“Section 143(3)(ii)”

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PAREL vs. N K FAMILY TRUST, LOWER PAREL

Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: us, at the outset, invited our attention to the Cross Objection raised by the Assessee whereby the Assessee has challenged the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Act which reads as under: "1. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the reopening of

validity of the re-assessment proceedings. The Assessee has challenged the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to pass Assessment Order, dated 29/12/2017, under Section 143(3)(ii) read with Section 147 of the Act. 5. The Ld. Authorised Representative appearing on behalf of the Assessee, advancing arguments on Cross-Objection

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. S VINODKUMAR DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 15/02/2017, passed under Section 143(3)(ii) read with Section 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2.1. The Revenue has raised following grounds ... period of 63 days. The Assessing Officer incorporated the aforesaid transfer pricing adjustment in the Draft Assessment Order, dated 26/12/2016, passed under Section 143(3)(ii) r.w.s. 144C (1) of the Act. Vide, letter dated 27/01/2017, the Assessee opted not to file objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel and therefore

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. S VINODKUMAR DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 15/02/2017, passed under Section 143(3)(ii) read with Section 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2.1. The Revenue has raised following grounds ... period of 63 days. The Assessing Officer incorporated the aforesaid transfer pricing adjustment in the Draft Assessment Order, dated 26/12/2016, passed under Section 143(3)(ii) r.w.s. 144C (1) of the Act. Vide, letter dated 27/01/2017, the Assessee opted not to file objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel and therefore

BRIGHT PAINTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 12(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground no

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM Bright

PRIVI LIFE SCIENCES P.LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. CIT 24, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

JITENDRA SHARMA, ACIT, CIRCLE -19(1), MUMBAI vs. CHHAYA GEMS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2008-09

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT

M/S ARVIND CHAMPAKLAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 17(1)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

allowed the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 30/11/2016, passed by the Income Tax Officer 17(1)(1), Mumbai under Section 143(3)(ii) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal

TATA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T., RANGE-2(3), MUMBAI

Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. Ground No. 5 (Legal & Professional Fees) was dismissed.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 14A", "Rule 8D", "Section 115JB", "Section 143(3)(ii)", "Section 36(1)(iii)", "Section 10(2)(xv)", "Section 10(34)", "Section 2(28A)", "Section 35D", "Section 37" ], "issues": "The primary issue

NILSAN NISHOTECH SYSTEM PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 15(1)(22), MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Year 2010-11, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 11/03/2013, passed under Section 143(3)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The Appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal

M/S. PORTFOLIO FASHIONS PVT LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Portfolio Fashions Pvt. Ltd., V. Cit (A) 5A, Jindal Mansion Delhi Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg Mumbai - 400026 Pan: Aadcp7858D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Hiro Rai Department Represented By : Shri H.M. Bhatt

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

ITO, WARD-31(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHARDA VINOD BHATIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalito – 31(2)(1), Vs. Sharda Vinod Bhatia, Room No. 248, 2Nd Floor 201, Model Town, Kautilya Bhavan, Mahesh Ashish Units Bkc, Bandra(E), Chs Ltd, Off Jp Road, Mumbai- 400051. 4 Bungalow, Andheri(W), Mumbai-400058. Pan/Gir No. : Aghpb6897P Appellant .. Respondent

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT

TULSIDAS V. PATEL PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5(3)(2), MUMBAI

Year 2012-13, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the Appellant against the Assessment Order, dated 23/03/2015, passed under Section 143(3)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). The Appellant has raised following grounds of appeal: 2. “1. Ground

SAI SHIPPING COMPANY PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER/NFAC, DELHI

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

provisions of section 115JB(2) was computed at Rs. 3,16,57,364/-. In this case, the assessment was completed under section 143(3)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961, on 08.02.2015 determining the taxable income at Rs. 3,16,57,360/- u/s 115JB(2). The assessee

ACIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. FIAT INDIA P.LTD ( NOW KNOWN AS NEW HOLLAND FLAT INDIA P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are allowed, for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Aakash Deep Jain ( & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

declaring nil income. The return of income filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment. The Assessing Officer completed scrutiny assessment under section 143(3)(ii) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) and assessed the loss at (-) ₹73,05,32,080/-under the regular provisions