Section 58(2) — 16 judgments | BharatTax

ITO-1(3)(4), MUMBAI vs. VISHWAS RAYONS PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

ITA 1027/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Hon’Ble Shri Om Prakash Kantito- 1(3)(4) Vs. Vishwas Rayons Private Room No. 528, 5Th Floor, Limited Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Room No. 19, 3Rd Floor Mumbai- 400020 6 M.K. Amin Marg, Bora Bazar Street, Fort, Mumbai- 400001 Pan/Gir No. Aadcv1302N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assesseeby Shri. Rasesh Shah Revenue By Ms. Kavitha Kaushik,Sr.Dr. Date Of Hearing 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20.01.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Challenging The Impugned Order 23.12.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Following Grounds Are Reproduced Below: “1. I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee & Deleting The Addition Of Rs.3,62,27,500/- Made By The Ao Under I The Provisions Of Section 68 Of The 2 Vishwas Rayons Private Limited

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 4Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER& HON’BLE SHRI

ITO, MUMBAI vs. VATIKA RAYONS PVT LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2895/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Kavitha Kaushik (SR DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56Section 68

proposed Direct Taxes Code, 2010, such forfeited sums may get taxed as income from other sources (residuary head). Clause (t) of section 58(2) is worded in a manner to rope in. Forfeited receipts even if they have capital character. It reads as below: "It any amount accrued, or received

U.P HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW

In the result ITA Nos.532 & 533/Lkw/2014 and ITA Nos

ITA 535/LKW/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. G.C. Shrivastava, Special Counsel & Sh. Mazhar Akram, CIT (DR)

Section 11Section 12A

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nLUCKNOW ‘B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW\nBEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAND\nSH

SHRI GIRISHBHAI VADILAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 332/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" Girishbhai Vadilal Shah Dcit बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 139, V R Shah Smruti Circle – 4(1)(2), Vs. Shikshan Mandir, Nr. Ahmedabad Dharnidhar Derasar, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjps3102P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad, (In Short The ‘Cit(A)’), (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) All Dated 16.03.2020 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. As The Issues Involved In The Three Appeals Are Common, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Vide This Common Order.

For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 57

paid were not utilized for earning interest income. According to the Ld. CIT(A), the AO should have invoked the provisions of Section 58(2) r.w.s. 40A(2) of the Act and only disallowed the excess and unreasonable expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) found that the assessee had taken loan ... Girishbhai Vadilal Shah vs. DCIT] A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2016-17 - 5 – excessive and accordingly interest of Rs.21,13,971/- was disallowed under Section 58(2) r.w.s. 40A(2) of the Act. Accordingly, the disallowance as made by the AO was restricted to this extent. 7. Shri Jaimin Shah

SHRI GIRISHBHAI VADILAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 331/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" Girishbhai Vadilal Shah Dcit बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 139, V R Shah Smruti Circle – 4(1)(2), Vs. Shikshan Mandir, Nr. Ahmedabad Dharnidhar Derasar, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjps3102P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad, (In Short The ‘Cit(A)’), (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) All Dated 16.03.2020 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. As The Issues Involved In The Three Appeals Are Common, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Vide This Common Order.

For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 57

paid were not utilized for earning interest income. According to the Ld. CIT(A), the AO should have invoked the provisions of Section 58(2) r.w.s. 40A(2) of the Act and only disallowed the excess and unreasonable expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) found that the assessee had taken loan ... Girishbhai Vadilal Shah vs. DCIT] A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2016-17 - 5 – excessive and accordingly interest of Rs.21,13,971/- was disallowed under Section 58(2) r.w.s. 40A(2) of the Act. Accordingly, the disallowance as made by the AO was restricted to this extent. 7. Shri Jaimin Shah

SHRI GIRISHBHAI VADILAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 330/AHD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" Girishbhai Vadilal Shah Dcit बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 139, V R Shah Smruti Circle – 4(1)(2), Vs. Shikshan Mandir, Nr. Ahmedabad Dharnidhar Derasar, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjps3102P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad, (In Short The ‘Cit(A)’), (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) All Dated 16.03.2020 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. As The Issues Involved In The Three Appeals Are Common, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Vide This Common Order.

For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR

Section 40A(2)(b)Section 57

paid were not utilized for earning interest income. According to the Ld. CIT(A), the AO should have invoked the provisions of Section 58(2) r.w.s. 40A(2) of the Act and only disallowed the excess and unreasonable expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) found that the assessee had taken loan ... Girishbhai Vadilal Shah vs. DCIT] A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2016-17 - 5 – excessive and accordingly interest of Rs.21,13,971/- was disallowed under Section 58(2) r.w.s. 40A(2) of the Act. Accordingly, the disallowance as made by the AO was restricted to this extent. 7. Shri Jaimin Shah

P. SURENDRAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 978/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm P. Surendran Sukanya Bhavan Asst. Cit-1(2) Vadayakkadu, Kunnukuzhy, P.O., Thiruvananthapuram Vs. Thiruvananthapuram-695 035

For Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)Section 40a

would apply in computing the income under the head “Profits and gains of business or profession” and “Income from other sources” as per section 58(2). All payments in excess of Rs.2,500 at one time whether for goods or services obtained for cash or 6 P. Surendran Sukanya Bhavan

MIRA MAHAL PREMISES MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)- 4 , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7158/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Gala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 56(2)(viib)

formula as per which the fair market value of shares is required to be determined The intention behind introduction of provisions of section 58(2)(vib) and Rule 11UA is precisely to avoid any arbitrariness as it lays down certain parameters and accounting methodology to determine correctness of the share

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-04, NEW DELHI vs. VISHNU KUMAR GARG, FARIDABAD

ITA 9449/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR

Section 127(1)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A