MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SMARTECHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD ) ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-50, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mahadhan Agritech Ltd. (Formerly Cit(A)-50, Dcit Cen. 8(1), Known As Smartchem Technologies 656, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ltd.), Mumbai-400021. Survey No. 93, Sai Hira, Mundhwa, Pune-411036. Pan No. Aacca 5046 P Appellant Respondent

132(4) of the IT act has specifically mentioned that the practice of generation of cash is specifically mentioned that the practice of generation of cash is specifically mentioned that the practice of generation of cash is followed since last 2 to 3 years. This shows the appel followed since last 2 to 3 years. This shows the appel followed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THANE WEST vs. KONARK INFRASTRUCTURE (WATER SUPPLY-UMC)(JV), ULHASNAGAR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003 but on or before the 31st day of March, 2021, the Assessing Officer shall.....[Emphasis given by us] 16. From the above it is ex-facie apparent that Section 153A or 153C of the Act, is overriding only

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SKYWAY INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, whereas appeals of the revenue are par...

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21

Section 132 (4), which was inserted by the Direct Tax (4), which was inserted by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987 w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, furth w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, further clarifies that a person may be examined not only er clarifies that a person may be examined not only in respect of the books

ACIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

ASST CIT CC-22, MUMBAI vs. JAWAHAR PUROHIT, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

ASST CIT CC-22, MUMBAI vs. JAWAHAR PUROHIT, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,.,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

M. R. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI vs. M.R. CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

M.R. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 22,

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded

JAWAHAR B. PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22XC, MUMBAI

In the result, in the case of M

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

TDS by invoking the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act. 5 Jawahar B. Purohit, M/s M.R. Construction 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that none of the disallowance is based on seized material. The learned Counsel for the assessee stated that these items are disallowed on the basis of the entries found recorded