“investigation wing”

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in the assessment order itself. It has been recorded in such reasons that “It was also observed by the Investigation Wing that the assessee has taken opening capital balance as on 01-04-2008 at ₹ 23,29,401/- as against the closing balance

Acc Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in the assessment order itself. It has been recorded in such reasons that “It was also observed by the Investigation Wing that the assessee has taken opening capital balance as on 01-04-2008 at ₹ 23,29,401/- as against the closing balance

Acc Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in the assessment order itself. It has been recorded in such reasons that “It was also observed by the Investigation Wing that the assessee has taken opening capital balance as on 01-04-2008 at ₹ 23,29,401/- as against the closing balance

DCIT 5(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Serco Bpo Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit – 5(3)(1) Vs. M/S Serco Bpo Pvt Room No. 573, Ltd.(As Successor Of Aayakar Bhavan, Intelnet Global Service Mumbai – 400 020. Pvtltd),Teleperformance Tower, Plot Cst No. 1406-A/28, Mindspace, Goregaon (W), Mumbai -400104. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcv2572L Appellant .. Respondent Co No. 136/Mum/2022 [Arising Out Of 2354/Mum/2022] (A.Y: 2009-10) Teleperformance Global Vs. Dcit – 5(3)(1) Service Pvt Ltd(Earlier Room No. 573, Serco Bpo Pvt Ltd), Aayakar Bhavan, Teleperformance Tower, Mumbai – 400020. Plot Cst No. 1406-A/28, Mindspace, Goregaon(W) Mumbai- 400104. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcv2572L Appellant .. Respondent

Mumbai. reopening of the assesseement are disposed off by the revenue authorities.. 3. Whereas,the A.O. has received the information from investigation wing that the share premium of Rs. 32,21,48,67,940/- has been received by the assessee in the previous year and the same has been ... seen that during F.Y.2008-09 relevant to A.Y.2009-10 assessee has shown receipt of share premium amounting Nil. Whereas information has been received from investigation wing that share premium was Rs.32,21,48,67,940/-. It has been found the that although the assessee has been objecting that the said amount

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Tanna Agro Impex Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed for Assessment Year 2012-13

remaining rice i.e non-exportable quality is sold in domestic / local market. The assessment was reopened on the basis of information from the investigation wing that assessee has received accommodation entries from Shubham Agro and Shree Hari Trading. The details of invoices, bank statements evidencing the payments made

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Tanna Agro Impex Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed for Assessment Year 2012-13

remaining rice i.e non-exportable quality is sold in domestic / local market. The assessment was reopened on the basis of information from the investigation wing that assessee has received accommodation entries from Shubham Agro and Shree Hari Trading. The details of invoices, bank statements evidencing the payments made

Tanna Agro Impex Private Limited, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed for Assessment Year 2012-13

remaining rice i.e non-exportable quality is sold in domestic / local market. The assessment was reopened on the basis of information from the investigation wing that assessee has received accommodation entries from Shubham Agro and Shree Hari Trading. The details of invoices, bank statements evidencing the payments made

Tanna Agro Impex Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue are partly allowed for Assessment Year 2012-13

remaining rice i.e non-exportable quality is sold in domestic / local market. The assessment was reopened on the basis of information from the investigation wing that assessee has received accommodation entries from Shubham Agro and Shree Hari Trading. The details of invoices, bank statements evidencing the payments made

Minkal K. Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO - 18(2)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1093/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16) Minkal K. Doshi बिधम/ Ito-18(2)(2) Room No. 11/B, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Earnest House, Vs. Pallanji House, 35, New Nariman Point, Mumbai- Charni Road, Khetwadi, 400021. Mumbai-400004. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aiopd7813N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri B. N. Rao Revenue By: Shri Nayana K. Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/02/2023 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)-29, Mumbai Dated 25.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.24,66,000/- Made By The Ao In Respect Of Long Term Capital Gain (Ltcg) Claimed Of Rs.20,64,793/- Being Profit On Sale Of Rs.36,000/- Shares Of M/S. Greencrest (Earlier Known As M/S. Marigold Glass Industries Ltd.) & Claimed It As An Exempt Income U/S 10(38) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). 3. Brief Facts Are That The Ao Noted That The Assessee Had Filed On 25.09.2015 Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.7,01,450/-. The Return Filed Has Been Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Thereafter

sold 3 A.Y. 2015-16 Minkal K Doshi it for Rs.26,08,353/-). However, the AO took note of the report of the investigation wing of Kolkata wherein it was stated that the scrip of M/s. Greencrest was a penny stock scrip which script code has been misused in connivance ... exit provider was providing accommodation entry to various beneficiary as Long Term Capital Gain/Short Term Capital Loss. In view of the findings of the Investigation wing, further verification was done. And since assessee had bought 1,50,000/- shares @ Rs.12/- per share in Sep, 2012 of a non-listed company

Shri. Pravin M Mehta (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4870/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07) Shri Pravin M. Mehta बिधम/ Ito, Ward-15(1)(2) 3Rd /4Th Floor, Pratishtha (Huf) Vs. Ground Floor, Shop No. 8, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve 198/200, Earth Sampann Road, Mumbai-400021. Chs, 10Th Khetwadi Lane, Maharashtra-400004. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaehm6552P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Smt. Nayana K. Kumar (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/02/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee (Huf) Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai Dated 24.05.2019 Passed For Ay. 2006-07. 2. None Appeared For The Assessee. The Assessee Has Raised Three (3) Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Which Are As Under: - “1. The Ld. Assessing Officer Has Erred In Treating Sales Of Shares As Unexplained Investment Of Rs.8,41,867/- & Added To The Total Income. 2. The Ld. Assessing Officer Has Erred In Adding Rs.42,093/- As Income From Other Sources As Amount Paid For Commission. 3. The Ld. Assessing Officer Has Erred In Treating Rs.15,000 Shown In Balance-Sheet Loan/Creditor As Unexplained Cash Credit & Added To The Total Income.”

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). And according to the AO, the statement of Shri Mukesh Chokshi was recorded by the investigation wing on 11.12.2009 wherein he has explained the modus operandi of providing entry operation by which beneficiaries availed his service through the thirty (30) odd companies/concerns controlled

Ravi Shambhulal Mange, Mumbai vs. ITO -17 (3) (1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleravi Shambhulal Mange V. Income Tax Officer – 17(3)(1) Bharat Wood Works, 26 Mumbai Sindhubaug A, Tilak Road Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai - 400077 Pan: Aacpb4205G (Appellant) (Respondent)

same is added on the basis of assumptions and without considering the relevant supporting documents. 5. Subsequently, based on the information received from investigation wing, the Assessing Officer issued notices u/s. 148 of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) and assessee was show-caused as under: - “During the year ... returning it to the godowns for recycling? The entry provider, Shirish Shah had categorically 9 Ravi Shambhulal Mange admitted the same before the Investigation wing, and the appellant has not submitted any evidence to controvert the same. The appellant has only re-submitted the paper evidence like the invoices, ledger

Smt Mayuri A Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 19 (2)(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, quash the reassessment proceedings and set aside the order of the Learned CIT(A) on the issue in dispute. The ground No. 1.1 of the appeal is accordingly allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11

backdrop of the aforesaid undisputed facts on the basis of investigation carried out by different investigation wings the AO brought on record in para 6.7 of the assessment order the detail of client code modification qua the transaction of the assessee with client code of M/s. BP Equities ... very strange that when the AO was not having any statement of M/s. BP Equities Pvt. Ltd. alleged to have been recorded by the investigation wing then how he has formed his 7 Smt. Mayuri A. Shah opinion as to reopening the assessment in case of the assessee. In other

Shree Ram Urban Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(2), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11

documents but he failed to do so. The AO after thrashing the facts on the basis of survey proceedings and statement recorded by the investigation wing proceeded to frame the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act at the total loss of Rs.85,15,862/-. 5. The assessee carried