ITO - WD - 3 (4), KALYAN vs. SIDDHI CORPORATION, DOMBIVALI

In the result, appeals by the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumar

12A,3rd Floor, Swastik Bldg., Samale Wadad, Savarkar Road, Dombivali, Maharashtra. PAN:ABFFS3228N ..... Respondent Appellant by : Shri R.Bhoopathi Respondent by : Ms. Neha Paranjpe Date of hearing : 18/09/2019 Date of pronouncement : 30/10/2019 ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: These two appeals by the Revenue are directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1(in short ‘the CIT(A))Thane

ITO - WD- 3 (4), KALYAN vs. SIDDHI CORPORATION, DOMBIVALI

In the result, appeals by the Revenue for assessment year 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumar

12A,3rd Floor, Swastik Bldg., Samale Wadad, Savarkar Road, Dombivali, Maharashtra. PAN:ABFFS3228N ..... Respondent Appellant by : Shri R.Bhoopathi Respondent by : Ms. Neha Paranjpe Date of hearing : 18/09/2019 Date of pronouncement : 30/10/2019 ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: These two appeals by the Revenue are directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1(in short ‘the CIT(A))Thane

I.T.O. - 23(1)(5), MUMBAI vs. GRACE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleito – 23(1)(5) Vs. M/S Grace Development Room.No.113,1St Floor Associates Matru Mandir, 101, B-Wing, Landmark Tardeo Road, Building, 1St Floor, 150 Mumbai – 400 007 Pali Road, Nr. Hdfc Bank, Bandra (W), Mumbai – 400050. Pan/Gir No. : Aahfg5648M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Neeraja Sarma.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Devendra Jain.Ar Date Of Hearing 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -32, Mumbai Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

section 131 is not sufficient. > High Court Of Mumbai - Nikunj Eximp Enterprises, ITXAL No. 5604 of 2010 The High Court held that the ITAT deleted the addition on account of bogus purchases not only on the basis of stock statement i.e. reconciliation statement but also in view of the other facts. The ITAT had recorded that the books of accounts

PADMASHREE DR. D.Y.PATIL UNIVERSITY ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT INCOME TAX CC-7(1) , MUMBAI

purchases to the tune of Rs.84.50 lakhs were not bogus.\nThe AO did not accept the same and added the amount of Rs.84.50 lakhs\nas income of the assessee in AY 2014-15 u/s. 69C of the Act.\n(i) The AO has also noticed that some of the employees have confirmed\nreceipt of capitation fee, but they have

SUPARIWALA EXPORT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

purchasers, sellers, distributors, importers, exporters, traders or otherwise dealers of tobacoo, tobacco leaves, beedies, cigars, cigarettes, pan masala, tobacco masala, tobacco powder, tobacco pastern agro-based products, flowers, etc. 4. In the course of assessment the Assessing Officer examined the claim of expenditure under section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. He noted that the assessee debited

DCIT, CC-7(1), MUMBAI vs. PADMASHREE DR. D.Y. PATIL UNIVERSITY, NAVI MUMBAI

12A of the Act by DIT\n(Exemptions), Mumbai, vide Registration No.40651 dated 21.03.2007 w.e.f\n01-04-2006. It is also approved u/s 80G of the Act. The assessee, inter alia,\nruns a Medical college, Dental college, Physiotherapy, Biotechnology and\nNursing colleges at Nerul, Navi Mumbai. Shri Vijay D Patil and Smt. Shivani\nPatil are the main trustees. Shri Vijay

PADMASHREE DR. D.Y. PATIL UNIVERSITY ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(1), MUMBAI

12A of the Act by DIT\n(Exemptions), Mumbai, vide Registration No.40651 dated 21.03.2007 w.e.f\n01-04-2006. It is also approved u/s 80G of the Act. The assessee, inter alia,\nruns a Medical college, Dental college, physiotherapy, Biotechnology and\nNursing colleges at Nerul, Navi Mumbai. Shri Vijay D Patil and Smt. Shivani\nPatil are the main trustees. Shri Vijay

PADMASHREE DR. D.Y.PATIL UNIVERSITY ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT INCOME TAX CC-7(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the\nappeals of the revenue are dismissed

12A of the Act by DIT\n(Exemptions), Mumbai, vide Registration No.40651 dated 21.03.2007 w.e.f\n01-04-2006. It is also approved u/s 80G of the Act. The assessee, inter alia,\nruns a Medical college, Dental college, physiotherapy, Biotechnology and\nNursing colleges at Nerul, Navi Mumbai. Shri Vijay D Patil and Smt. Shivani\nPatil are the main trustees. Shri Vijay

DCIT, CC-7(1), MUMBAI vs. PADMASHREE DR. D.Y. PATIL UNIVERSITY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the\nappeals of the revenue are dismissed

12A of the Act by DIT\n(Exemptions), Mumbai, vide Registration No.40651 dated 21.03.2007 w.e.f\n01-04-2006. It is also approved u/s 80G of the Act. The assessee, inter alia,\nruns a Medical college, Dental college, physiotherapy, Biotechnology and\nNursing colleges at Nerul, Navi Mumbai. Shri Vijay D Patil and Smt. Shivani\nPatil are the main trustees. Shri Vijay

DCIT, CC-7(1), MUMBAI vs. PADMASHREE DR. D.Y. PATIL UNIVERSITY, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the\nappeals of the revenue are dismissed

12A of the Act by DIT\n(Exemptions), Mumbai, vide Registration No.40651 dated 21.03.2007 w.e.f\n01-04-2006. It is also approved u/s 80G of the Act. The assessee, inter alia,\nruns a Medical college, Dental college, physiotherapy, Biotechnology and\nNursing colleges at Nerul, Navi Mumbai. Shri Vijay D Patil and Smt. Shivani\nPatil are the main trustees. Shri Vijay

MR. SAURABH ANIL GANDHI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 42(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailmr. Saurabh Anil Gandhi A-502 Chanakya Chs Ltd. Mahavir Nagar, Opp. Ekta Nagar, New Link Road, Kandivali West, Mumbai- 400067 ............... Appellant Pan: Aelpg7302J

12A and notification under section 35AC, the fact of payment through banking channels and certain tribunal orders favourable to other donors is not sufficient to discharge that onus once the Department has produced credible, fresh and corroborative material arising out of a lawful search and survey. The Investigation Wing's findings demonstrate an organised modus operandi: cheques/RTGS receipts into

SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

bogus and non genuine purchases by Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO by admitting additional evidences in the form of ledger accounts of purchase parties, confirmation letters and copies of bank statements thereby violating Rule 46A. 23. The brief facts are that the assessee has made total purchases to the tune of Rs.5

SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP M/S, S.D. CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 24(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

bogus and non genuine purchases by Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO by admitting additional evidences in the form of ledger accounts of purchase parties, confirmation letters and copies of bank statements thereby violating Rule 46A. 23. The brief facts are that the assessee has made total purchases to the tune of Rs.5

DCIT 24(3), MUMBAI vs. SHEKHAR S. DADARKAR, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

bogus and non genuine purchases by Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO by admitting additional evidences in the form of ledger accounts of purchase parties, confirmation letters and copies of bank statements thereby violating Rule 46A. 23. The brief facts are that the assessee has made total purchases to the tune of Rs.5

SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

bogus and non genuine purchases by Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO by admitting additional evidences in the form of ledger accounts of purchase parties, confirmation letters and copies of bank statements thereby violating Rule 46A. 23. The brief facts are that the assessee has made total purchases to the tune of Rs.5

SHEKHAR DADARKAR PROP,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 34(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

bogus and non genuine purchases by Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO by admitting additional evidences in the form of ledger accounts of purchase parties, confirmation letters and copies of bank statements thereby violating Rule 46A. 23. The brief facts are that the assessee has made total purchases to the tune of Rs.5

SHRI CHANDRAKANT KHIMJI MOTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3120 /मुं/2019 ("न.व.2011-12 ) Shri Chandrakant Khimji Mota, Income Tax Officer – 19(1)(3), बनाम/ 12A Bana Build, Sopariwala House, Matru Mandir, Room No.220, Tardeo Road, Vs. Lamington Road, Mumbai 400 007 Mumbai 400 007 Pan/Gir No:Aadpm 8221A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

12A Bana Build, Sopariwala House, Matru Mandir, Room No.220, Tardeo Road, Vs. Lamington Road, Mumbai 400 007 Mumbai 400 007 PAN/GIR No:AADPM 8221A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms Kavita P. Kaushik सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 15/09/2020 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 17/09/2020 Date of Pronouncement आदेश/ ORDER This appeal by the assessee is directed

PEGASUS PROPERTIES P. LTD.,PUNE vs. DY CIT, CC-2(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

purchase the property. 8 ITA.NO. 943/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2015-16) Pegasus Properties Pvt. Ltd., 14. The unsold flats cannot be let out for the very reason being it forms part of business stock in trade and such stock is required to be in possession of the Appellant so that the property can be sold to the desired customers at any point