VIPENDRA RAVINDRA MANDAL,THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 22(3)(6), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vipendra Ravindra Mandal, Ito Ward 22(3)(6), 405, Orchid Wing-F Lodha Crown, Piramal Chamber, Taloja Bypass Road, Kohni B.O. Vs. Mumbai-400012. Khoni, Thane-421204. Pan No. Alepm 8472 H Appellant Respondent

TDS Statement 2015-16 71 (R) consideration on sale of consideration on sale of immovable property (Section immovable property (Section 194IA 2.1. In view of the above 2.1. In view of the above information available with this office information available with this office and verification of status of Return Of Income filed by the and verification of status of Return

AKSHAY DEEPAK TALIM ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

section 148A(d) of the Act, are reproduced\nas follows: -\n\"Findings of the Assessing Officer:\nAs per the information shared by Jt. Sub Registrar Haveli-15, the assessee\nhas purchased immovable property located at Baner, Pune for a purchase\nconsideration of Rs. 1,09,09,151/- on 17.10.2016\nOn perusal of schedule of payments made by the assessee

CHEMOX EXPORTS IMPORTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961\nIn this case, following information has been received in this office under the non filer module\nof INSIGHT PORTAL of the Income Tax Department:\nInformation\nCode\nInformation Description\nSource\nAmount Description\nAmount (Rs.)\nTDS-1941(B)\nTDS Statement\n(Section TDS

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

TDS) Statement and information uploaded by\nInvestigation Wings/Central Circle/1 & CI on Insight Portal.\nAs per the information summary available in Insight Portal, the\nfollowing information relating to Assessment Year 2015-16\npertains to the assessee company individual.\nSr.\nNo\nSource of PAN\nName\nAAACC0823E\nSource of PAN\nName\nToyam\nIndustries Ltd\nInformatio\nn F.Y.\n2014-15\nInformation\nType\nInformation

MAHAVIR CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD, 19(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

section 149(1)(b) of the I.T. Act, 1961, learned CIT (A) ought to have held that assumption of jurisdiction by A.O. u/s 147 r.w.s 148 and 148A is vitiated as at the time of passing order u/s 148A(d) A.O. was not in possession of books of account or other documents or evidence which reveal that the income chargeable

AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(INTERNATIONAL TAX) 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS on the said remittances. Taking a leaf\nout of this information, the AO was of the opinion that the assessee\nhas not shown this income in its return of income as taxable and\nformed a belief that income of Rs.91,08,957/-, had escaped assessment\nand issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 29/06/2021. Drawing support\nfrom

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX MUMBAI vs. DEVANG AJIT JAVERI , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on aforesaid terms

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

TDS) v. IKEA Trading Hong Kong Ltd., [2011] 333 ITR 565 (Del) to urge that it is the date of issuance of the Show Cause Notice ('SCN') that would be the relevant starting point. Accordingly he submits that the date of issuance of the SCN by the ACIT being 28 August, 2012, limitation would expire on 28 February, 2013. Therefore

DEVANG AJIT JHAVERI,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, RANGE 17(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on aforesaid terms

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

TDS) v. IKEA Trading Hong Kong Ltd., [2011] 333 ITR 565 (Del) to urge that it is the date of issuance of the Show Cause Notice ('SCN') that would be the relevant starting point. Accordingly he submits that the date of issuance of the SCN by the ACIT being 28 August, 2012, limitation would expire on 28 February, 2013. Therefore

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX vs. DEVANG AJIT JHAVERI , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on\naforesaid terms

TDS) ν. ΙΚΕΑ Trading Hong Kong Ltd., [2011] 333 ITR\n565 (Del) to urge that it is the date of issuance of the Show Cause\nNotice ('SCN') that would be the relevant starting point. Accordingly\nhe submits that the date of issuance of the SCN by the ACIT being\n28 August, 2012, limitation would expire on 28 February, 2013.\nTherefore

DEVANG AJIT JHAVERI ,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, RANGE 17(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on\naforesaid terms

TDS) ν. ΙΚΕΑ Trading Hong Kong Ltd., [2011] 333 ITR\n565 (Del) to urge that it is the date of issuance of the Show Cause\nNotice ('SCN') that would be the relevant starting point. Accordingly\nhe submits that the date of issuance of the SCN by the ACIT being\n28 August, 2012, limitation would expire on 28 February, 2013.\nTherefore

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

148A(d). The ld. AR further submitted that the disallowance made under section 36(1)(va) could have been made only by invoking explanation and not under the main provisions of section 147. Accordingly it is argued that when the addition made under main provisions are deleted then the disallowance under section 36(1)(va) which is done under explanation

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 8(1) , MUMBAI, MUMBAI

148A(b) notice and order under section\n148A(d). The ld. AR further submitted that the disallowance made under section\n36(1)(va) could have been made only by invoking explanation and not under the\nmain provisions of section 147. Accordingly it is argued that when the addition\nmade under main provisions are deleted then the disallowance under section

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

TDS) Statement and information uploaded by Investigation Wings/Central Circle/1 & Cl on Insight Portal. As per the information summary available in Insight Portal, the following information relating to Assessment Year 2015-16 pertains to the assessee company individual. Sr. Source of PAN Source of PAN Informatio Information Information No Name Name n F.Y. Type Value . 1 AAACC0823E Toyam 2014-15 Information

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

TDS) Statement and information uploaded by Investigation Wings/Central Circle/1 & Cl on Insight Portal. As per the information summary available in Insight Portal, the following information relating to Assessment Year 2015-16 pertains to the assessee company individual. Sr. Source of PAN Source of PAN Informatio Information Information No Name Name n F.Y. Type Value . 1 AAACC0823E Toyam 2014-15 Information

DARSHANA JATIN SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 19(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

148A(d) were not validly served and therefore\nthe reassessment proceedings were vitiated for want of proper\nservice. It was also contended that the notice under section 148\nwas issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not in\naccordance with section 151A and the faceless reassessment\nscheme. It was further contended that the sanction under section\n151 was mechanical

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly we direct the AO to delete the disallowance made under section\n36(1)(va) of the Act for AY 2019-20 & 2020-21 also.\n15. In result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2018-19 to AY 2020...

148A(b) notice and order under section\n148A(d). The ld. AR further submitted that the disallowance made under section\n36(1)(va) could have been made only by invoking explanation and not under the\nmain provisions of section 147. Accordingly it is argued that when the addition\nmade under main provisions are deleted then the disallowance under section

DATTATRAY NAMDEV SURYAWANSHI,PANVEL vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

TDS of Rs. 3,13,515/- on contract receipts of Rs. 3,13,50,154/- during the year under consideration. 3.1. On the basis of information available with the Department, ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) issued notice u/s 148A(b) of Act dated 22.03.2022, under the new regime introduced by Finance Act, 2021 pursuant to the directions

ABBAS KHAN,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy Sabbas Khan, (Through Legal Vs National Faceless Appeal Centre/ Heir Mr. Iqbal Khan) Income-Tax Officer 41(1)(1), Flat No.7, Haroon Building, 1St Mumbai Floor, A H Wadia Marg, Opp Habib Hospital, Old Agra Road, Kurla (W), Mumbai-400 070 Pan: Aahpk3046K Appellant Respondent

TDS on contractual receipts) for the AY 2012–13. Subsequently, a notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 28.03.2019 was issued in the name of the deceased assessee. Pursuant thereto, notices under Section 142(1) dated 22.07.2019 and 07.11.2019 were issued, followed by final show cause notices dated 12.11.2019 and 22.11.2019, requiring an explanation