capital gain or casual income was also not ad…

Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 2.28. It is noted that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Yuvraj vs UOI (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom.) held as under:- “that from the perusal of the order one found no application of mind on the part of the Asstt. Commissioner to the facts of the case, the issue to be dealt with and the reasons for passing the order. The value of the land was not determined by the revenue. The issue relating to capital gain or casual income was also not ad…

DCIT Cir. 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 2.28. It is noted that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Yuvraj vs UOI (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom.) held as under:- “that from the perusal of the order one found no application of mind on the part of the Asstt. Commissioner to the facts of the case, the issue to be dealt with and the reasons for passing the order. The value of the land was not determined by the revenue. The issue relating to capital gain or casual income was also not ad…

DCIT Cir. 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 2.28. It is noted that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Yuvraj vs UOI (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom.) held as under:- “that from the perusal of the order one found no application of mind on the part of the Asstt. Commissioner to the facts of the case, the issue to be dealt with and the reasons for passing the order. The value of the land was not determined by the revenue. The issue relating to capital gain or casual income was also not ad…

DCIT Cir. 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…was made solely on the basis of statement u/s 133A and no other material was found, in that situation, it was held that the such statement has no evidentiary value. 2.28. It is noted that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Yuvraj vs UOI (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom.) held as under:- “that from the perusal of the order one found no application of mind on the part of the Asstt. Commissioner to the facts of the case, the issue to be dealt with and the reasons for passing the order. The value of the land was not determined by the revenue. The issue relating to capital gain or casual income was also not ad…

Oricon Enterprises Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singh

…facts of Kelvinator India (supra) were not applicable to the facts of the case under consideration, that the AO had not formed an opinion, that he did not apply his mind.He referred to the cases of Rajesh Jhaveri (291 ITR 50B0), EMA India Ltd (266 CTR 659), (315 ITR 84)and Ameen Pathology (252 ITR 673). 6.2.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us.We find that while issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act the AO had observed that income had escaped on three counts. It is found that on two issues no queries were made during the original assessment proceedings. So,there is no question of ch…

Disha N . Lalwani, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 23(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2003-04 Disha N. Lalwani, Income Tax Officer- J-301, Vardhaman Nagar 23(2)(2), बनाम/ Jn. Of R.P. Rd. & M.G. Rd. C-10-Pratyakshkar Vs. Mulund (W), Bhavan, 02Nd Floor, Mumbai-400080 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra, Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaapl6056H

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, डी, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2003-04 Disha N. Lalwani, Income Tax Officer- J-301, Vardhaman Nagar 23(2)(2), बनाम/ JN. Of R.P. Rd. & M.G. Rd. C-10-Pratyakshkar Vs. Mulund (W), Bhavan, 02nd Floor, Mumbai-400080 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra, Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. AAAPL6056H "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri M. Subramanian S…