ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

bogus purchase, without appreciating that assessee is not at all eligible for deduction u/s. 801A(4) as the agreement entered into by the assessee with various government authorities is for contractual work and not to develop / operate and maintain any infrastructure facilities to which deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(i) is intended to." 5. "On the facts and in the circumstances

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

bogus purchase, without appreciating that assessee is not at all eligible for deduction u/s. 801A(4) as the agreement entered into by the assessee with various government authorities is for contractual work and not to develop / operate and maintain any infrastructure facilities to which deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(i) is intended to." 5. "On the facts and in the circumstances

UNITY INFRASPORJECTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 8(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7270 & 7075/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2013-14)

bogus purchases on the taxable income, Ld. CIT(A) might not have given importance to verify the relevant documents submitted by the assessee before him as well as AO and since, assessee has already got the benefit from the order of Ld. CIT(A), therefore we choose not to disturb the findings of Ld. CIT(A). 24 Further, with regard

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that the telescoping benefit will lead to double relief as the Assessee has claimed deduction u/s 801A(4) of the Act. 5. That a copy of Form no. 36 so filed by the Revenue Authorities was served on the Assessee on 23.07.2018. Page No. 39 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

bogus purchases without appreciating the fact that the telescoping benefit will lead to double relief as the Assessee has claimed deduction u/s 801A(4) of the Act. 5. That a copy of Form no. 36 so filed by the Revenue Authorities was served on the Assessee on 23.07.2018. Page No. 39 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018

ACIT -3(4) , MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice Preside & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

bogus or sham, we do not find any merits in findings of learned CIT(A) in upholding levy of interest on excess share application money refunded, by treating the same as loan. Therefore, we direct the AO/TPO to delete the adjustment on account of levy of interest on excess share application money refunded. As a result, grounds

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. CIT-CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice Preside & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

bogus or sham, we do not find any merits in findings of learned CIT(A) in upholding levy of interest on excess share application money refunded, by treating the same as loan. Therefore, we direct the AO/TPO to delete the adjustment on account of levy of interest on excess share application money refunded. As a result, grounds

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 1534 of the I.T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" ii. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation

THE DY COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1) ., MUMBAI vs. RPS INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 153A of the I.T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" ii. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S PRITI CONSTRUCTION , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

801A, hence the issue as to whether addition can be made in absence of incriminating material under the provision has not been decided conclusively by Hon'ble Supreme Court." iii.&iv Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the M/s. Priti Construction, Mumbai. addition of bogus purchase expenses

THE DY.COMM. OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1) ., MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHAH & PARIKH, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Dcit, Vs. M/S Shah & Parikh Central Circle 5(1), 2, Vallabh Niwas, Room No. 1928, 19Th Malviya Road, Floor, Air India Bldg, Vile Parle(E), Nariman Point, Mumbai-400057 Mumbai – 400021. Pan/Gir No. : Aajfs4684D Appellant .. Respondent

801A, hence the issue as to whether addition can be made in absence of incriminating material under the provision has not been decided conclusively by Hon'ble Supreme Court." 3. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,91,194/- on account of bogus

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SPECO INFRASTRUCTURE, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

section 153A of the I.T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation

DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue\nare dismissed

801A\"\n17. Further in order to support that assessee was\n‘developer', it was argued that assessee being the\n9\nआयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण\nINCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nΙ.Τ.Α. No. 4940/Mum/2024\nI.T.A. No. 4942/Mum/2024\nΙ.Τ.Α. No. 4944/Mum/2024\ncompany has met out the basic requirement for claiming\ndeduction and the activities of construction of the road\nand 'widening

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AIR INDIA BUILDING, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. PRATIBHA INDUSTRIES LTD , KURLA WEST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

section 801A(4) of the IT Act, 1961.” 3. None appeared on behalf of the respondent-assessee despite service of notice. Accordingly, appeal is being decided on the basis of material on record. 4. The brief facts are that in this case return of income was filed on 30/11/2015 declaring total income of Rs.’Nil’ after claiming deduction u/s. 80IA

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

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

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Dcit, Vs. M/S Rps Priti Jv, Central Circle 5(1), C-113, Shyamkamal Room No. 1928, 19Th Bldg, 27 Tejpal Road, Floor, Air India Bldg, Agarwal Market, Vile Nariman Point, Parle (E), Mumbai – 400021. Mumbai-400057. Pan/Gir No. : Aabar7230F Appellant .. Respondent

section 153A of the 1. T. Act on the grounds that no incriminating material was found during the course of search proceedings?" 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing

JT. COMM OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , CC - 7(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. RAJAMUNDRY EXPRESSWAY PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Us :-

801A is available only for development of the new infrastructure facility. 4. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was correct in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that the assessee company was a mere paper company and not a developer. 5. On the facts and the circumstances

AQUA TECH SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PCIT (CENTRAL)-3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Acccountant Member

bogus transactions, receipts from such transactions and the profit element on such contract receipts from L&T directly affects the genuineness of the corresponding purchase costs and claim of deduction u/s 801A(4) of the Act which remained unverified during the course of reassessment proceedings Hence, element of loss of revenue is present in reassessment order passed

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT-2, MUMBAI

In the result, the ITA No

801A(9) restricts only allowability of deduction and not "computation of deduction". 80. The ld CIT(A) has expressed the view that the assessee has adopted two different parameters for computing deductions u/s 10AA ITA Nos.1645 & 2876/Mum/2019 ITA Nos.2344 & 3945/Mum/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Page 15 of 105 and u/s 80IB(9) of the Income