WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

WIND WORLD INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITEAD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITEAD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

DCIT - CC 3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

WIND WORLD INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3 (1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA number

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

13 is dismissed. 053. Now we come to the appeal filed by the learned assessing officer we find that ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal is with respect to the telescoping of disallowance on account of speed money paid with unaccounted income of bogus purchases. This ground is identical to ground number 1 – 2 of the appeal

DY..C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S STATE BANK OF MYSORE, BANGALORE

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

13 & 14 of Profit & 45,34,25,43,685 Loss Account) [B] Interest received in respect of eligible business under 1849,50,60,118 section 36 (1) (viii) [C] Eligible business profits for computing deduction u/s 217,05,51,659 36(1)(viii) [D=A*C/B] 20% of Eligible Profits - [D*20] 43,41,10,331 Amounts transferred to Special

STATE BANK OF MYSORE,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

13 & 14 of Profit & 45,34,25,43,685 Loss Account) [B] Interest received in respect of eligible business under 1849,50,60,118 section 36 (1) (viii) [C] Eligible business profits for computing deduction u/s 217,05,51,659 36(1)(viii) [D=A*C/B] 20% of Eligible Profits - [D*20] 43,41,10,331 Amounts transferred to Special

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus, baseless, vexatious and false case in the year 2012 against the said trust and other trustees of the said trust before the Hon'ble Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State at Mumbai, thereby alleging misuse of trust property premises situate at 8th floor of said trust building by the trustees for the purpose and for the benefit of M/s Ideen Furniture

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus, baseless, vexatious and false case in the year 2012 against the said trust and other trustees of the said trust before the Hon'ble Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State at Mumbai, thereby alleging misuse of trust property premises situate at 8th floor of said trust building by the trustees for the purpose and for the benefit of M/s Ideen Furniture

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus, baseless, vexatious and false case in the year 2012 against the said trust and other trustees of the said trust before the Hon'ble Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State at Mumbai, thereby alleging misuse of trust property premises situate at 8th floor of said trust building by the trustees for the purpose and for the benefit of M/s Ideen Furniture

DY.CIT (E) -2(1) , MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI EDUCATIONAL TRUST, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

bogus, baseless, vexatious and false case in the year 2012 against the said trust and other trustees of the said trust before the Hon'ble Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State at Mumbai, thereby alleging misuse of trust property premises situate at 8th floor of said trust building by the trustees for the purpose and for the benefit of M/s Ideen Furniture

NAVNIDHI STEEL AND ENGG CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2007-08

13. One thing further to be noticed is that intimation under section 143(1)(a) is given without prejudice to the provisions of section 143(2). Though technically the intimation issued was deemed to be a demand notice issued under section 156, that did not per se preclude the right of the Assessing Officer to proceed under section

BHARAT DE vs. HI DAGHA,THANEVS.ITO WARD 3(1), KALYAN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

13. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has not filed any the appellant has not filed any evidence which could substanti evidence which could substantiate the genuineness of purchases ate the genuineness of purchases Bharat Devshi Dagha ITA Nos. 3315 & 3314/M/2023 made from alleged Hawala Dealers. In his reply, the assessee has made from alleged Hawala Dealers. In his reply

BHARAT DE vs. HI DAGHA,THANEVS.ITO WARD 3(1), KALYAN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

13. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has not filed any the appellant has not filed any evidence which could substanti evidence which could substantiate the genuineness of purchases ate the genuineness of purchases Bharat Devshi Dagha ITA Nos. 3315 & 3314/M/2023 made from alleged Hawala Dealers. In his reply, the assessee has made from alleged Hawala Dealers. In his reply