MR. CHANDERSHEKHAR KAPUR,MUMBAI vs. I.T.O. WARD - 16(1)(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhmr Chandershekhar Kapur Ito, Ward 16(1)(1), A-5, Beach House, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Gandhi Gram Road, Mumbai-400020 Juhu, Mumbai-400001. Vs. Pan: Aacpk9387Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi & Vipul Mody (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Pramod Nikalje (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.04.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Under Section 253 Of Income-Tax Act (‘Act’) Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

Capital Gain in subsequent years and that there was no impact on return income. In our view, the assessee has furnished a satisfactory explanation within the meaning of section 273B

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. SANATHANAGAR ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and all Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

gain -for squaring off and consolidation of receivable and payable, -operational efficiency, ease of MIS - for business exigencies to clear the transactions expeditiously and without any commercial loan. It was further submitted that: - All journal entries are genuine with corresponding journal entries in books of sister concerns. - At no point of time there was any cash transaction with the sister

RAMA SIVARAMAN ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 3(2), MUMBAI

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

capital gains of INR.63,50,000/- made in the hands of the Assessee with the directions to the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Assessee would be at liberty to place before Assessing Officers such document/details/agreements as the Assessee may deem fit in support of its contents. Since, we have

RAMA SIVARAMAN,MUMBAI vs. AO WARD 3(2) , THANE

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

capital gains of INR.63,50,000/- made in the hands of the Assessee with the directions to the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Assessee would be at liberty to place before Assessing Officers such document/details/agreements as the Assessee may deem fit in support of its contents. Since, we have

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4),MUMBAI., PRATISHTHA BHAVAN, MUMBAI. vs. ARUN SUBRAHMANYAM, MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed”

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyal

capital gain. The revised computation was duly filed which is also enclosed in the assessee‟s paper book page 2. The Ld.AR further relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(A). The relevant para of page 9 is duly annexed herewith: - “7.2 In this regard, during the course of appellate proceedings, the Ld. A.R. has argued that at the time

MRS. SONAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) RANGE-3, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner Of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4Th Vs. Income Tax (Tds) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aqops1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner Of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (Tds) 5Thfloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aadps0777K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Raveevwaglay, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2019

capital bonds to the extent allowed and had paid the tax on the balance amount. As such, there was no revenue loss and hence penalty u/s 271C was un-called for having regard to section 273B of the Act. It is stated that the relevant documents of the sellers showing amount paid to them having been offered by them under

MRS.TARULATA SHAH,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) RANGE-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Sonal Shah Joint Commissioner Of 17/18, Swastik Bldg. 4Th Vs. Income Tax (Tds) Floor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aqops1855M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mrs. Tarulata Shah Joint Commissioner Of 21/22, Swastik Bldg. Vs. Income Tax (Tds) 5Thfloor, N.S. Road, No. 1. Range-3, Mumbai. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aadps0777K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Raveevwaglay, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2019

capital bonds to the extent allowed and had paid the tax on the balance amount. As such, there was no revenue loss and hence penalty u/s 271C was un-called for having regard to section 273B of the Act. It is stated that the relevant documents of the sellers showing amount paid to them having been offered by them under

M/S JUST DIAL LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 9(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri G. Manjunathajust Dial Ltd (Formerly Dcit-9(2) Known As Just Dial Pvt.Ltd.) Now Dcit 12(3)(1) M-501-B, Palm Court Room No.147B Complex, Above D-Mart Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Near Goregaon Sport Club, Mumbai-400 020 New Link Road, Malad (W) Mumbai-400 064 Pan: Aaca8049G Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah (Ar) Respondent By: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 04.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.04.2019

gain of Rs. 38,73,000/- and after deduction of written down value (WDV) of Rs. 20,86,700/-, the assessee incurred loss of Rs. 36,08,634/- against the Portfolio investments with Prudential ICICI. The Loss of Rs. 36,08,634/- in portfolio investment was debited in the profit and loss account while doing so inadvertently and through oversight