HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

144B 24/1055381 637(1) 39 4313/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2002-03 Assessee 378/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai [Appeals 40 4314/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2003-04 against 374/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai Penalty 41 2866/Mum/2012 CIT(A)-I/IT- 06.02.2012 DCIT, Cir-1(1), 08.10.2010 271(1

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

144B 24/1055381 637(1) 39 4313/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2002-03 Assessee 378/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai [Appeals 40 4314/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2003-04 against 374/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai Penalty 41 2866/Mum/2012 CIT(A)-I/IT- 06.02.2012 DCIT, Cir-1(1), 08.10.2010 271(1

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

144B 24/1055381 637(1) 39 4313/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2002-03 Assessee 378/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai [Appeals 40 4314/Mum/2010 CIT(A)-I/IT- 09.03.2010 DCIT, Range 30.03.2009 271(1)(c) 2003-04 against 374/2009-10 1(1), Mumbai Penalty 41 2866/Mum/2012 CIT(A)-I/IT- 06.02.2012 DCIT, Cir-1(1), 08.10.2010 271(1

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. K K VENTURA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands\ndismissed

144B on 06/08/2021, wherein the Assessing Officer\nbrought to tax unexplained loans aggregating\nto\n*8,43,50,000/- under section 68, together with disallowance\nof interest expenditure of ₹29,95,911/-.\n5. The assessee thereafter preferred a writ petition before the\nHon'ble Bombay High Court, inter alia contending that the\nAssessing Officer had failed to provide a meaningful

ITO-19(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AMISHI MIHIR DOSHI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhri

xvi) of section 144B have not been followed and that the appellant was not afforded with reasonable opportunity to represent her case by not taking cognizance to her adjournment petition dated 02.03.2022. The appellant also cited the decision in the case of Carrier Technologies India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai -ITA No.822/Mum/2022) and Abacus Real Estate (P) Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT

M/S. RDC VENTURES,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-27, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Rdc Ventures Vs. Principal Commissioner Office No.-110 Of Income Tax-27 Ridhhisidhhi Premises Room No. 401, 4 Th Floor, Society, Near Sahakar Tower No. 6, Vashi Talkies Tilak Nagar, Railway Station, Chembur (West) Mumbai- Commercial Complex, 400089 Vashi, Navi Mumbai -400703 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aakfr0914Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Dhran Gandhi Respondent By : Sanyogita Nagpal Date Of Hearing 29.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2024

section 263 of the Income Tax Act, may not be passed in your case.” 4. Vide notice issued u/s 263 of the Act the ld. Pr. CIT has pointed out that the assessing officer in the assessment order has not mentioned that whether the assessee was following percentage P a g e | 4 M/s RDC Ventures Vs. Pr.CIT-27 completion

ENDURA SOFT SOLUTION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankarendura Soft Solution V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited, 2Nd Floor, बनाम Income Tax, Ward – Geeta Building, Sion Circle, 4(2)(1), Aayakar Bhawan, Sion East, Next To Hp Petrol Churchgate, Mumbai – Pump, Mumbai – 400 022, 400020, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6529P Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

144B on total income Rs. 4,88,23,370 /- making additions of Rs. 2,88,56,010/- on account of unsecured loans received from one Sunflow Fininvest Pvt Ltd(‘SFPL’) and interest paid on the loan amounting to Rs. 1,99,67,364/-.During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the AO that the assessee