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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

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

Section 37 (1) of the act. The learned assessing officer further disallowed ₹ 60 crores u/s 37 (1) which the assessee voluntarily disallowed in the proceedings before the settlement commission. The AO further made a disallowance of ₹ 121,013,188/– u/s 14 A and disallowance of interest of Rs 243,86,238/– u/s 36(1)(iii) on account of diversion

KALPSARU DIAMONDS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 23(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, Acit 23(2), Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. Cit-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth Floor, Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent

139(1) of the Act was processed s processed without carrying out any regular without carrying out any regular scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act, so the proviso to section 147 is not attracted. u/s 143(3) of the Act, so the proviso to section 147 is not attracted. u/s 143(3) of the Act, so the proviso

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -23(1) , MUMBAI vs. KALPSARU DIAMONDS, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, Acit 23(2), Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. Cit-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth Floor, Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent

139(1) of the Act was processed s processed without carrying out any regular without carrying out any regular scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act, so the proviso to section 147 is not attracted. u/s 143(3) of the Act, so the proviso to section 147 is not attracted. u/s 143(3) of the Act, so the proviso

RAJKUMARI SINGH,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 8, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

139(1) of Rs.91.19 crores. Although, the assessee has eliminated income by Rs.91.19 crores, but in its submission before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee had agreed to ignore such reduction because income cannot be reduced in the returns filed u/s 153A of the Act. The AO ignored reversal of bogus purchases, however, reversal of bogus sales was denied

HYDROAIR TECTONICS (PCD) LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

139(1) of Rs.91.19 crores. Although, the assessee has eliminated income by Rs.91.19 crores, but in its submission before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee had agreed to ignore such reduction because income cannot be reduced in the returns filed u/s 153A of the Act. The AO ignored reversal of bogus purchases, however, reversal of bogus sales was denied

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SKYWAY INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, whereas appeals of the revenue are par...

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21

bogus purchase ignoring the fact that the assessee failed failed failed to to to prove prove prove the the the genuineness genuineness genuineness of of of purchases, purchases, purchases, andany andany andany expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee expenditure in respect of which payments by account payee cheques

M/S. HGP COMMUNITY PVT. LT D SUCESSOR TO ALPHA ASSOCIATES,MUMBAI vs. DY. C.I.T. .CENT. CIR.-1(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, the ground

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant ()And Ms Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

section 143(3) of the Act were completed on were completed on 18/06/2015, wherein addition/ disallowance 18/06/2015, wherein addition/ disallowance M/s Alpha Associates ITA Nos. 1851 & 1846/M/2021 including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld. CIT(A) adjudicated the appeals

DCIT CENT. CIR 1(2) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. ALPHA ASSOCIATES, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant ()And Ms Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

section 143(3) of the Act were completed on were completed on 18/06/2015, wherein addition/ disallowance 18/06/2015, wherein addition/ disallowance M/s Alpha Associates ITA Nos. 1851 & 1846/M/2021 including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld. CIT(A) adjudicated the appeals

HGP COMMUNITY PVT.LTD SUCESSOR TO ALPHA ASSOCIATES,MUMBAI vs. DY.C.I.T.CENTRAL CIR -1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant ()And Ms Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

section 143(3) of the Act were completed on were completed on 18/06/2015, wherein addition/ disallowance 18/06/2015, wherein addition/ disallowance M/s Alpha Associates ITA Nos. 1851 & 1846/M/2021 including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld. CIT(A) adjudicated the appeals

DCIT CENT. CIR-1(2) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. ALPHA ASSOCIATES, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant ()And Ms Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

section 143(3) of the Act were completed on were completed on 18/06/2015, wherein addition/ disallowance 18/06/2015, wherein addition/ disallowance M/s Alpha Associates ITA Nos. 1851 & 1846/M/2021 including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld including disallowance for bogus purchases were made. The Ld. CIT(A) adjudicated the appeals