M/S PIRAMAL ENTERPRISES LIMIITED ,MUMBSI vs. DY CIT(APPEAL)-RANGE-8(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Piramal Enterprises Ltd., Dy. Cit, Mumbai-8(1)(2), Or Piramal Tower, Agastya National Facelss Assessment Vs. Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Centre, Delhi, Kamani Junction, Kurla Room No. 624, 6Th Floor, (West), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400070. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacn 4538 P Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ronak Doshi : Revenue By Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Cit-Dr & Mr. Samuel Pitta, Dr : Date Of Hearing 17/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/12/2022

TDS as claimed by the appellant in its return of income. return of income. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND I, II, III AND VI AS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND I, II, III AND VI AS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND I, II, III AND VI AS MENTIONED ABOVE: MENTIONED ABOVE: GROUND NO. VI: DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10AA OF GROUND NO. VI: DEDUCTION

ASST CIT 15(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. PRASHANT PROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee as well revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4621/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Acit 15(2)(2) Prashant Projects Ltd., R.No. 403, 4 T H Floor, R.No. 406-408, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. 57, V. M.K. Road, Hermes Atrium, Mumbai 400020 Sector-11, Cbd Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400614 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabci0639P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

natural justice in accordance with law . The assessee will be allowed by learned CIT(A) to submit evidences and explanations in support of its contention to sub-serve the interest of substantial justice which shall be admitted by Ld. CIT-A and be adjudicated on merits in accordance with law . Needless to say that powers of learned

I.T.O. - 23(1)(5), MUMBAI vs. GRACE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleito – 23(1)(5) Vs. M/S Grace Development Room.No.113,1St Floor Associates Matru Mandir, 101, B-Wing, Landmark Tardeo Road, Building, 1St Floor, 150 Mumbai – 400 007 Pali Road, Nr. Hdfc Bank, Bandra (W), Mumbai – 400050. Pan/Gir No. : Aahfg5648M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Neeraja Sarma.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Devendra Jain.Ar Date Of Hearing 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -32, Mumbai Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

justice. Your honour may note that the Ld. A.O. blindly relied on the information provided by the DGIT (Inv.), that the said parties were engaged in providing accommodation entries. Your appellant had submitted all the necessary details that were available to prove the genuineness of the transactions. Thereafter, the onus of disproving the submissions and explanations of the appellant lied

THE BYKE HOSPITALITY LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE -2(2) (1) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Byke Hospitality Ltd., National Faceless Appeal 156-158 Chakravarty Ashok Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Complex, Mumbai, Sahar P & T Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(2)(1), Colony S.O., Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400099. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaack 2113 R Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Ms. Shivangi Chopara, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ashish Heliwal, Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 29/12/2022

tds certificates, invoice copy and bank statement can't prove the service rendered by GCPL. As statement can't prove the service rendered by GCPL. As statement can't prove the service rendered by GCPL. As pointed out by the AO in assessment order that these pointed out by the AO in assessment order that these pointed

DCIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S JAINAM INVESTMENTS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by aforesaid two SSCS..." AR further submitted that the assessee, vide its letter dated 115 (Placed at pages 90 -93 of paper book) has specifically requested the AO to issue summons

DCIT CENT. CIR. - 1(3), MUMBAI vs. JAINAM INVESTMENTS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by aforesaid two witnesses….” 14. The Ld A.R further submitted that the assessee, vide its letter dated 19-03-2015 (Placed at pages 90 -93 of paper book) has specifically requested

CITY ELEVATORS PVT. LTD,ANDHERI vs. TDS WARD 1(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2016-17 City Elevators Pvt. Ltd., Tds Ward-1(1)(4), 304/A Panchsheel Apts. Sirm.V. 416, 4Th Floor, Cumballa Hill Mtnl Vs. Road, Andheri West, Te Building, Peddar Road, Dr. Mumbai-400093. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaccc 8797 P Appellant Respondent

natural justice. Such TDS demand & interest is is against the principle of natural justice. Such TDS demand & interest is is against

ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

DCIT 4(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 4(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 4(2)(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

GOPALDAS VISRAM & CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2), MUMBAI

Appeals are disposed off accordingly

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

natural justice during the course of appellate proceedings before the FAA. Ground no.2 and 3 are dismissed accordingly. 30. The issue raised in the grounds of appeal no.4 is with regard to the deletion of addition of Rs.3,76,000/- by CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of legal and professional charges. 31. During the course

BHARAT KANTILAL DOSHI,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 27(1), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Natural Justice and Reasonable\nOpportunity.\nc. Ground 4-Non-grant of TDS credit of Rs.3,97,946/-\nd. Ground 5-Non-grant