DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SPECTRA REALTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue, being ITA no

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Prabhash Shankardeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle - 7(1) Room No.653, Aaykar Bhawan, Churchgate, ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400020 V/S Spectra Realities Private Limited, 9, Floor-I, Plot – 51, Kapadia Chamber, Devji Ratansi Marg, ……………… Respondent Chinchbunder, Mumbai – 400009 Pan: Aalcs7233B Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle - 7(1) Room No.653, Aaykar Bhawan, Churchgate, ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400020

viib) of the Act, by observing as follows: - “10.5 I have considered the facts of the case, assessment order and submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant has issued non-cumulative redeemable preference shares at the face value of Rs. 100 and premium of Rs. 220. For the purpose of determining the fair market value of such shares

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SOYUMM MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED,, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue, being ITA no

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Prabhash Shankardeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle - 7(1) Room No.653, Aaykar Bhawan, Churchgate, ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400020 V/S Spectra Realities Private Limited, 9, Floor-I, Plot – 51, Kapadia Chamber, Devji Ratansi Marg, ……………… Respondent Chinchbunder, Mumbai – 400009 Pan: Aalcs7233B Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle - 7(1) Room No.653, Aaykar Bhawan, Churchgate, ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400020

viib) of the Act, by observing as follows: - “10.5 I have considered the facts of the case, assessment order and submissions filed by the appellant. The appellant has issued non-cumulative redeemable preference shares at the face value of Rs. 100 and premium of Rs. 220. For the purpose of determining the fair market value of such shares

DCIT 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. FINPROJECT INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4860/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13)

TDS certificate would be assessed under Act- CIT v. K. Thangamani [2009] 177 Taxman 499/309 ITR 15{Mad.). Legal effect prevails over substance of transaction - In taxing a receipt to income -tax the authorities are only concerned with the legal effect or character of the transaction and not the substance of the transaction - Pandit Lakshmikanta

DCIT 4(1), MUMBAI vs. HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (INDIA) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

TDS at all. In the light of above ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. The 4th Ground of appeal pertains to disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. This 19. issue also dealt with by the coordinate bench of ITAT in assessee’s own case for A.Y.s 2002-03, 2004-05 and 2005-06 vide

HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (I) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

TDS at all. In the light of above ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. The 4th Ground of appeal pertains to disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. This 19. issue also dealt with by the coordinate bench of ITAT in assessee’s own case for A.Y.s 2002-03, 2004-05 and 2005-06 vide

HSBC SECURITIES AND CAPITAL MARKETS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

TDS at all. In the light of above ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed. The 4th Ground of appeal pertains to disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. This 19. issue also dealt with by the coordinate bench of ITAT in assessee’s own case for A.Y.s 2002-03, 2004-05 and 2005-06 vide

THERMAX BABCOCK & WILCOX ENERGY SOLUTION LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/DY/CIT/ASSTT/ITO/NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

56(2)(viib)) was allowed. Ground No. 9 was dismissed. Ground No. 10 (interest on delayed TDS) was allowed. Grounds 11 & 12 (penalty initiation) were dismissed as premature.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections

BLOOM PACKAGING P LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amit Shukla

viib) of the Act. 13. Similarly, we analyse the provisions of section 28(iv) of the Act. These provisions imply the arising of any benefit / perquisite to the assessee-firm. On facts of the present case, we find, there is no such any benefit or perquisite to the assessee firm by transfer of shares of UPL and UEL to NCPL

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

56(2)(viib) of the Act with effect from 1.8.2013 involving receipt of share capital if it exceeds the fair market value, the difference is chargeable to tax as income. The TPO proposed to bring this transaction as income of the assessee where the assessee had invested in their AE’s with the observation, without bench marking the capital transaction

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

56(2)(viib) of the Act with effect from 1.8.2013 involving receipt of share capital if it exceeds the fair market value, the difference is chargeable to tax as income. The TPO proposed to bring this transaction as income of the assessee where the assessee had invested in their AE’s with the observation, without bench marking the capital transaction

AVINASH CONSTRUCTIONS,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR 2(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleavinashbhosale Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – Central Circle – 2(3) 2, Abil House, Ganesh Khind Road 8Th Floor, Room No. 803 Pune City, Pune – 411007 Old Cgo Bldg, Pratishtha Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aabca5452C (Appellant) (Respondent) Avinash Constructions V. Dcit – Central Circle – 2(3) 2, Abil House, Ganesh Khind Road 8Th Floor, Room No. 803 Pune City, Pune – 411007 Old Cgo Bldg, Pratishtha Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaefa6358H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 131 of the Act to M/s. Varali Infrastructure Limited to inquire about the basis of valuation and other details such as source of fund. M/s Varali Infrastructure Limited, in response submitted the source of payment for subscribing to the shares 5 ITA NO. 1307& 1797/MUM/2021) AvinashBhosale Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Avinash Constructions of assessee. The Assessing Officer was satisfied with

AVINASH BHOSALE INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD., MUMBAI vs. DY CIT-CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleavinashbhosale Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – Central Circle – 2(3) 2, Abil House, Ganesh Khind Road 8Th Floor, Room No. 803 Pune City, Pune – 411007 Old Cgo Bldg, Pratishtha Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aabca5452C (Appellant) (Respondent) Avinash Constructions V. Dcit – Central Circle – 2(3) 2, Abil House, Ganesh Khind Road 8Th Floor, Room No. 803 Pune City, Pune – 411007 Old Cgo Bldg, Pratishtha Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaefa6358H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 131 of the Act to M/s. Varali Infrastructure Limited to inquire about the basis of valuation and other details such as source of fund. M/s Varali Infrastructure Limited, in response submitted the source of payment for subscribing to the shares 5 ITA NO. 1307& 1797/MUM/2021) AvinashBhosale Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Avinash Constructions of assessee. The Assessing Officer was satisfied with

SHARAD SEVANTILAL SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 23(3)(6), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS.\nThe assessee further submitted that one more advance of Rs.1.61 crores was paid on\n14.08.2015 by the assessee and the balance amount of Rs.1 crore was sourced by\nthe assessee through Housing Loan from HDFC Bank. The assessee also submitted\nthat since the seller had some technical issues in getting the original documents\nfrom the Bank there was delay

RAKYAN BEVERAGES PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIGARH vs. ACIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

viib) r.w.s. 2(24)(xvi) of the 1961 Act have not been made applicable to the shares issued to non-residents mainly to encourage foreign investments. 28. As regards the share premium received from Mr. Anuj Rakyan, we note that none of the lower authorities have given any reason or basis for adding the same

TUTOR INVESTMENT & FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

TDS deduction. 4. The first issue relates to the addition proposed by Ld Pr. CIT u/s 56(2)(viib) of the Act. The Ld Pr. CIT noticed that the assessee has issued 10 lakh shares @ Rs.200/- per share. However, the value of shares as per valuation certificate was only Rs.186/- per share. Accordingly the Ld Pr. CIT took the view

M/S PODDAR FININ CONSULTANCY P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD-7(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1860/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Poddar Finin Consultancy बिधम/ Ito Ward Pvt. Ltd. Maharashtra-410206. Vs. 4A/B, Ground Floor, Tk Industries Estate, Sitaram Palturam Murai Marg, Mumbai- 400015. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagcp3938D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri R. A. Dhyani (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 06.08.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Thane [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1) The Assessment Order Passed By The Id. Assessing Officer (Ao) Is Invalid & Bad In Law. 2) (A) The Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Erred In Law & Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. Assessing Officer

viib) of the Act. 3) The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)) erred in law and facts in confirming the action of the Id. Assessing Officer [AO] in making addition of Rs.4,93,50,000/-; being the amount of share premium u/s. 68 of the Act without appreciating the facts of the case. 4) Without prejudice to above

DCIT-CC-7(3), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. SHRI MAJNI KARAMSHI PATEL, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross objections of the assessee and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal, Accountat Member Dcit, Cc-7(3) Vs. Shri Manji Karamshi Room No. 655, Patel Aayakar Bhavan, Office No. 1, Patel M.K.Road, Bhavan-29, Vijaywadi, Mumbai.-400020. Dr. Nagindas N Shah Lane Chira Bazar, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpp0130D Appellant .. Respondent Co No. 45/Mum/2021 (A.Y: 2014-15) Shri Manji Karamshi Vs. Dcit, Cc-7(3) Patel Room No. 655, Aayakar Office No. 1, Patel Bhavan, Bhuvan-29, Vijaywadi, M.K .Road, Dr. Nagindas N Shah Mumbai-400002. Lane Chira Bazar, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpp0130D Appellant .. Respondent

TDS on interest paid to M/s. Galore Supplier Pvt Ltd, M/s. Landmark Supplier Pvt ITA No. 6128/Mum/2019 & Co. No. 45/Mum/2021 Shri Majni Karmshi Patel, Mumbai. Ltd (amalgamated with S.K. Stock Dealers Pvt Ltd) & M/s. Kingfisher Properties Pvt Ltd as the appellant is not liable to get his books of accounts audited u/s 44AB of the Act. Further, the Id. Assessing

RED MONSTER MOBILE PVT LTD.,,MUMBAI-400021 vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3, MUMBAI-400020

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blered Monster Mobile Private Limited V. Pr.Cit –3 213, Raheja Chambers Room No. 612, 6Th Floor Free Press Journal Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aagcr9963G (Appellant) (Respondent)

viib) of the Act. Accordingly, Assessing Officer has accepted and completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Therefore, the subsequent events in A.Y. 2016-17 will not have any impact in the present assessment year under consideration. 13. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe that the Ld. Pr.CIT has initiated the proceedings

DCIT 3(2), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

TDS) Pune vs Vodafone Cellular Ltd (assessee‟s own case) in Income Tax Appeal Nos. 1152 , 1274, 1995, of 2017 & Income Tax Appeal Nos. 571, 1266 of 2018 dated 27/01/2020 had also taken an identical view in respect of identical issue. 2.8.6. The ld.DR before us placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case