MRS SUNITA SHYAM MALPANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 25(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesunita Shyam Malpani, Vs. Ito 25(1)(3), 701,Plot No.117, Room No.703, Karanapartment, Kautilyabhavan, Lokhandwalacomplex, Bandra Bkc, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400053. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं.Pan/Gir No.Acppm8552J (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

capital gain. The Ld. A/R has filed all the possible documentary evidence relating to purchase and sale of the stock on which the LTCG was earned. All the details are filed in assessee’s Paper Book and the same were filed before the Ld. AO. The details filed are as under: S.No. Particulars Paper Book Page No. 1. Copy

ABALABBA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO-12(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

69B without giving any finding as to how the said Sections were applicable to the facts of the Appellant's case. 4) Both the lower authorities erred in ignoring decisions of the High Courts led before them. 5) Both the lower authorities erred in ignoring the fact that under a Family Settlement, there is no transfer of property. 6) Having

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

Capital gains and other sources No income from business or profession is ever earned by the assessee any time during the year under consideration as well in any of the earlier years. This can be substantiated by referring the computation of total income for the year under consideration as well of the earlier years. Mrs.Rashmi Yogendra Kanodia (legal heir

RITESH AGGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO - 16(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal, Ito-16(3)(3), D 704, Imperial Heights Best Colony Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Road, Goregaon West, Opp. Vs. Karve Road, New Marine Lines, Goregaon Fire Bridge, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400104. Pan No. Aadpa 6828 R Appellant Respondent

capital gain. The agreement was still pending and as he was not interested to The agreement was still pending and as he was not interested to The agreement was still pending and as he was not interested to invest more on that flat, stamp duty for same was not paid. It was invest more on that flat, stamp duty

KOMAL KUMARPAL SHAH,KALYAN THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2011-12 Komal Kumarpal Shah Income Tax Officer 403, Zozwala Complex, Ward 3 (2) Vs. Agra Road, Rani Mansion, Kalyan. - 421301 Murbad Road- 421301. Pan: Azups5227N (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For : Assessee By : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, C. A. : Shri R. R. Makwana- Sr. D.R. Revenue By : 23 . 07 . 2024 Date Of Hearing : 22 . 08 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement

section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was shown in the return of income. Therefore, the appellant failed to give explanation/documentary evidence that this corresponding capital gain in respect of this transaction was reflected in the return of income Hence, keeping in view the Assessing Officer's observation that the appellant had not shown this penny stock transaction

FINQUEST FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AY

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.733/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.734/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Finquest Financial Solutions बिधम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Cc-3(4), Vs. 602, 6Th Floor, Boston Room No.1915, 19Th House, Suren Road, Floor, Air India Building, Andheri (E), Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 093 Mumbai-400 021 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacf8117G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri V. G. Ginde & Kumar Kale Revenue By: Shri Ankush Kapoor, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 16.01.2023, For Ay. 2018-19 & Ay. 2017-18 Respectively. 2. As Per The Request Of The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ar) Of The Assessee, First Of All, We Will Adjudicate The Appeal For Ay. 2018-19 First. 3. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Does Not Press Ground No. 1 Which Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Rs.19,25,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer (Ao), Being Disallowance Of Fees Paid To The Roc. Therefore, This Ground Of Appeal Of Assessee Stands Dismissed. (Ay. 2018-19 & Ay. 2017-18) Finquest Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

capital gain of Rs.38,89,667/- in respect of cancellation of ‘Purchase Agreement’ of eight (8) flats at “Sriniwas Residency” and while computing the LTCG in the return of income, the appellant had claimed indexed cost of acquisition based on the investment recorded originally in the books of account i.e. Rs.7,10,75,000. However, in the light of subsequent

FINQUEST FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AY

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.733/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.734/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Finquest Financial Solutions बिधम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Cc-3(4), Vs. 602, 6Th Floor, Boston Room No.1915, 19Th House, Suren Road, Floor, Air India Building, Andheri (E), Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 093 Mumbai-400 021 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacf8117G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri V. G. Ginde & Kumar Kale Revenue By: Shri Ankush Kapoor, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/06/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 16.01.2023, For Ay. 2018-19 & Ay. 2017-18 Respectively. 2. As Per The Request Of The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ar) Of The Assessee, First Of All, We Will Adjudicate The Appeal For Ay. 2018-19 First. 3. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Does Not Press Ground No. 1 Which Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Rs.19,25,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer (Ao), Being Disallowance Of Fees Paid To The Roc. Therefore, This Ground Of Appeal Of Assessee Stands Dismissed. (Ay. 2018-19 & Ay. 2017-18) Finquest Financial Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

capital gain of Rs.38,89,667/- in respect of cancellation of ‘Purchase Agreement’ of eight (8) flats at “Sriniwas Residency” and while computing the LTCG in the return of income, the appellant had claimed indexed cost of acquisition based on the investment recorded originally in the books of account i.e. Rs.7,10,75,000. However, in the light of subsequent

SUHASIT STAR TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-15(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and that of\nthe Revenue are dismissed

sections 69, 69A, 69B and 69C being treated separately, because\nsuch deemed income is not income from salary house property, profits and\ngains of business or profession, or capital gains

DCIT-CC-6(1), MUMBAI, BKC, KAUTILYA BHAWAN vs. PRASHANT PRAKASH NILAWAR, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue, being ITA

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

capital gains, and other sources. 5. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out on 23.09.2021 in the case of Rucha Group. The assessee was also covered in the said search action. Subsequently, the case was centralised with the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-6(1), Mumbai, by virtue of the CCIT

PRASHANT PRAKASH NILAWAR ,PUNE vs. ACIT CIRCLE-6(1), NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue, being ITA

capital gains, and other sources. 5. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was carried out on 23.09.2021 in the case of Rucha Group. The assessee was also covered in the said search action. Subsequently, the case was centralised with the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-6(1), Mumbai, by virtue of the CCIT

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

In the result, appeals for these two years are also allowed

capital gains addition of Rs.2,14,50,000 cannot be\nupheld and are hereby deleted.\n7.1.\nFor the purpose of bringing assurance on the fact that issue\nrelating to land at Dhokawade, Alibaug existed even in the case of Shri\nTarun Nandkumar Seksaria (supra), reference can be made to ground\nno.2 of his appeal which deals with the addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

gains from business or profession” determined on the basis of Income and Expenditure Account for the year ended 31-3-2017. We give hereunder brief details of the same for your ready reference:- Income and Expenditure Account – year ended 31-3-2017 Particular Amount Particular Amount (` ) (` ) Various 53,41,22 Consultancy 6,66,11, Expenses 9 Income 633 Net Surplus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

gains from business or profession” determined on the basis of Income and Expenditure Account for the year ended 31-3-2017. We give hereunder brief details of the same for your ready reference:- Income and Expenditure Account – year ended 31-3-2017 Particular Amount Particular Amount (` ) (` ) Various 53,41,22 Consultancy 6,66,11, Expenses 9 Income 633 Net Surplus

SHAKUNTALA KAMBLE (LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF PREMCHAND KAMBLE),THANE vs. DCIT -CENT. CIR `, THANE

gains of business shall be computed in accordance with the provisions contained in sections 30 to 43D. Section 40 provides for certain disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under other sections. The computation under ITA Nos. 1764-1767 & 1911-1912/Mum/2021 & ITA No. 1394-1396/Mum/2020

GOVIND CORPORATION ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals for these two years are also allowed

capital gains addition of Rs.2,14,50,000 cannot be\nupheld and are hereby deleted.\n7.1. For the purpose of bringing assurance on the fact that issue\nrelating to land at Dhokawade, Alibaug existed even in the case of Shri\nTarun Nandkumar Seksaria (supra), reference can be made to ground\nno.2 of his appeal which deals with the addition

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. E I RESORTS AND CLUBS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

3213/Mum/2025

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

gains and unexplained money are devoid of factual and legal foundation. In the result, the additions sustained under the head “Unexplained Investment U/s 69A/69B” amounting to ₹2,58,50,000 in the case of E I Resorts and Clubs Private Limited, and under section 69A/69B in AY 2012-2013 and Rs 133,98,747 for AY 2020- 21 which

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. EI RESORTS & CLUBS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

3213/Mum/2025

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

gains and unexplained money are devoid of factual and legal foundation. In the result, the additions sustained under the head “Unexplained Investment U/s 69A/69B” amounting to ₹2,58,50,000 in the case of E I Resorts and Clubs Private Limited, and under section 69A/69B in AY 2012-2013 and Rs 133,98,747 for AY 2020- 21 which

EI RESORTS AND CLUBS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -8(1), MUMBAI

gains and unexplained money are devoid of\nfactual and legal foundation. In the result, the additions\nsustained under the head “Unexplained Investment U/s\n69A/69B" amounting to ₹2,58,50,000 in the case of E I\nResorts and Clubs Private Limited, and under Section\n69A/69B in AY 2012-2013 and Rs 133,98,747 for AY 2020-\n21 which