MEENA HASMUKH SAVLA,MATUNGA MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is\nallowed

69A to 69D though he has stated to apply tax rate as\nper section 115BBE.\n\n8. 6. 4. If the inference is drawn that ld. AO has made a\ndisallowance of claim of exemption by the assessee u/s 10(38),\nthen, first and foremost, his statement of applying the rate of\n60% under section 115BBE does not hold good

VINAY PARMANAND HARIANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT), WARD-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vinay Parmanand Hariani, Ito, Int. Taxation Ward 2(2)(1), Kempinski Private Residences Room No. 1725, 17Th Floor, Air Vs. Unit 40F Dki Jakarta, 10310 India Building, Nariman Point, Indonesia. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabph 4179 A Appellant Respondent

Capital Gain without providing the information collected directly by the AO to Gain without providing the information collected directly by the AO to Gain without providing the information collected directly by the AO to the assessee, when it is specifically requested by the assessee and the assessee, when it is specifically requested by the assessee and the assessee, when

THE ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), MUMBAI

3012/Mum/2025

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

section 69A of the Act. 10. Based on this reasoning, the Assessing Officer made substantial additions running into several crores, dividing them into three distinct heads first, those considered as capital receipts subject to tax under the head ―Capital Gains

PREETI CHIRANIA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 28(2)(4), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy Svs. Ito, Ward – 28(2)(4) Preeti Chirania 309, 3Rd Floor, Tower No. Flat No.3, 1St Floor, 6, Vashi Rly Stn., Mangesh Santa Durga Commercial Complex, Chs, Sector – 17, Nerul Vashi Navi Mumbai – 400 (E), Navi Mumbai – 400 703. 706. Pan/Gir No. Akbpc0636M (Applicant) (Respondent)

69A of the Act overlooking the material information and evidences filed by the assessee in the proceedings. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has furnished the information with evidences of the purchase price, financial statements, and summary of shares sold in F.Y 2014- 15, Ledger account, copies of bank statement, copy of contract notes for sale of impugned shares, demat

ANJU CHIRANIA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalanju Chirania, Vs. Ito, Ward –4(1)(3), 301, Sona Chambers, Room No. 637, 507/509, Jss Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Chira Bazar, Marine Lines, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Afcpc9073Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

69A on account of long-term capital gain on transfer of shares, which was based on generic findings of investigation wing, without there being any specific finding against the bonafide investment and sale by the appellant through online platform of recognized stock exchange through the SEBI registered stock broker. 5. On the facts and the circumstances of the case

GOVIND CORPORATION ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands\ndismissed

capital gain, which had been claimed by the\nassessee as exempt under section 10(38), were sham\ntransactions. It was held that it was a case of bogus long-term\ncapital gain obtained through brokers and that the assessee\nhad used colourable device for avoidance of tax. The receipt of\nRs.23,68,313/- was deemed to be income under section

CHITRA AVDHESH MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 33 (1) (3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands\ndismissed

capital gain, which had been claimed by the\nassessee as exempt under section 10(38), were sham\ntransactions. It was held that it was a case of bogus long-term\ncapital gain obtained through brokers and that the assessee\nhad used colourable device for avoidance of tax. The receipt of\nRs.23,68,313/- was deemed to be income under section

THE ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), MUMBAI

section 69A of the Act.\n\n10. Based on this reasoning, the Assessing Officer made substantial additions running into several crores, dividing them into three distinct heads first, those considered as capital receipts subject to tax under the head “Capital Gains

THE ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -8(1), MUMBAI

capital gains tax and others\ntreated as unexplained money under section 69A. Accordingly,\nld. AO made following additions:-\ni. Rs.5

ACIT, CIR-1(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. CHERYL ADVISORY PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2013-14

capital gain or Bogus loss. Further the appellant raised objection before the gain or Bogus loss. Further the appellant raised objection before the gain or Bogus loss. Further the appellant raised objection before the AO that, no addition can be made merely based on the alleged AO that, no addition can be made merely based on the alleged AO that

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY PVT LTD, MUMBAI

capital gains tax and others\ntreated as unexplained money under section 69A. Accordingly,\nld. AO made following additions:-\ni. Rs.5

ALKA RAJESH VANIGOTA,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-52, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Capital Gain from sale of shares and securities of M/s.\nGreencrest Financial Services Limited treated the same as bogus\ntransaction thereafter making the addition under section 69A

ALPESH K. AJMERA HUF ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 18(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands\nallowed

69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 -\nUnexplained moneys Assessment years\n2010-11 to 2012-13\nUnexplained moneys\n\n8\nITA No. 4041/Mum/2025\nAlpesh K. Ajmera HUF Mumbai.\n[ASSESSMENT\nYEARS 2010-11 ΤΟ\n2012-13]\nAssessee was dealing in share\nHe claimed\ntrading loss in script of M/s ‘P’- Revenue\nalleged that assessee had carried out\ntransactions in script

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(4), MUMBAI vs. SHRI YOGENDRA KANODIA, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalacit-Cc-5(4), Vs. Mrs.Rashmiyogendra Room No.1924,19Th Kanodia(Legal Heir Of Floor, Air Late Shri Yogendra Indiabuilding, Surajmal Kanodia) Nariman Point, 1 St Floor,Samudra Mumbai-400021. Tarang, Keluskarroad, Northshivajipark,Dadar, Mumbai-400028. Pan/Gir No. : Aadpk4863A Appellant .. Respondent

69A relating to maintenance of books of accounts itself is not applicable then the second condition becomes in-applicable. 6.3 Furtherit is submitted that the provision of Section 44AA of the Income Tax Act1961 relates to provision for maintenance of books of accounts by certain person carrying on profession or businessWe would like to provide the relevant extract of provision

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

capital gains tax and others\ntreated as unexplained money under section 69A. Accordingly,\nld. AO made following additions:-\ni. Rs.5

THE ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -8(1), MUMBAI

capital gains tax and others\ntreated as unexplained money under section 69A. Accordingly,\nld. AO made following additions:-\ni. Rs.5

THE ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), MUMBAI

capital gains tax and others\ntreated as unexplained money under section 69A. Accordingly,\nld. AO made following additions:-\ni. Rs.5

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY PVT LTD, MUMBAI

capital gains tax and others\ntreated as unexplained money under section 69A. Accordingly,\nld. AO made following additions:-\n\ni. Rs.5