VRUSHALI SANJAY SHINDE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC- 1, THANE

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blevrushali Sanjay Shinde V. Dcit, Central Circle-1 282, Boundary Road B-101, Marigold, Prestige Residency G.B. Road, Kavesar, Thane- 400607 Civil Line, Meerut - 250001 Pan: Ajnps5211K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Sankalp Malik Department Represented By : Shri Shanti Subramanian

TDS on the commission had also not be claimed in the ROI The appellant has also stated that she accept the addition of Rs.1,05,212/- to her income. Vide her rejoinder filed on 16/3/2020, the appellant has further stated that she accept the addition and give consent to add the same in the total income of the assessee

MS KALYAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,KALYAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 THANE, THANE

section 153D of the Act is bad in law, considering the fact\nthat the approval was granted mechanically without application of mind and\ntherefore the order may please be quashed.\niii) ITA No.4525/Mum/2023\n1. The Learned CIT Appeals erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,99,46,568/-\nmade by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2. Thane

MANGESHI ENTERPRISES,KALYAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, THANE

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

153D of the Act is bad in law, considering the fact that the approval was granted mechanically without application of mind and therefore the order may please be quashed. iii) ITA No.4525/Mum/2023 1. The Learned CIT Appeals erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,99,46,568/- made by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2. Thane (hereinafter

SMT. USHA SATISH SALVI,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , CENTRAL CIRCLE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the three years\nare dismissed

section 153D of\nthe I.T.ACT, 1961. Непсе, we reject additional ground taken by the\nassessee.\"\n\n8.2 In view of the aforesaid discussion and verification of records\navailable, we are of the opinion that approval was granted by the\nadditional Commissioner of income-tax after due application of\nmind. The objections of the assessee raised in an additional ground\nare

MR MANGESH D GAIKAR,KALYAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, THANE, THANE

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

153D of the Act is bad in law, considering the fact that the approval was granted mechanically without application of mind and therefore the order may please be quashed. iii) ITA No.4525/Mum/2023 1. The Learned CIT Appeals erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,99,46,568/- made by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2. Thane (hereinafter

KALYAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,KALYAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 THANE, THANE

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

153D of the Act is bad in law, considering the fact that the approval was granted mechanically without application of mind and therefore the order may please be quashed. iii) ITA No.4525/Mum/2023 1. The Learned CIT Appeals erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,99,46,568/- made by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2. Thane (hereinafter

KALYAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,KALYAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, THANE, THANE

Bench: Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

153D of the Act is bad in law, considering the fact that the approval was granted mechanically without application of mind and therefore the order may please be quashed. iii) ITA No.4525/Mum/2023 1. The Learned CIT Appeals erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,99,46,568/- made by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2. Thane (hereinafter

JCIT (OSD), CC-4(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE COOPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., AHAMEDNAGAR

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

153D by the competent authority is mechanical and without application of mind. 2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in issuing a notice dated 27.12.2019 directing the appellants to get the accounts audited under section 142(2A) at the fag end Shri Renukamata Multi–State

JCIT (OSD), CC-4(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE COOPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., AHAMEDNAGAR

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

153D by the competent authority is mechanical and without application of mind. 2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in issuing a notice dated 27.12.2019 directing the appellants to get the accounts audited under section 142(2A) at the fag end of the assessment proceedings which

M/S RENUKAMATA MULTI STATE CO-OP. URBAN CREDITN SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSTT. CIT, CC-4(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

153D by the competent authority is mechanical and without application of mind. 2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in issuing a notice dated 27.12.2019 directing the appellants to get the accounts audited under section 142(2A) at the fag end of the assessment proceedings which

JCIT (OSD), CC-4(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE COOPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., AHAMEDNAGAR

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

153D by the competent authority is mechanical and without application of mind. 2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in issuing a notice dated 27.12.2019 directing the appellants to get the accounts audited under section 142(2A) at the fag end Shri Renukamata Multi–State

SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

153D by the competent authority is mechanical and without application of mind. 2 It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in issuing a notice dated 27.12.2019 directing the appellants to get the accounts audited under section 142(2A) at the fag end of the assessment proceedings which

SOMA ENTERPRISE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), MUMBAI-1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

TDS credit before the ld. AO in three independent proceedings and before the ld. PCIT in Section 263 proceedings; f) The ld. PCIT had never pointed out by any error in the order of the ld. AO by making preliminary enquiries with regard to submissions made by the assessee before him. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision

SOMA ENTERPRISES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE PCIT,(CENTRAL)-MUMBAI-1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

TDS credit before the ld. AO in three independent proceedings and before the ld. PCIT in Section 263 proceedings; f) The ld. PCIT had never pointed out by any error in the order of the ld. AO by making preliminary enquiries with regard to submissions made by the assessee before him. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision

SOMA ENTERPRISE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), MUMBAI-1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

TDS credit before the ld. AO in three independent proceedings and before the ld. PCIT in Section 263 proceedings; f) The ld. PCIT had never pointed out by any error in the order of the ld. AO by making preliminary enquiries with regard to submissions made by the assessee before him. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision

SOMA ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,TELAGANA vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL),MUMBAI-1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

TDS credit before the ld. AO in three independent proceedings and before the ld. PCIT in Section 263 proceedings; f) The ld. PCIT had never pointed out by any error in the order of the ld. AO by making preliminary enquiries with regard to submissions made by the assessee before him. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision

SOMA ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. THE PCIT(CENTRAL),MUMBAI-1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

TDS credit before the ld. AO in three independent proceedings and before the ld. PCIT in Section 263 proceedings; f) The ld. PCIT had never pointed out by any error in the order of the ld. AO by making preliminary enquiries with regard to submissions made by the assessee before him. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision

SOMA ENTERPRISE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), MUMBAI-1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

TDS credit before the ld. AO in three independent proceedings and before the ld. PCIT in Section 263 proceedings; f) The ld. PCIT had never pointed out by any error in the order of the ld. AO by making preliminary enquiries with regard to submissions made by the assessee before him. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision