“appeal before the tribunal”

Grand Foundry Limited, Mumbai vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri.Narender Kumar Choudhry () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

vide ex-parte order dated 30/06/2023, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee for non compliance. Further aggrieved, the Assessee filed second appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Though the Assessee through his Counsel, has filed an adjournment application, however by considering the peculiar fact that the impugned order

Sana Hospitality Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Mumbai

24/05/2021, which was dismissed by the CIT(A) vide order, dated 07/07/2023, on account of non-prosecution. The Appellant has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal 6. challenging the above dismissal order passed by the CIT(A). The Ld. Authorised Representative for the Appellant appearing before 7. us submitted

Vinipul Inorganics Foods Private Limited, Chembur, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 14 (3) (2), Mumbai, Maharshi Karve Road

In the result both the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh.Narendra Kumar Choudhry () & Shri S Rifaur Rahman ()

however could not succeed, as the Ld. Commissioner confirmed the addition by impugned order. Further aggrieved, the Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. Ld. Counsel of the Assessee at the outset mainly claimed that the Assessing Officer inspite of directions by the Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench

Vinipul Inorganics Foods Pvt Ltd, Chembur, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 14 (3) (2), Mumbai, Maharshi Karve Road

In the result both the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Sh.Narendra Kumar Choudhry () & Shri S Rifaur Rahman ()

however could not succeed, as the Ld. Commissioner confirmed the addition by impugned order. Further aggrieved, the Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. Ld. Counsel of the Assessee at the outset mainly claimed that the Assessing Officer inspite of directions by the Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench

DCIT-41(4)(1), Mumbai vs. Abdulsattar Suleman Ghaswala, Mumbai

In the result appeal of learned Assessing officer for A

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Abdulsattar Suleman Dcit-41(4)(1) Ghaswala Room No. 425, 4Th Floor, Kautilya 142/48 Ghaswala Estate Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra(East) Vs. S V Road Jogeshwari(W) Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400102 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpg9088R Co No. 83/Mum/2023 (Arising In Ita No. 1658/Mum/2023 For A.Y. 2013-14) Abdulsattar Suleman Ghaswala Dcit-41(4)(1) Room No. 425, 4Th Floor, Kautilya 142/48 Ghaswala Estate S V Road Jogeshwari(W) Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra(East) Vs. Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400102 (Cross Objector/ Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpg9088R

well reasoned order, the CIT(A) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. Aggrieved by the same, the revenue preferred the appeal before the tribunal. The tribunal firstly considered the validity of the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Act. After elaborately considering the facts the tribunal

Shri Amish Modi, Mumbai vs. Dy.CIT Cent Circle-2(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.2437/मुं/2021(िन.व. 2011-12) आअसं.2436/मुं/2021(िन.व. 2012-13) Shri Amish Modi, B-404, Jyoti Tower, S.V.Road, Kandivali (West), Mumbai – 400 067 Pan: Afxpm-2914-F ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle – (2)(1), Mumbai Pratishtha Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 021 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Ravikant Pathak "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Shri Milind Chavan ,Sr.Ar सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2023 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/12/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: The Appeals By The Assessee For Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 Are Dated Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai [ In Short ‘The Cit(A)’], Dated 09/11/2021 Common For Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. Shri Ravikant Pathak Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted At The Outset That In Both The Appeals The Assessee Has Raised Identical Grounds Of 2 Ita No.2436/Mum/2021(A.Y.2012-13)

commission for providing bogus entries, accordingly the CIT(A) restricted the addition to 3%. Both Revenue and assessee carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal. The Co-ordinate Bench vide common order dated 25/05/2023 dismissed the appeal of Revenue in ITA No.3243/Mum/2022. The assessee in its appeal

Shri Amish Modi, Mumbai vs. Dy.CIT Cent. Cir 2(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.2437/मुं/2021(िन.व. 2011-12) आअसं.2436/मुं/2021(िन.व. 2012-13) Shri Amish Modi, B-404, Jyoti Tower, S.V.Road, Kandivali (West), Mumbai – 400 067 Pan: Afxpm-2914-F ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle – (2)(1), Mumbai Pratishtha Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 021 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Ravikant Pathak "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Shri Milind Chavan ,Sr.Ar सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2023 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/12/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: The Appeals By The Assessee For Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 Are Dated Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai [ In Short ‘The Cit(A)’], Dated 09/11/2021 Common For Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. Shri Ravikant Pathak Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted At The Outset That In Both The Appeals The Assessee Has Raised Identical Grounds Of 2 Ita No.2436/Mum/2021(A.Y.2012-13)

commission for providing bogus entries, accordingly the CIT(A) restricted the addition to 3%. Both Revenue and assessee carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal. The Co-ordinate Bench vide common order dated 25/05/2023 dismissed the appeal of Revenue in ITA No.3243/Mum/2022. The assessee in its appeal