“advance tax”

Soma Enterprises Limited, Mumbai vs. The PCIT(Central), Mumbai-1, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Rs.38,95,20,180/-. 5.3. Subsequently, a rectification order u/s.154 of the Act was passed on 14/07/2014 wherein credit for advance tax of Rs.9,12,19,787/- was given by the ld. AO. Further, yet another rectification order u/s.154 of the Act was passed on 03/09/2014 wherein again the income ... granted TDS credit of Rs.67,50,20,743/-. Subsequently, a rectification order u/s.154 of the Act was passed on 29/10/2014 wherein credit for advance tax of Rs.15 Crores was granted to the assessee and TDS credit already granted in the sum of Rs.67,50,20,743/- was not disturbed

Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5597/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Maharashtra Housing & Acit (Exemption)-2(1) बिधम/ Area Development Piramal Chambers, Vs. Office Of Finance Lalbaug, Mumbai- Controller, Mhada, 4Th 400012. Floor, Griha Nirman Bhavan, Kala Nagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaajm0344H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nishant Thakkar/Ms. Jasmine Amalsadvala Revenue By: Shri S. H. Usmani (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 19/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-01, Mumbai Dated 28.06.2017 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By Assessee Are As Under: - “1.0 Denial Of Exemption Under S. 11 The Learned Cit(A) Erred On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law In Upholding The Assessment Order Appealed Against Denying Exemption Under S.11 Of The Act. Relief Claimed: The Appellant Be Granted Exemption Under S.11 Of The Act. 2.0 Engaged In Business:

denying the very application of s.234B & 234C of the Act to it, for the fact that the appellant was not under obligation to pay advance tax. ITA Ns. 5597/Mum/2017 A.Ys. 2013-14 Maharashtra Housing Area Development. Relief claimed: Interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act be directed to be deleted

M/S. Keva Construction Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT -15(2) (1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

financial transactions—In relevant accounting year it had profits of Rs. 27 lakhs which it deposited in said account—It, however, paid its advance tax of about Rs. 18 lakhs by taking overdraft from said account since account showed a debit balance at relevant time—Whether it could be said ... that advance tax was paid out of profits and not out of overdraft—Held, on facts, yes—Whether interest on overdraft taken to pay advance tax could be disallowed—Held, on facts, no Facts The assessee's previous year for the assessment year 1970-71 ended

Novell Inc, America vs. DCIT (It) Range 3(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Us.

withholding tax under Section 195 Assessment Year 2014-15 of the Act and consequently the Appellant was not legally liable to pay advance tax under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. Without Prejudice to the Ground No.1. Ground No.2, Ground No. 3, Ground No. 4 Ground

Shri. Amit Prakash Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT- CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

declaring income of Rs.37,34,291/- determining the tax liability at Rs.9,40,087/- out of which TDS was of Rs.6,50,656/-, advance tax of Rs.1,50,000/- and self- assessment tax of Rs.1,39,431/-. In the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, the tax liability

Shrinivas Vijay Tandale, Thane vs. ITO -WD 3(1), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is Allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.1838/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shrinivas Vijay Tandale Ito- Ward 3(1) 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion, 1201/202, Rutu River Above Canara Bank, Murabd View, Classic Bldg No.2 बिधम/ Road, Kalyan-421301 Gandhari Adharwadi Road Vs. Bear K M Agrawal College, Kalyan West 421301. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No.Adopt6392H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Nimesh Chotani & Laxmi Gupta, Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Neeta Jeph, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01.09.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20/05/2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) Of 2

Total Cash Accumulation (B) Less: Withdrawals 1,45,750 1,58,000 1,70,500 4,74,250 Drawings Cash deposited into Bank 333 Advance Tax profession Tax Other

DCIT 27(1), Mumbai vs. Gopuram Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

previous year relevant to A. Y * (0.2013 - 14) . As per answer to Question no. 16 the partner of the firm agreed to pay advance tax on the total income of 5 crores from "the sale of flats accordingly." The undisputed fact is that during the course of survey u/s. 133A

M/S. Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai vs. The ACIT (It)1(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

Where the refund is out of any tax paid under Section 115WJ or collected at source under Section 206C or paid by way of advance tax or treated as paid under Section 199, during the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year, such interest shall be calculated at the rate

Poonam Property Chs Ltd, Mumbai vs. CPC/ITO, 22(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed with a direction to A

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalpoonam Property Chs Ltd. B-2, Poonam Properties Chs Ltd. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 Pan: Aaaap2735Q ...... Appellant Vs. Cpc/Ito-22(2)(1), 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. N.R. Agarwal Respondent By : Sh. Ashish Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As (‘Cit(A)] Dated 05.11.20218 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 20,85,481/- For Which Deduction Was Claimed U/S. 80P(2)(D) For Interest Earned From Co-Op. Bank.”

tax [, interest and fee], if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, [any relief allowable under section 89,] any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section 90A, or any relief allowable under section