“investigation wing”

Bhavani Gems P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -5, Mumbai

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Bhavani Gems Private Limited The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Dw–1370, G–Block West Core, Tax–5, Room No. 515, 5Th Floor, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Bandra Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai–400 020 Mumbai–400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecb9471D

Income-tax Act and findings regarding transferpricing issues in respect of international transactions or specified domestic transactions or both have been recorded by the Investigation Wing or the AO. 3.4 For cases to be referred by the AO to the TPO in accordance with paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 above

Mr Pravin Bhanwarlal Gandhi, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 20 (2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

during the course of appellate proceedings or even before us. We find that the primary suspicion based on the corroborative evidences gathered by DDIT Investigation Wing, Mumbai regarding the transactions of Shri B A Desai vis-à-vis M/s. Balaji Enterprises still remains. Since assessee had carried out certain purchase

ITO-15(2)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Pravir Polymers Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-15(2)(4), M/S Pravir Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 360, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. 601/602, Delta, Central Avenue, Road, Marine Lines, Vs. Technology Street, Hiranandani Mumbai-400020. Garden Powai, Mumbai-400076. Pan No. Aaacp 4621 K Appellant Respondent

while completing the assessments of Shri Shirish Chandrakant Shah as well as it has been accepted by him in various statements recorded by the Investigation wing that accommodation entries were provided against receipt of cash and the records were maintained on day-to- day basis in the form of cash

Bini Builders P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-7(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1321/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) बिधम/ Bini Builders Pvt. Ltd. Dcit Central Circle-7(3) 203-204, Raigad Darshan, Jp Room No.655, Aayakar Vs. Road, Andheri West, Bhawan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccb3447R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue By: Shri C. T. Mathews (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/04/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 20.05.2021 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -49, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Initiation Of The Reassessment Proceeding Under Section 147. A.Y.2009-10 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Confirming & Creating Reason To Believe For Escaped Assessment U/S. 147 As There Was No Failure On Part Of Assessee To Disclose Fully & Truly Fact.

believe that certain income escaped assessment in the hands of the assessee. We find that Ld. AO was clinched with tangible information from investigation wing which suggested possible escapement of income in the hands of the assessee. In our opinion, nothing more was required at this stage since ... believe that certain income escaped assessment in the hands of the assessee. We find that Ld. AO was clinched with tangible information from investigation wing which suggested possible escapement of income in the hands of the assessee. In our opinion, nothing more was required at this stage since

Shri Rameshkumar H. Jain, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, CC-2(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amar Jit Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Rameshkumar H. Jain, Dcit, Bit Chawl No.3, Central Circle-2(4), Shop No.202, Mumbai – 400 020 Seth Mothi Sha, Vs. Love Lane, Mazgaon, Byculla, Mumbai – 400 010 Pan: Aaipj9005G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Ms.Ruchi Rathod, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Ganesh Bare, Sr. A.R. Cit Date Of Hearing : 05.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.04.2022 O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 17.03.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai Relevant To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal) Erred In Not Treating The Search Action As Illegal & Bad In Law. The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal) Erred In Not Holding That The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Is Bad, Illegal & Without Jurisdiction. The Said Proceeding Is Illegal, Without Jurisdiction & Bad In Law. 2.1. On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Learned Cit (Appeals) Erred In Confirming Arbitrarily The Addition Of Rs.22,31,445/- Being Not Treating The Jewelry Found In Locker As The Stock In Trade Of The Appellant. Addition

brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure action under section 132 of the Act was carried out by the Investigation Wing-4, Mumbai in case of M/s. Gold Sukh Safety Vaults Ltd. (for short ‘Gold Sukh’) on 08.11.2012 . Gold was involved in the business of providing