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

section 3 of Taxation and other axation and other laws (relaxation of certain laws (relaxation of certain provisions) ordinance, 2020, by ordinance, 2020, by way of notification issued, the time limit the time limit for passing the assessment order passing the assessment order was extended up to 30/09/2021. He submitted that though the 30/09/2021. He submitted that though the 30/09/2021

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) MUMBAI , PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 115JB of the Act is lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable to pay tax computed as per normal to pay tax computed as per normal provisions of the Act,” provisions

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 (4) MUMBAI, PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 115JB of the Act is lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable to pay tax computed as per normal to pay tax computed as per normal provisions of the Act,” provisions

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 115JB of the Act is lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable to pay tax computed as per normal to pay tax computed as per normal provisions of the Act,” provisions

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 115JB of the Act is lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable to pay tax computed as per normal to pay tax computed as per normal provisions of the Act,” provisions

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 115JB of the Act is lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable to pay tax computed as per normal to pay tax computed as per normal provisions of the Act,” provisions

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) MUMBAI, PRATISHTHA BHAVAN MUMBAI vs. ASHTECH INDIA PVT LTD (E-FILING), ASHTECH HOUSE MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 115JB of the Act is lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable to pay tax computed as per normal to pay tax computed as per normal provisions of the Act,” provisions

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 115JB of the Act is lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable to pay tax computed as per normal to pay tax computed as per normal provisions of the Act,” provisions

M/S ASHTECH (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI CITY vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 115JB of the Act is lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable lesser than the tax under normal provisions, the assessee is liable to pay tax computed as per normal to pay tax computed as per normal provisions of the Act,” provisions

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 270A of the Act could be levied on the Assessee in view of the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rajendra Sadashiv Patil Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [ITA No.669/Pune/2022]. It was further submitted that relevant documents and details submitted by the Assessee in relation to the alleged bogus purchases during the assessment

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 270A of the Act could be levied on the Assessee in view of the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rajendra Sadashiv Patil Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [ITA No.669/Pune/2022]. It was further submitted that relevant documents and details submitted by the Assessee in relation to the alleged bogus purchases during the assessment

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 270A of the Act could be levied on the Assessee in view of the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rajendra Sadashiv Patil Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [ITA No.669/Pune/2022]. It was further submitted that relevant documents and details submitted by the Assessee in relation to the alleged bogus purchases during the assessment

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 270A of the Act could be levied on the Assessee in view of the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rajendra Sadashiv Patil Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [ITA No.669/Pune/2022]. It was further submitted that relevant documents and details submitted by the Assessee in relation to the alleged bogus purchases during the assessment

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 270A of the Act could be levied on the Assessee in view of the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rajendra Sadashiv Patil Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [ITA No.669/Pune/2022]. It was further submitted that relevant documents and details submitted by the Assessee in relation to the alleged bogus purchases during the assessment

DCIT-3(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 270A of the Act could be levied on the Assessee in view of the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rajendra Sadashiv Patil Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [ITA No.669/Pune/2022]. It was further submitted that relevant documents and details submitted by the Assessee in relation to the alleged bogus purchases during the assessment

DCIT 3(1)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RELCON INFRAPROJECTS LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

Section 270A of the Act could be levied on the Assessee in view of the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Rajendra Sadashiv Patil Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [ITA No.669/Pune/2022]. It was further submitted that relevant documents and details submitted by the Assessee in relation to the alleged bogus purchases during the assessment

ITO-19(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. S P INTERNATIONAL, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No.6580/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2010-11

bogus purchases) were brought to tax in the hands of the Assessee. There is no change in the fact and circumstances in the previous year relevant to the assessment year before us. On perusal of assessment order, we find that the addition has been made under Section 69C of the Act. We note that in paragraph 12 of the Assessment

DANCO ENTERPRISES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 9(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for stati...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

section 69C of the Act on account of purchases of various materials from M/s account of purchases of various materials from M/s account of purchases of various materials from M/s Basant Marketing Private Limited by treating them as Basant Marketing Private Limited by treating them as Basant Marketing Private Limited by treating them as alleged bogus purchases without appreciating