“full and true disclosure”

DCIT - CC 3(1), Mumbai vs. Wind World India Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

bogus purchases of Rs 129.06 crores for the years relevant to AYS 2007- 08 to 2013-14 on the ground of non full and true disclosure after considering the findings of the search action, the discrepancies noted in the supporting evidences submitted before them in respect of the purchases/expenses from

DCIT Central Circle 3 (1), Mumbai vs. Wind World India Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

bogus purchases of Rs 129.06 crores for the years relevant to AYS 2007- 08 to 2013-14 on the ground of non full and true disclosure after considering the findings of the search action, the discrepancies noted in the supporting evidences submitted before them in respect of the purchases/expenses from

Rashmi Infrastructure Developers Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT-3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. The ITSC observed pursuant to this claim of deduction, it had resulted in assessee not making full and true disclosure of undisclosed income. Moreover, the requirement of limiting the built up area to an extent of 1000 sq.ft has not been complied with ... ITSC, since the same was not done by the assessee, it concluded that assessee had not come clean before the ITSC by making full and true disclosure of its income to settle the dispute. Accordingly, ITSC rejected the application of the assessee in the order passed u/s 245D

Rashmi Infrastructure Developers Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT -3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. The ITSC observed pursuant to this claim of deduction, it had resulted in assessee not making full and true disclosure of undisclosed income. Moreover, the requirement of limiting the built up area to an extent of 1000 sq.ft has not been complied with ... ITSC, since the same was not done by the assessee, it concluded that assessee had not come clean before the ITSC by making full and true disclosure of its income to settle the dispute. Accordingly, ITSC rejected the application of the assessee in the order passed u/s 245D

Bombay Marine Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO WD 3(1) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm The Ito, Bombay Marine Engineering Ward 3(1)(2) Works Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, 5B Bakhtawar, Nariman Point, Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaacb0451F Assessee By : Shri Nimesh Chotani, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.G. Mehta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2022

assessee in the financial statements and computation of income. Hence there cannot be any failure on the part of the assessee to make full and true disclosure of particulars of income in the original assessment proceedings. Since, in the instant case, the reopening was admittedly made beyond 4 years from ... under consideration; and Bombay Marine Engineering Works P. Ltd.; 06-07 ii. There is no failure on the part of assessee to make full and true disclosure of particulars of income in the original assessment proceedings. 06. Hence, we have no hesitation in quashing the reassessment proceedings as void abinitio

ACIT 12(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Fame Engineering India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Fame Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Ito-12(2)(1), D-31, Star Apartment, S.V. Aayakar Bhavan, Road, Borivali (West), Vs. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400092. Pan No. Aaaca 9948 E Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 Asst. Commissioner Of Income M/S Fame Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., Tax-12(2)(1), 31, Star Apartment, S.V. Road, Borivali Room No. 128E, 1St Floor, Vs. West, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai-400092. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaca 9948 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. S.N. Kabra, Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/05/2022

information that the appellant had made a false claim of having received a loan. A false claim made amounts to failure to make full and true disclosure. Therefore, I hold that the AO was justified in reopening the assessment even though more than 4 years had passed from ... also rejected the contention of the assessee that there was no failure on the part of the assessee in making full and true disclosure, as false claim was made by the assessee regarding the loan. In absence of any rebuttal by the assessee before us, we concur with the finding

Fame Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 12 (2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Fame Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Ito-12(2)(1), D-31, Star Apartment, S.V. Aayakar Bhavan, Road, Borivali (West), Vs. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400092. Pan No. Aaaca 9948 E Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 Asst. Commissioner Of Income M/S Fame Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., Tax-12(2)(1), 31, Star Apartment, S.V. Road, Borivali Room No. 128E, 1St Floor, Vs. West, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai-400092. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaaca 9948 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. S.N. Kabra, Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/05/2022

information that the appellant had made a false claim of having received a loan. A false claim made amounts to failure to make full and true disclosure. Therefore, I hold that the AO was justified in reopening the assessment even though more than 4 years had passed from ... also rejected the contention of the assessee that there was no failure on the part of the assessee in making full and true disclosure, as false claim was made by the assessee regarding the loan. In absence of any rebuttal by the assessee before us, we concur with the finding

Hsbc Asset Management (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.1 raised by assessee is allowed and assessment order framed found to be without jurisdiction

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalhsbc Asset Management (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Mercantile Bank Chamber, 16 Veer Nariman, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aabch0007N ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-1(1)(2) Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Niraj Sheth, Ar Respondent By : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit (A)’] Vide Order Dated 13.10.2017 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Distinct & Separate & Without Prejudice To Each Other. 1. On The Facts & In Law, The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - 6, Mumbai [‘Cit(A)’] Erred In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Initiated After Four Years From The End Of Relevant Assessment Year, Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Made & The Appellant Had Disclosed Fully & Truly All Material Facts Necessary

Others (188 Taxman 123) (Bom), wherein the facts of the case were similar in so far as that the assessee had made a full and true disclosure of its income in its ROI,-and there was no new information/material found by the AO for reopening the proceedings under section ... based on reasons recorded by Your Good self is bad in law. In view of the foregoing, and considering that: > We had made full and true disclosure of all material facts in the computation of income and Financial Statements in the course of its assessment under, section

Merck Performance Materials Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 15(2)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Rahul Chaudharyआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1210/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Merck Performance Materials बिधम/ The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., (Formerly Known As Commissioner Of Income Vs. Chemtreat Composites India Tax – 15(2)(2), Mumbai, Pvt. Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Godrej One, Pirojsha Nagar, M.K. Road, Eastern Express Highway, Mumbai - 400020 Vikhroli (East), Mumbai- 400079 Pan : Aabcc5609B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी) / Respondent) For The Appellant/Assessee: Arati Vissanji For The Respondent/Revenue: C.T. Mathews सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary: 1. By Way Of The Present Appeal The Appellant/Assessee Has Challenged The Order Dated, 02.12.2019 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 24, Mumbai (Hereafter Referred To As „The Cit(A)‟] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereafter Referred To As „The Act‟), Whereby The Ld. Cit(A) Had Dismissed The Appeal Against The Assessment Order, Dated 29.12.2017, Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Act.

been made earlier, is clearly reflective of the position that during the course of the assessment proceedings the assessee had made a full and true disclosure of all material facts in relation to the assessment. As a matter of fact, it would be necessary to note that the notice

Rose Impex, Surat vs. Asstt. CIT-CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Rose Impex Acit, Cc-1(3) 11, Shakti Chamber, Vs. Pratishtha Bhavan Main Road, Rughunathpura Mumbai Sura -395003 Pan No. Aamfr1123K Appellant Respondent : Mr. Suchek Anchaliya, Ar Assessee By : Mr. T. Shankar, Dr Revenue By : 07/03/2022 Date Of Hearing Date Of : 29/03/2022 Pronouncement

meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is attributable to failure on the part of the assessee to make full and true disclosure in the return of Income.” 6.1 Further, the A.O in his detailed finding from para 6 to 12 also had the assessee concern

Dy CIT-CC-6(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Marathon Nextgen Realty Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Vikas Awasthy & Shri Prashant Maharishiआअसं. 797/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2012-13 ) आअसं. 798/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2011-12 ) आअसं. 799/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 6(3), Room No.1926, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ..... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Marathon Nextgen Realty Limited, Marathon Futurex Mafatlal Mill Compound, N.M.Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013. Pan: Aaacp-8032-E ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.P. Bairagra With Ms. Rupa Nanda ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri C.T. Mathews सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 23/02/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 25/03/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: These Three Appeals By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-54, Mumbai [In Short ‘ The Cit(A)’], For The 2

A.Y.2011-12) (iii) The Assessing Officer has nowhere in the reasons for reopening of the assessment order alleged that assessee has failed to make full and true disclosure of all facts necessary for the assessment. 6. Au Contraire, Shri C.T. Mathews representing the Department vehemently defended reopening of assessment and prayed

Dy CIT, CC-6(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Marathon Nextgen Realty Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Vikas Awasthy & Shri Prashant Maharishiआअसं. 797/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2012-13 ) आअसं. 798/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2011-12 ) आअसं. 799/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 6(3), Room No.1926, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ..... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Marathon Nextgen Realty Limited, Marathon Futurex Mafatlal Mill Compound, N.M.Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013. Pan: Aaacp-8032-E ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.P. Bairagra With Ms. Rupa Nanda ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri C.T. Mathews सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 23/02/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 25/03/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: These Three Appeals By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-54, Mumbai [In Short ‘ The Cit(A)’], For The 2

A.Y.2011-12) (iii) The Assessing Officer has nowhere in the reasons for reopening of the assessment order alleged that assessee has failed to make full and true disclosure of all facts necessary for the assessment. 6. Au Contraire, Shri C.T. Mathews representing the Department vehemently defended reopening of assessment and prayed

The United Western Bank Ltd. (Through Successors Idbi Bank Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Satara

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as above

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

assessee, which was already there in the assessment ITA Nos. 1738/PN/2005, 289/PN/2010 & 1339/PN/2007 IDBI Bank Ltd.; AY 02-03 proceedings where full and true disclosure was made by the assessee. He also submitted that note No. 5 to the notes on financial statements clearly shows the above transaction. Therefore

The United Western Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jalgaon

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as above

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

assessee, which was already there in the assessment ITA Nos. 1738/PN/2005, 289/PN/2010 & 1339/PN/2007 IDBI Bank Ltd.; AY 02-03 proceedings where full and true disclosure was made by the assessee. He also submitted that note No. 5 to the notes on financial statements clearly shows the above transaction. Therefore

The United Western Bank Ltd., Satara vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-Tax, Satara

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as above

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

assessee, which was already there in the assessment ITA Nos. 1738/PN/2005, 289/PN/2010 & 1339/PN/2007 IDBI Bank Ltd.; AY 02-03 proceedings where full and true disclosure was made by the assessee. He also submitted that note No. 5 to the notes on financial statements clearly shows the above transaction. Therefore

DCIT 1 (1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross

aforesaid reasons we find that the ld. AO had not recorded anywhere regarding the failure on the part of the assessee to make full and true disclosure of material facts in the original assessment proceedings. This is a mandatory requirement of law as held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High ... reasons recorded for reopening the assessment had not indicated any failure on the part of the assessee to make full and true disclosure of material facts during the original assessment proceedings. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had also placed reliance on various decisions of the Hon’ble High

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

states that mere production of books of accounts from which discrepancy could have been discovered by the Assessing Officer will not amount to full and true disclosure within the meaning of the first proviso to section 147. In this case, by not showing the capital gains in the income statement ... perusal of the aforesaid reasons there could be no fault that could be attributed on the part of the assessee in making a full and true disclosure of the particulars of income by the assessee in the original assessment proceedings and accordingly, first proviso to Section