Section 56(2)(i) — 10 judgments | BharatTax

NOKHA TRADING LLP,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2397/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Marlecha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 1Section 10Section 10(35)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 56(2)(i)

business income, without appreciating that (a) dividend income is taxable as income from business or profession, by virtue of specific mention under section 56(2)(i) and not under business or profession; Page 3 of 10 (b) the learned AO in the assessment order had positively accepted the returned income

JOHAR HASAN ZOJWALLA,KALYAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1669/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 250Section 56(2)(i)

deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) and added the same to the total income of the assessee under section 56(2)(i) of the Act. 5. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on the challenge against the invocation of proceedings under

RAJ KUMAR KANDOI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 575/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 57

apart from the other expenses such as audit fee, car maintenance, etc. After perusing the account books and following the provisions contained in section 56(2)(i)(b) and section 2(24) (ix) of the Act, the Tribunal allowed Rs. 15,000/- on estimate as a deduction

LEGRAND NEDERLAND B.V.,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. COMM. OF INCOME TAX 3(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2487/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelegrand Nederland B.V. V. Acit (Intl. Taxation) – 3(1)(2) 16Th Floor, Air India Building 61/62, 6Th Floor Nariman Point, Mumbai Kalpatru Square, Kondivita Road Off. Andheri Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai - 400059 Pan: Aaccl1156B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Shri Prayas Jain Department Represented By : Shri Amit Kumar Soni

Section 10(34)Section 112(1)(c)Section 115Section 144C(5)Section 2(22)(d)Section 244ASection 270A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1953/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसुं.6997/म ुं/2019(धन.व. 2016-17) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai ...... अपीलाथी/Appellant बनाम Vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, The Leela Galleria, Andheri ( East), Mumbai 400 059 ..... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaace-2175-M C.O. No.57/Mum/2019 Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 059 ...... Cross Objector बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ...... प्रधिवादी/Respondent Circle 11(3)(1), Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-DR

Section 115