MANGAL PRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3) ERSTWHILE CE CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 3. Thus for both assessments years the assessments were not pending and no incriminating material was found with reference to the addition made by AO on account of notional rent of property and difference in 26AS, when actually there were mistake in TDS certificate so filed by company. It was contended

MANGAL PRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3) ERSTWHILE CE CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 3. Thus for both assessments years the assessments were not pending and no incriminating material was found with reference to the addition made by AO on account of notional rent of property and difference in 26AS, when actually there were mistake in TDS certificate so filed by company. It was contended

MANJULA MANGALPRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3)(ERSTWHILE CEN CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 3. Thus for both assessments years the assessments were not pending and no incriminating material was found with reference to the addition made by AO on account of notional rent of property and difference in 26AS, when actually there were mistake in TDS certificate so filed by company. It was contended

MANJULA MANGALPRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3)(ERSTWHILE CEN CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 3. Thus for both assessments years the assessments were not pending and no incriminating material was found with reference to the addition made by AO on account of notional rent of property and difference in 26AS, when actually there were mistake in TDS certificate so filed by company. It was contended

MANGAL PRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3) ERSTWHILE CE CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 3. Thus for both assessments years the assessments were not pending and no incriminating material was found with reference to the addition made by AO on account of notional rent of property and difference in 26AS, when actually there were mistake in TDS certificate so filed by company. It was contended

M/S SINNAR THERMAL POWER LTD(FORMERLY RATTANINDIA NASIK POWER LTD) ,DELHI vs. DY CIT CC 6 (4) , MUMBAI

153A of the Act. Hence our M/s. Sinnar Thermal Power Limited (Formerly Rattanindia Nasik Power Limited) findings and observations are given only for other remaining assessment years before us. 12.2. We find that the ld AO had made the aforesaid disallowance on account of bogus expenditure by alleging that the transactions had by the assessee company i.e. IIC Limited with

KAMLA LANDMARC ENTERPRISES,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-(3)(4),, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

153A /153C without reference to incriminating seized material has also been expounded by honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Singhad technical education Society in civil appeal No. 11080 of 2017 and others. In this regard the honourable Supreme Court in paragraph 18 of the said order observed that: In this behalf it was noted

KAMLA LANDMARC ENTERPRISES,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-(3)(4), MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

153A /153C without reference to incriminating seized material has also been expounded by honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Singhad technical education Society in civil appeal No. 11080 of 2017 and others. In this regard the honourable Supreme Court in paragraph 18 of the said order observed that: In this behalf it was noted

KAMLA LANDMARC ENTERPRISES,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(3)(4),, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

153A /153C without reference to incriminating seized material has also been expounded by honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Singhad technical education Society in civil appeal No. 11080 of 2017 and others. In this regard the honourable Supreme Court in paragraph 18 of the said order observed that: In this behalf it was noted

KAMLA LANDMARC ENTERPRISES, ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-(3)(4),, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

153A /153C without reference to incriminating seized material has also been expounded by honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Singhad technical education Society in civil appeal No. 11080 of 2017 and others. In this regard the honourable Supreme Court in paragraph 18 of the said order observed that: In this behalf it was noted

KAMLA LANDMARC ENTERPRISES,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(3)(4),, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

153A /153C without reference to incriminating seized material has also been expounded by honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Singhad technical education Society in civil appeal No. 11080 of 2017 and others. In this regard the honourable Supreme Court in paragraph 18 of the said order observed that: In this behalf it was noted

KAMLA LAMDMARC ENTERPRISES,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(3)(4),, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

153A /153C without reference to incriminating seized material has also been expounded by honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Singhad technical education Society in civil appeal No. 11080 of 2017 and others. In this regard the honourable Supreme Court in paragraph 18 of the said order observed that: In this behalf it was noted

KAMLA LANDMARC ENTERPRISES,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(3)(4), CENTRAL CIRCLE,, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

153A /153C without reference to incriminating seized material has also been expounded by honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Singhad technical education Society in civil appeal No. 11080 of 2017 and others. In this regard the honourable Supreme Court in paragraph 18 of the said order observed that: In this behalf it was noted

ACIT-CC-1(3), NEW MARINE LINES, CHURCHGATE vs. MS. SHANTI ENTERPRISES, VASHI

In the result ground number 1 and 2 of the appeal for assessment year 2015 – 16 of the learned assessing officer are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shriraj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2012-13 A.Y.2015-16 Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Bhagwati Developers, Mumbai 1306, 13Th Floor, Vs. Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A, Vashi Navi Mumbai Co No. 80/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 [Ita No. 1346/Mum/2024] Bhagwati Developers, Acit-Central Circle-1(3), 1306, 13Th Floor, Mumbai Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A, Vashi Navi Mumbai Pan Aalfb 5272C A.Y. 2012-13 Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Ms. Shanti Enterprises, Mumbai Office No. 1306, Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A Vashi Co No. 110/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 [Ita No. 1349/Mum/2024] Ms. Shanti Enterprises, Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Office No. 1306, Real Tech Mumbai Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A Vashi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mani Jain & Shri Prateek Jain

153A of the act as there is no asset defined in explanation 2 of that section represents the undisclosed income.Therefore, reversing the order of the learned CIT – A on this point, the assessment order was quashed, and ground number 1 was allowed. 40. For completeness of the appeal, ground number 2 of cross objection and solitary ground of appeal

ACIT-CC-1(3), MUMBAI vs. BHAGWATI DEVELOPERS , NAVI MUMBAI

In the result ground number 1 and 2 of the appeal for assessment year 2015 – 16 of the learned assessing officer are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shriraj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2012-13 A.Y.2015-16 Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Bhagwati Developers, Mumbai 1306, 13Th Floor, Vs. Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A, Vashi Navi Mumbai Co No. 80/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 [Ita No. 1346/Mum/2024] Bhagwati Developers, Acit-Central Circle-1(3), 1306, 13Th Floor, Mumbai Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A, Vashi Navi Mumbai Pan Aalfb 5272C A.Y. 2012-13 Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Ms. Shanti Enterprises, Mumbai Office No. 1306, Real Tech Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A Vashi Co No. 110/Mum/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 [Ita No. 1349/Mum/2024] Ms. Shanti Enterprises, Acit-Central Circle-1(3), Office No. 1306, Real Tech Mumbai Park, Plot No.39/2, Sector-30A Vashi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mani Jain & Shri Prateek Jain

153A of the act as there is no asset defined in explanation 2 of that section represents the undisclosed income.Therefore, reversing the order of the learned CIT – A on this point, the assessment order was quashed, and ground number 1 was allowed. 40. For completeness of the appeal, ground number 2 of cross objection and solitary ground of appeal

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

TDS u/s.201(1A) or u/s.206C(7) of the delayed payment of TDS u/s.201(1A) or u/s.206C(7) of the delayed payment of TDS u/s.201(1A) or u/s.206C(7) of the Act has been shown of Rs. 2,42,966/ Act has been shown of Rs. 2,42,966/-. In this regard, the . In this regard, the assessee was required

HYDROAIR TECTONICS (PCD) LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

153A had claimed that its closing stock as appearing in P&L Account was overvalued of Rs.60 crores. Therefore, it has claimed reduction to that extent. The AO added back the amount of Rs.60 crores as the assessee has not justified its claim. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted addition made by the AO because, he had estimated profit from the business

RAJKUMARI SINGH,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 8, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

153A had claimed that its closing stock as appearing in P&L Account was overvalued of Rs.60 crores. Therefore, it has claimed reduction to that extent. The AO added back the amount of Rs.60 crores as the assessee has not justified its claim. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted addition made by the AO because, he had estimated profit from the business

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 erred in initiating proceedings and passing an order under sec 153A of the Act without appreciating the fact that neither there was 153A of the Act without appreciating the fact that neither there was 153A of the Act without appreciating the fact that neither there was any incriminating material found during search nor was there any any incriminating material