MOHAMMAD SALEEM,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

block year. Further with effect from 01.04.17, an amendment has been brought in 153C(1) itself. The same is as under: "[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151, section 153, where the assessing officer is satisfied that.- A) Any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs

ALPS CONSTRUCTION ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 23(1)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI B R BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (Judicial Member)

block year. Further with effect from 01.04.17, an amendment has been brought in 153C(1) itself. The same is as under: "[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151, section 153, where the assessing officer is satisfied that.- A) Any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs

MOHAMMAD SALEEM,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly, to give effect to this\norder after factual verification.\n8.14\nIn result the appeal of assessee in 3950 to\n3954/Mum/2025 for AY 2015-16 to 2018-19, are partly allowed\nfor statistic...

block year. Further with effect\nfrom 01.04.17, an amendment has been brought in 153C(1) itself. The\nsame is as under:\n\"[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147,\nsection 148, section 149, section 151, section 153, where the\nassessing officer is satisfied that.-\nA) Any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing,\nseized or requisitioned, belongs

MOHAMMAD SALEEM,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly, to give effect to this\norder after factual verification.\n8.14 In result, the appeal of assessee in 3950 to\n3954/Mum/2025 for AY 2015-16 to 2018-19, are partly allowed\nfor statistic...

block year. Further with effect\nfrom 01.04.17, an amendment has been brought in 153C(1) itself.\nThe same is as under:\n\"[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147,\nsection 148, section 149, section 151, section 153, where the\nassessing officer is satisfied that.-\nA) Any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing,\nseized or requisitioned, belongs

MOHAMMAD SALEEM,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly, to give effect to this\norder after factual verification.\n8.14\nIn result the appeal of assessee in 3950 to\n3954/Mum/2025 for AY 2015-16 to 2018-19, are partly allowed\nfor statistic...

block year. Further with effect\nfrom 01.04.17, an amendment has been brought in 153C(1) itself. The\nsame is as under:\n\"[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147,\nsection 148, section 149, section 151, section 153, where the\nassessing officer is satisfied that.-\nA) Апу топey, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing,\nseized or requisitioned, belongs

MOHAMMAD SALEEM,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly, to give effect to this\norder after factual verification.\n8.14 In result the appeal of assessee in 3950 to\n3954/MUM/2025 for AY 2015-16 to 2018-19, are partly allowed\nfor statistica...

block year. Further with effect\nfrom 01.04.17, an amendment has been brought in 153C(1) itself. The\nsame is as under:\n\"[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147,\nsection 148, section 149, section 151, section 153, where the\nassessing officer is satisfied that.-\nА) Any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing,\nseized or requisitioned, belongs

ALTICO CAPITAL INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Cit(A) Which Was Dismissed By The Cit(A) Vide Its Order, Dated 13/12/2022. Now The Appellant Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Aforesaid Order Of The Cit(A).

Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 [PAN: AACCC3064F] …………… Appellant Vs National e-Assessment Centre, Respondent ……………. Delhi Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta For the Respondent/Department : Ms. Snayogita Nagpal Date : 18.07.2023 Conclusion of hearing : 27.07.2023 Pronouncement of order O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: By way of the present appeal the Appellant has challenged the order

HINDUSTAN OIL EXPLORATION COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO CIR 9(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalhindustan Oil Exploration Co. Ltd. Anand House, 13Th Road, Off Linking Rd. ……………. Appellant Khar (W), Mumbai 400 052 Pan – Aaach1407P V/S Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Special Range–1, Mumbai Hindustan Oil Exploration Co. Ltd. Anand House, 13Th Road, Off Linking Rd. ……………. Appellant Khar (W), Mumbai 400 052 Pan – Aaach1407P V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Circle–9(2)(1), Mumbai Hindustan Oil Exploration Co. Ltd. Anand House, 13Th Road, Off Linking Rd. ……………. Appellant Khar (W), Mumbai 400 052 Pan – Aaach1407P V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Range–9(2), Mumbai

Block is contrary to the material on record. Further, a perusal of Article–16 of the PSC, as placed in the paper book, indicates that the assessee is to be allowed deduction of expenses in terms of section 42 of the Act. Therefore, the unsuccessful oil exploration expenses is allowable under section

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT CIRCALE 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

TDS 3. Addition on account of salary & purchase of shares 4. Addition on account of receipt of unsecured loans Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) for all the years under consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Ld.AO on the ground that neither the assessee nor any representative

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

TDS 3. Addition on account of salary & purchase of shares 4. Addition on account of receipt of unsecured loans Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) for all the years under consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Ld.AO on the ground that neither the assessee nor any representative

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

TDS 3. Addition on account of salary & purchase of shares 4. Addition on account of receipt of unsecured loans Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) for all the years under consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Ld.AO on the ground that neither the assessee nor any representative

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT. CENT. CIR. 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

TDS 3. Addition on account of salary & purchase of shares 4. Addition on account of receipt of unsecured loans Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) for all the years under consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Ld.AO on the ground that neither the assessee nor any representative

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

TDS 3. Addition on account of salary & purchase of shares 4. Addition on account of receipt of unsecured loans Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) for all the years under consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Ld.AO on the ground that neither the assessee nor any representative

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

TDS 3. Addition on account of salary & purchase of shares 4. Addition on account of receipt of unsecured loans Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) for all the years under consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Ld.AO on the ground that neither the assessee nor any representative

DOLEX COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CENT-CIR 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

TDS 3. Addition on account of salary & purchase of shares 4. Addition on account of receipt of unsecured loans Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) for all the years under consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Ld.AO on the ground that neither the assessee nor any representative

DCIT CC 7(2).MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAN INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2020-2021

TDS deducted and deposited by the assesse on behalf bondholders was treated as deposited by the assesse on behalf bondholders was treated as deposited by the assesse on behalf bondholders was treated as part of that. Besides we note that claim wa part of that. Besides we note that claim was in accordance with s in accordance with section

DCIT CC 4 (4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

block assessment u/s 153A, ii. all pending assessments/ reassessments shall stand abated, all pending assessments/ reassessments shall stand abated, all pending assessments/ reassessments shall stand abated, iii. in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, eve in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, eve in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, In case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume

DCIT CC 4 (4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

block assessment u/s 153A, ii. all pending assessments/ reassessments shall stand abated, all pending assessments/ reassessments shall stand abated, all pending assessments/ reassessments shall stand abated, iii. in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, eve in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, eve in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, In case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume