DE vs. HARDHA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD. ,MUMBAIVS.ITO 9 (1)(3) , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

69C on the basis that the assessee has not claimed any deduction remains unsubstantiated. In view of these facts in our considered view, we see no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the AO. Addition of Rs.6,00,000 under section 69A and Rs.20,300 under section

DEV SHARDA DEVELOPERS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 9(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

69C on the basis that the assessee has not claimed any deduction remains unsubstantiated. In view of these facts in our considered view, we see no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the AO. Addition of Rs.6,00,000 under section 69A and Rs.20,300 under section

UDAY GHANSHYAM NAIK ,MUMBAI vs. ITO CIRCLE 42(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the cross

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19

69C. Accordingly, the total income of the assessee was assessed at ₹15,59,67,710/ 15,59,67,710/– under Section 143(3) of the Act under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 29.09.2021. vide order dated 29.09.2021. 4. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee tendered certain additional d. CIT(A), the assessee tendered certain additional

DCIT-42(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. SRI UDAY GHANSHYAM NAIK, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19

69C. Accordingly, the total income of the assessee was assessed at ₹15,59,67,710/ 15,59,67,710/– under Section 143(3) of the Act under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 29.09.2021. vide order dated 29.09.2021. 4. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee tendered certain additional d. CIT(A), the assessee tendered certain additional

ACIT-CENTREL CIRCLE-3-1, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO.(COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS) PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

69C and taxing the same under Section 115BBE. 18. Per contra, the Ld.AR submitted that the expenditure was duly recorded in the books of account, payments were made through banking channels, TDS

ACIT-CC-3.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO (COLD STORAGE& EXPORTS) PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

69C and taxing the same under Section 115BBE. 18. Per contra, the Ld.AR submitted that the expenditure was duly recorded in the books of account, payments were made through banking channels, TDS

ACIT- CC -3.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO.(COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS) PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

69C and taxing the same under Section 115BBE. 18. Per contra, the Ld.AR submitted that the expenditure was duly recorded in the books of account, payments were made through banking channels, TDS

ACIT-CC-3(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO( COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS) PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

69C and taxing the same under Section 115BBE. 18. Per contra, the Ld.AR submitted that the expenditure was duly recorded in the books of account, payments were made through banking channels, TDS

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-3.1, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO. (COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS) PVT. LTD, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in respect of purchases from M/s S

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Jagadishassessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 & Assessment Year: 2021-22 & Assessment Year: 2022-23 & Assessment Year: 2023-24

69C and taxing the same under Section 115BBE. 18. Per contra, the Ld.AR submitted that the expenditure was duly recorded in the books of account, payments were made through banking channels, TDS

ACIT-CC-3.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. I AHMED & CO.(COLD STORAGE & EXPORTS0 PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, all six appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed in\nrespect of purchases from M/s S

Section 69C makes it clear that the provision can be\ninvoked only where the assessee has incurred expenditure and offers no\nexplanation about the source of such expenditure or the explanation\noffered is not satisfactory. In the present case, there is no dispute that the\nexpenditure is recorded in the regular books of account of the assessee.\nThe payments have

ASST CIT CC 1 (1), MUMBAI vs. M/S B & M BUILDCON , MUMBAI

Appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order whereas the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6673/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6674/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. B & M Buildcon Dcit-Central Circle-1(1) V-Time Square, Level 13 Room No.903, 9Th Floor बिाम/ Plot No.3, Sector-15 Pratishtha Bhavan Vs. Palm Beach Road, Cbd Belapur Old Cgo Bdg. (Annexe) Navi Mumbai- 400 614. M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020. स्थायीलेखा िं./जीआइआर िं./Pan/Gir No. Aalfb-6551-C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.7472/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit-Central Circle-1(1) M/S. B & M Buildcon Room No.903, 9Th Floor V-Time Square, Level 13 बिाम/ Pratishtha Bhavan Plot No.3, Sector-15 Vs. Old Cgo Bdg. (Annexe) Palm Beach Road, Cbd Belapur M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020. Navi Mumbai- 400 614. स्थायीलेखा िं./जीआइआर िं./Pan/Gir No. Aalfb-6551-C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta-Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman-Ld. Cit- Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 20/02/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 20/03/2020 Date Of Pronouncement

section 153A is limited to assessing only search related income, thereby denying Revenue, the opportunity of taxing other escaped income that comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.CIT(A) was correct in holding that information available with the Revenue department as well the information yielded

B & M BUILDCON ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CC- 1 (1), MUMBAI

Appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order whereas the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6673/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6674/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. B & M Buildcon Dcit-Central Circle-1(1) V-Time Square, Level 13 Room No.903, 9Th Floor बिाम/ Plot No.3, Sector-15 Pratishtha Bhavan Vs. Palm Beach Road, Cbd Belapur Old Cgo Bdg. (Annexe) Navi Mumbai- 400 614. M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020. स्थायीलेखा िं./जीआइआर िं./Pan/Gir No. Aalfb-6551-C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.7472/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit-Central Circle-1(1) M/S. B & M Buildcon Room No.903, 9Th Floor V-Time Square, Level 13 बिाम/ Pratishtha Bhavan Plot No.3, Sector-15 Vs. Old Cgo Bdg. (Annexe) Palm Beach Road, Cbd Belapur M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020. Navi Mumbai- 400 614. स्थायीलेखा िं./जीआइआर िं./Pan/Gir No. Aalfb-6551-C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta-Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman-Ld. Cit- Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 20/02/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 20/03/2020 Date Of Pronouncement

section 153A is limited to assessing only search related income, thereby denying Revenue, the opportunity of taxing other escaped income that comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.CIT(A) was correct in holding that information available with the Revenue department as well the information yielded

B & M BUILDCON ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CC- 1 (1), MUMBAI

Appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order whereas the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6673/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6674/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. B & M Buildcon Dcit-Central Circle-1(1) V-Time Square, Level 13 Room No.903, 9Th Floor बिाम/ Plot No.3, Sector-15 Pratishtha Bhavan Vs. Palm Beach Road, Cbd Belapur Old Cgo Bdg. (Annexe) Navi Mumbai- 400 614. M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020. स्थायीलेखा िं./जीआइआर िं./Pan/Gir No. Aalfb-6551-C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.7472/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit-Central Circle-1(1) M/S. B & M Buildcon Room No.903, 9Th Floor V-Time Square, Level 13 बिाम/ Pratishtha Bhavan Plot No.3, Sector-15 Vs. Old Cgo Bdg. (Annexe) Palm Beach Road, Cbd Belapur M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020. Navi Mumbai- 400 614. स्थायीलेखा िं./जीआइआर िं./Pan/Gir No. Aalfb-6551-C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta-Ld.Ar Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman-Ld. Cit- Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 20/02/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 20/03/2020 Date Of Pronouncement

section 153A is limited to assessing only search related income, thereby denying Revenue, the opportunity of taxing other escaped income that comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.CIT(A) was correct in holding that information available with the Revenue department as well the information yielded

OBEROI FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT (E), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleoberoi Foundation V. Cit (Exemptions) Commerz, 3Rd Floor 6Th Floor, Piramal Chambers International Business Park Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400 012 Oberoi Garden City, Off. W.E. Highway Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 400063 Pan: Aaato1684L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vijay Mehta Department Represented By : Shri K.C. Salvamani

TDS compliance. The real issue raised by the assessee in this appeal is whether the provisions of section 11 is applicable and in the subsequent proceedings, the Assessing Officer has verified the allowability of the rent and he has not properly verified the same. In our view, the venturing in the subsequent proceedings are beyond the scope of the grounds

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI. , MUMBAI vs. EKJYOT PROPERTIES , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Section 194A deals with TDS on interest other than interest on securities. The AO has stated in para 6.5.1. that out of the cash receipts of Rs. 15,00,000/- Rs. 10,00,000/- received on 29.08 from Mrs. Tina Agarwal is not appearing in the ledger and hence, it is reflective of undisclosed transaction. From the ledger

ADITYA BIRLA SUNLIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) 54, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 Aditya Birla Sunlife Insurance Commissioner Of Income Tax Company Ltd., (A) – 54, 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One World Mumbai Vs. Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Aditya Birla Sunlife Tax – Central Circle – 5(3), Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One Vs. World Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Ronak Doshi, Ca Revenue : Shri Ajay Chandra, Cit Dr

69C of the Act be deleted. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO. I & II ABOVE: GROUND NO. V: LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 234A & 234B OF THE ACT: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding interest u/s.234A and further upholding levy of interest u/s.234B. 2. The Appellant prays that on facts

DCIT-CC-5(3), MUMBAI, AIR INDIA, NARIMAN POINT vs. ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 Aditya Birla Sunlife Insurance Commissioner Of Income Tax Company Ltd., (A) – 54, 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One World Mumbai Vs. Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Aditya Birla Sunlife Tax – Central Circle – 5(3), Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One Vs. World Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Ronak Doshi, Ca Revenue : Shri Ajay Chandra, Cit Dr

69C of the Act be deleted. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO. I & II ABOVE: GROUND NO. V: LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 234A & 234B OF THE ACT: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding interest u/s.234A and further upholding levy of interest u/s.234B. 2. The Appellant prays that on facts

STERLING HOLIDAY RESORTS LIMITED,TAMIL NADU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 2(3)(1),, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

TDS returns treating the same as "out of books expense";  Addition on account of cash deposit made of Specified Bank Notes during demonetization of Rs. 84,42,000/-;  Disallowance of Employee Stock Option Plan ("ESOP") expense aggregating to Rs. 2,61,09,750/- 2. Ground No. 2 Addition of out of book expense as per section 69C