ACIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. FIROZ TIN FACTORY, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Sanjay Garg, (Jm) सर्वश्री बी.आर.बास्करन, ऱेखा सदस्य एर्ुं श्री संजम गगग, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष आमकय अऩीर सं /I.T.A. No.6224/Mum/2012 (ननधधगयण वषग / Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/S Firoz Tin Factory, बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Ground Floor, Rock Cliff, Tax 19(3), Vs. Opp Joggers Park, Piramal Chambers, Bandra (W), Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400050 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं /I.T.A. No.6756/Mum/2012 (ननधधगयण वषग / Assessment Year : 2010-11) बनाम/ M/S Firoz Tin Factory, Asstt. Commissioner Of Ground Floor, Rock Cliff, Income Tax 19(3), Vs. Opp Joggers Park, Piramal Chambers, Bandra (W), Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400050 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थधमी रेखध सं./जीआइआय सं./Pan :Aaaff6356L अऩीरधथी ओय से / Assessee By Shri Girish Dave प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Revenue By Shri G M Doss सुनवधई की तधयीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2015 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date Of Pronouncement :22.01.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran:

Capital gain. 13. During the course of appellate proceedings before Ld CIT(A), the assessee submitted that it had never claimed depreciation on the Kalina Property. It was further submitted that the constructions carried on the Kalina property consisted of land filling & leveling, construction of a compound wall and a watchman cabin. It was submitted that the assessing officer

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR DIGILINK LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

gains of eligible business for the first five years and upto 30% for the remaining five years in the ten consecutive assessment years out of the fifteen years starting from the time the enterprise started its operation. The legislature having ousted applicability of sub-section (1) and (2) in the opening sentence brought in for the purposes of time line

MAHEK CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS) 2(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Mahek Construction, The Income Tax Officer (Tds)-2(3), Office No. 7 & 8, Room No. 708, 7Th Floor, Patidar Complex, K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Kannamwar Nagar No. 2, Vs. Building, Charni Road, Vikhroli (East), Mumbai - 400002 Mumbai - 400083 Pan: Aanfm5785D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Ritika Agarwal (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Suman Kumar (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 19/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 11/04/2018

capital gain u/s 45 of the Act in the hands of the lessor (appellant). 5. Because, ld. CIT (A) should have adjudicated the appeal on the basis of statement of facts and grounds of appeal filed instead of dismissing it in limine. 4. The assessee has moved an application for condonation of delay of 256 days in filing the present

M/S MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

capital gains tax: It is an undisputed position that respondent assessee is an investment company and had invested by purchasing a substantial number of shares and thereby securing right to management. Possibility of sale of shares by private placement etc. cannot be ruled out and is not all improbability. Dividend may or may not be declared. Dividend is declared

VODAFONE DIGILINK LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NEW DELHI

gains\nof eligible business for the first five years and upto 30%\nfor the remaining five years in the ten consecutive\n assessment years out of the fifteen years starting from the\ntime the enterprise started its operation. The legislature\nhaving ousted applicability of sub-section (1) and (2) in\nthe opening sentence brought in for the purposes of time

ITO (TDS) RG 2(2), MUMBAI vs. KAMDHENU BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals filed by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

section 194I of the Act. It is the substance of the transaction which gains precedence and supremacy over form or nomenclature. g) Also, it is immaterial whether the CIDCO has shown this payment as a revenue receipt or as a capital

ITO (TDS) RG 2(2), MUMBAI vs. KAMDHENU BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals filed by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

section 194I of the Act. It is the substance of the transaction which gains precedence and supremacy over form or nomenclature. g) Also, it is immaterial whether the CIDCO has shown this payment as a revenue receipt or as a capital

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

Capital Gain" in the return of income. The SRA has also clarified that no consideration has been paid to the assessee against any redevelopment. Therefore, the AO while completing the assessment under section 148 did not make any addition towards the reason for which the reopening was done. However, during the assessment proceedings, the AO found that a survey Shivalik

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

Capital Gain" in the return of income. The SRA has also clarified that no consideration has been paid to the assessee against any redevelopment. Therefore, the AO while completing the assessment under section 148 did not make any addition towards the reason for which the reopening was done. However, during the assessment proceedings, the AO found that a survey Shivalik

STOCK TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT OSD-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhstock Traders Private Ltd. Acit (Osd)-2(3) 63, Bombay Samachar Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400001. Mumbai-400020. Vs. Pan: Aaacs7235A Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Nishant Somaiya (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 03.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

Capital Gain’. 18. In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed. 10 ITA No. 2254 Mum 2011-Stock Traders Private Ltd. 19. Ground No.6 relates to Car Hire Charges. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee was not liable to deduct TDS as the amount was less than Rs. 1.20 Lakhs as the provisions of section

NATHANI PAREKH CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS) - 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

194I, section 194IC which was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2017 is clearly applicable and that the tax ought to have been under the said section. Accordingly the AO passed the order under section 201(1) / 201(1A) of the Act for all the assessment treating the assessee as an assessee in default. Nathani Parekh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. 5. On further appeal

NATHANI PAREKH CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS) - 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

194I, section 194IC which was inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2017 is clearly applicable and that the tax ought to have been under the said section. Accordingly the AO passed the order under section 201(1) / 201(1A) of the Act for all the assessment treating the assessee as an assessee in default. Nathani Parekh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. 5. On further appeal

ITO WD 11(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. SALIENT TRADERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result , appeal of the assessee for A

capital compensation paid. A copy of agreement signed towards this deal was also submitted. Further, these expenses provided are spread over for a period beyond the financial year 2011-12 and are not limited to the A Y under consideration only. In this regard it is the submission of the assessee that since the entire income of Rs. 45 crores

ADDL CIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

Capital Management(P) Ltd. in ITA No.8057/Mum/2003 dated 20.10.2008 upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits, that this issue is directly covered in favour of the assessee by the following orders of the Tribunal : 1) M/s. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. ACIT

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

Capital Management(P) Ltd. in ITA No.8057/Mum/2003 dated 20.10.2008 upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits, that this issue is directly covered in favour of the assessee by the following orders of the Tribunal : 1) M/s. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. ACIT

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

Capital Management(P) Ltd. in ITA No.8057/Mum/2003 dated 20.10.2008 upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits, that this issue is directly covered in favour of the assessee by the following orders of the Tribunal : 1) M/s. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. ACIT

ADDL CIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

Capital Management(P) Ltd. in ITA No.8057/Mum/2003 dated 20.10.2008 upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits, that this issue is directly covered in favour of the assessee by the following orders of the Tribunal : 1) M/s. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. ACIT

DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

Capital Management(P) Ltd. in ITA No.8057/Mum/2003 dated 20.10.2008 upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits, that this issue is directly covered in favour of the assessee by the following orders of the Tribunal : 1) M/s. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. ACIT

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. C.I.T. RANGE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove

Capital Management(P) Ltd. in ITA No.8057/Mum/2003 dated 20.10.2008 upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submits, that this issue is directly covered in favour of the assessee by the following orders of the Tribunal : 1) M/s. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. ACIT