AHMEDNAGAR INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC- 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanvk-Vk-La- 7125@Eaqcbz@2018 ¼Fu-Oa- 2013&14½ Vk-Vk-La- 7126@Eaqcbz@2018 ¼Fu-Oa- 2014&15½ M/S Ahmednagar Investments Pvt. Ltd. 11/12, Raghuvanshi Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aadca9872E Cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle– 5(3) Room No.1906, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 021

rectification order? 6. The powers of the CIT(A) u/s 251 of the Act are plenary and co-extensive with that of the AO. The CIT(A) in exercise of powers u/s 251 of the Act in an appeal against the assessment order may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment. Thus, the CIT(A) u/s

AHMEDNAGAR INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC- 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanvk-Vk-La- 7125@Eaqcbz@2018 ¼Fu-Oa- 2013&14½ Vk-Vk-La- 7126@Eaqcbz@2018 ¼Fu-Oa- 2014&15½ M/S Ahmednagar Investments Pvt. Ltd. 11/12, Raghuvanshi Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel Mumbai-400 013 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aadca9872E Cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle– 5(3) Room No.1906, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 021

rectification order? 6. The powers of the CIT(A) u/s 251 of the Act are plenary and co-extensive with that of the AO. The CIT(A) in exercise of powers u/s 251 of the Act in an appeal against the assessment order may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment. Thus, the CIT(A) u/s

QUALITY HEIGHTCON PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -14(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

rectification\norder u/s 154 dated 16/02/2012 against the intimation u/s 143(1) dated 17/01/2012\nwherein the predecessor Assessing Officer has given full TDS credit claimed by the\nAssessee in its return of income which includes the TDS credit of Rs.24,46,194/.\n5. The Appellant crave leave to add, delete or substantiate any grounds of appeal at the\ntime

LUPIN LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

rectification order passed by Ld CIT(A) u/s 154 of the Act. 23.1 The facts relating to the above said disallowance are identical with the identical disallowances made in AY 2010-11. In paragraphs11 (supra), we have dealt with identical disallowance made in the assessment year 2010-11 36 M/s. Lupin Limited Asst. year

CONCORDE INTERNATIONAL,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 19(1), MATUR MANDIR, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleconcorde International V. Dcit, Circle 19(1), Ec-B2-8010, Bharat Diamond Bourse Matru Mandir Building Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 1St & 2Nd Floor, Nana Chowk Bhatia Hospital Lane Pan: Aabfc9865G Javji Dadaji Marg, Grant Road (W) Mumbai- 400007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Sunil Hirawat Department Represented By : Shri H.M. Bhatt

u/s. 147 of the Act based on the information received from DGIT (Inv.,), Mumbai, that the assessee has availed accommodation entries from various dealers who are said to be providing accommodation entries without there being transportation of any goods. In the reassessment Page No. | 2 Concorde International proceedings, the assessee was asked to prove the genuineness of the purchases made

VIJAYGROUP HOUSING PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. NFAC CIT(A), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Raj Kumar Chauhan & Shri Om Prakash Kant

bogus long term capital gain, etc. 3. It is further noticed that, CA Sanjay Shah has arranged accommodation entries for his clients from the entities being run and operated by Shri. Rajesh Mehta viz. Anericap limited and VRB Capital Services Limited. On perusal of list of beneficiaries and fund trader, it is seen that the assessee i.e. M/s. Vijaygroup Housing

VIJAYGROUP HOUSING PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. NFAC CIT(A), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Raj Kumar Chauhan & Shri Om Prakash Kant

bogus long term capital gain, etc. 3. It is further noticed that, CA Sanjay Shah has arranged accommodation entries for his clients from the entities being run and operated by Shri. Rajesh Mehta viz. Anericap limited and VRB Capital Services Limited. On perusal of list of beneficiaries and fund trader, it is seen that the assessee i.e. M/s. Vijaygroup Housing

SHI vs. HANKAR AGARWAL HUFHUF,ANDHERI (EAST)VS.INCOME TAX OFFICER 31(2)(1), MUMBAI, BANDRA (EAST)

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang&\Nms Padmavathy S, Am\Ni.T.A. No. 2468/Mum/2024\N(Assessment Year: 2010-11)\Nshivshankar Agarwal Huf,\N204A, Corporate Centre, Marol Pipe\Nline, Andheri-Kurla Road, Andheri\N(E), Mumbai-400059.\Npan: Aafhs0899Q\Nincome Tax Officer-31(2)(1),\Nkb-248, Kautilya Bhawan,\Nvs. Bandra Kurla Complex,\Nbandra (E), Mumbai-400051.\Nappellant)\Nrespondent)\Nappellant/Assessee By\N: Shri Ashok Bansal & Shri Ajay\Ndaga, Ar\Nrevenue / Respondent By\N: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. Dr\Ndate Of Hearing\N: 11.08.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement\N: 28.08.2025\Norder\Nper Padmavathy S, Am:\Nthis Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of\Nincome Tax (Appeals), Thiruvanantapuram [In Short 'Cit(A)'] Passed Under\Nsection 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Dated 22.03.2024 For\N Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of\Nappeal:\N1. The Ld. Cit(A) In Disposing Of The Appeal Erred In Not Adjudicating\Nground Nos 1 To 3 Of The Grounds Of Appeal Raised Before Her Challenging The\Nvalidity Of Assessment.\N2. The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Made By The Ito Of\Nrs.309610/- Being 12.50% Of The Alleged Bogus Purchases.\N2.

bogus purchases includes M/s Shree Ram\nSteel to the tune of Rs.37,96,584/-. The assessment of the assessee was once again\nreopened vide notice dated 31.03.2017 and from the perusal of the notice under\nsection 148, we notice that it merely states that the AO has reasons to believe that\nthe income of the assessee has escaped assessment

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 14(1)(2), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. FOODLINK SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for

bogus. The Assessing Officer has ignored the fact\nthat cash sales are out of stock genuinely held and acquired by the\nassessee through purchase invoices, which were duly produced before\nthe Assessing Officer, but same were not doubted by him. The learned\nDR also could not controvert the copy of purchases corresponding to\nthe sales and stock register, filed

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 14(1)(2), MUMBAI, AAKAR BHAVAN vs. FOODLINK SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for

bogus. The Assessing Officer has ignored the fact\nthat cash sales are out of stock genuinely held and acquired by the\nassessee through purchase invoices, which were duly produced before\nthe Assessing Officer, but same were not doubted by him. The learned\nDR also could not controvert the copy of purchases corresponding to\nthe sales and stock register, filed

LUPIN LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

bogus purchases was made on the technical reason that the said suppliers have not paid VAT amount, which would disentitle the assessee to claim VAT credit and hence the assessee cannot effectively prove the genuineness of purchases. If the re-revised VAT returns have been accepted by the VAT authorities and the assessee got the credit of VAT amount

ASSTT. CIT -CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. LUPIN LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

bogus purchases was made on the technical reason that the said suppliers have not paid VAT amount, which would disentitle the assessee to claim VAT credit and hence the assessee cannot effectively prove the genuineness of purchases. If the re-revised VAT returns have been accepted by the VAT authorities and the assessee got the credit of VAT amount

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 14(1)(2), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. FOODLINK SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for

bogus. The Assessing Officer has ignored the fact\nthat cash sales are out of stock genuinely held and acquired by the\nassessee through purchase invoices, which were duly produced before\nthe Assessing Officer, but same were not doubted by him. The learned\nDR also could not controvert the copy of purchases corresponding to\nthe sales and stock register, filed

JCIT CENT. CIR. - 1(4), MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Grasim Industries Limited, The Dcit Cc-1(4), Corporate Finance Division, Room No. 902, 9Th Floor, Old Vs. A-2, Aditya Birla Centre, S.K. Cgo Building, M.K. Road, Ahire Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400030. Pan No. Aaacg 4464 B Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Jcit (Osd), Central Circle- Grasim Industries Limited, 1(4), A-Wing, 2Nd Floor, Aditya Room No. 902, Pratishtha Vs. Birla Centre, S.K. Ahire Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Marg, Worli, Building Annexe, Mumbai-400030. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacg 4464 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh Thar & Mr. Chaitanya Joshi Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2024 : Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2024

bogus purchase addition to the buildings. purchase addition to the buildings. 6. Aggrieved with the above finding of the Ld. CIT(A) both the Aggrieved with the above finding of the Ld. CIT(A) both the Aggrieved with the above finding of the Ld. CIT(A) both the Revenue and the assessee are before the Tribunal Revenue and the assessee

ALKA ASHOK JAGTAP,KALYAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KALYAN

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokaralka Ashok Jagtap Income Tax Office C-304, Regency Avenue Rani Mansion Syndicate, Murbad Road, Vs. Kalyan, Kalyan Kalyan West, Thane- 421301, Kalyan Pan/Gir No. Ahtpj7760J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sunil Jain Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026

purchased in earlier years and sold during the year under consideration. As regards STCG of Rs. 72,596/-, it was submitted that the same had already been offered to tax in the return of income. However, during the course of appellate proceedings, and as recorded by the CIT(A) in paragraph 5.8 of the appellate order, the assessee

DCIT, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED, MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

purchased and the entire amount of material purchased is claimed as expenses in the profit and loss account and thus, the gross value of sale of scrap in cash is income of the Assessee and therefore gross value of the same needs to be confirmed as against the estimated addition made by the CIT(A). 42. We have gone heard

DCIT CC 5-1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED , MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

purchased and the entire amount of material purchased is claimed as expenses in the profit and loss account and thus, the gross value of sale of scrap in cash is income of the Assessee and therefore gross value of the same needs to be confirmed as against the estimated addition made by the CIT(A). 42. We have gone heard

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI

The Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

purchased and the entire amount of material purchased is claimed as expenses in the profit and loss account and thus, the gross value of sale of scrap in cash is income of the Assessee and therefore gross value of the same needs to be confirmed as against the estimated addition made by the CIT(A). 42. We have gone heard