INCOME TAX OFFICER-13(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI KIRITBHAI K. THUMMAR, MUMBAI

In the result, assessee‟s cross objection is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 133(6), Income tax return copy, bank statements, ledger statements, source of funds and all the loan interest was paid and TDS was also deducted. Here also AO had doubted their creditworthiness in extending their loan. I had examined bank statement, source of funds and net worth of above persons. Networth of the above persons is as under

NILESH JANARDAN THAKUR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 25(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication, on merits. ITA 3738/Mum/2013 10. The assessee has raised common grounds of appeal for both the assessment years. For the sake of brevity, grounds of appeal for AY 2008-09 in ITA No.3738/Mum/2013 are reproduced below:- “1. On facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 1995-96 Dcit-2(2)(1), M/S State Bank Of India, R. No.545, Financial Reporting & बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan Taxation Department, 3Rd Vs. M.K. Road, Floor, Corporate Centre, Mumbai-400020 State Bank Bhavan, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacs8577K

condoned. 3. So far as, the issue of grant interest u/s 244A of the Act, the ld. counsel for the assessee, contended that this issue is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the Assessment Year 2001-02 & 2002-03, vide order dated 31/08/2015 in ITA Nos.6817, 6818, 6823 & 6824/Mum /2012

M/S N. G. GROUP ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-28(2)(, NAVI MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am M/S N.G. Group The Income Tax Officer Plot No.8, Sector 11 3Rd Floor, 6Th Tower, Off Juinagar Railway Station, Vsrccl, Vashi Vs. Sanpada, Navi Mumbai–400703 Navi Mumbai –400709 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaffn9159E Assessee By : Ms. Ritika Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 02.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 01-11-2022

condone the delay in filing of the appeal of 485 days. 010. Coming the facts of the case, assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of developing and building of residential and commercial premises. It filed its return of income on 30th September 2009 declaring nil income. Thereafter, assessment order under Section

KESARAM CHATARARAMJI CHOUDHARY ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 28(21)(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 () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2017-18

133(6) of the Act. Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary 3. On examination of the bank statements, the Assessing Officer On examination of the bank statements, the Assessing Officer On examination of the bank statements, the Assessing Officer observed that cash aggregating to ₹26,51,401/– had been deposited observed that cash aggregating to had been deposited

ORICON ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 20, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not admitted

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Orion Enterprises, Acit, Flat No.602B, Foreshore Central Circle-20, बनाम/ Apts, Juhu Tara Road, Mumbai Vs. Santacruz West, Mumbai-400049 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aabfo0229Q "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By None राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Subhacham Ram Cit-Dr

condone delay for sufficient cause on the facts and circumstances of each case.” The consistent view is that such question would be a question of fact simpliciter and would not be covered under the provisions of section 256 of the Act unless such exercise of discretion or conclusion arrived at was perverse or so illogical that no reasonable person could

RAHUL GANGARAM KANAGANDULA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-20(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI, MAHARASTRA

In the result, Appeal of assessee is allowed with above directions

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm Rahul Gangaram Kanagandula 203, Vikas Darshan, Income Tax Officer, Shankar Puppala Road, Ward 20(3)(1) 12Th Lane Nagpada, Vs. Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai Central, Mumbai-400 008 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Alepk1983F

133(6) of the Act was issued to the ICICI bank for obtaining the bank statement wherein it was found that assessee has not disclosed any income arising out of import and subsequent sale. Further, cash deposit amounting to ₹50 lacs were appearing in the bank statement of the assessee. The assessee was issued show cause notice six times

NIKHIL R. DHARIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-19(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2009-10 Nikhil R Dharia, Acit-19(2), B-7, Utkarsh Tilak Nagar, Matru Mandir, बनाम/ V. P. Road, Tardeo Road, Vs. Mumbai-400004 Mumbai-400007 "नधा"रती / Assessee राज"व / Revenue P.A. No.Addpd8065A

delay is condoned. 3. The next ground raised by the assessee, challenging the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act). The ld. counsel for the assessee, Ms. Neha Paranjape, did not press this ground, therefore, it is dismissed as not pressed. 4. The only effective ground agitated by the ld. counsel

SITU SHASTRI,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 20(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri M. Balaganesh

condonation of delay and considering the submissions of the learned Authorised Representative, we are satisfied that the delay in filing the present appeal is due to reasonable cause. Accordingly, we admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. 5. Brief facts are, the assessee is an individual. For the assessment year under dispute, he filed his return of income

BHAGATRAM GODHWANI ,MUMBAI vs. ITO - 10(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Bhagatram Godhwani, Income Tax Officer-10(3)(3), 165, 5-B, Sanjay Building No. 5, Aayakar Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, M.K. Road, Mital Industries Estate, Sakinaka, Mumbai-400020. Vs. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aabpg 3339 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anil Thakrar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Brajendra Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2022

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted. The parties were accordingly directed to argue the appeal. Bhagatram Godhwani 6.1 The ground Nos. 1 & 2 of the appeal are connected with the issue of the addition of unsecured loans amounting to ₹ 25 lakh made by the Assessing Officer in terms of section

MOHD GAFURUDDIN F. SIDDIQUE,MUMBAI vs. CIT 15, MUMBAI

The appeal is dismissed as not admitted

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2006-07 Mohd. Gafuruddin F. Siddiqui, Cit-15, Flat No.1, Gr. Flr, Saadath Mumbai बनाम/ Manzil, 35, Bora St. Null Vs. Bazar, Behind Safai Masjid, Mumbai-400003 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aapps1966C

condone delay for sufficient cause on the facts and circumstances of each case.” The consistent view is that such question would be a question of fact simpliciter and would not be covered under the provisions of section 256 of the Act unless such exercise of discretion or conclusion arrived at was perverse or so illogical that no reasonable person could

MODY INTERIORS PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-16 (3), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

condoning the delay of 40 days in filing of the Pt appeal being caused under the bonafide reasons and compelling circumstances beyond control of the appellant; 1.1 A humble prayer is made to direct Ld. CIT(A) to admit the appeal since the small delay of 40 days had occurred due to serious medical illness and ultimate death of appellant

ADDL CIT RG 15(1), MUMBAI vs. BHUMIRAJ CONSTRUCTIONS, NAVI MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 Jcit(Osd), M/S Bhumiraj Constructions Circle-15(1), D/5-6, Big Splash, बनाम/ Room No.104, Matru Mandir, Sector-17, Vs. 1St Floor, Tardeo Road, Navi Mumbai-400703 Mumbai-400007 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaffb3546H Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S Bhumiraj Constructions Jcit(Osd), D/5-6, Big Splash, Circle-15(1), बनाम/ Sector-17, Room No.104, Matru Mandir, Vs. Navi Mumbai-400703 1St Floor, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaffb3546H

133/- and accordingly levied the penalty at the rate of 10% which comes to Rs.43,25,013/-. It is noted that the major dispute was on account of allowability of deduction u/s 80IB(10). As mentioned earlier, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as this Tribunal (in preceding para of this order) has allowed the claimed deduction

ANOOPKUMAR DEVIDAS RAIMALANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO, CIR-18(1), MUMBAI

condone the delay of 119\ndays and admit the appeal for disposing off the same on merits.\n5. Assessee is in appeal before us and raised following grounds in its\nappeal:\n\"1. Confirming the addition of Rs. 8,60,124/- on account of\ninterest paid on Loans borrowed for purchase of Surat Property\nwhich was given on Rent

SANJIB SUDHIR PRADHAN,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

delay of 4 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned. 22. Ground No. 1, raised in assessee’s appeal, is general in nature and therefore, needs no separate adjudication. 23. Grounds no. 2 and 3 were not pressed during the hearing, therefore these grounds are dismissed as not pressed. 24. The issue arising in grounds

SANJIB SUDHIR PRADHAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO, 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

delay of 4 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned. 22. Ground No. 1, raised in assessee’s appeal, is general in nature and therefore, needs no separate adjudication. 23. Grounds no. 2 and 3 were not pressed during the hearing, therefore these grounds are dismissed as not pressed. 24. The issue arising in grounds

SEA FACE PARK CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2021-22 Sea Face Park Co. Ito Ward 19(3)(1) Operative Housing Piramal Chambers Society Limited Mumbai- 400012. 50, Bhulabhai Desai Vs. Road, Maharashtra- 400026. Pan: Aaaas3577R Appellant : Respondent

Section 80P(2) (d) of the Act by the CPC resulted in a demand of Rs.6,76,290/-. Sea Face Park Co. Operative Housing Society Limited; A. Y.2021-22 2.2. The assessee tried several times to file rectification application. However, no such option was available with the assessee on the income tax portal to apply for rectification

ITO 21(1)(4), MUMBAI vs. RAJUL P.PAREKH, MUMBAI

In the result, Department’s appeal and assessee’s cross objection are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

section 133(6), solely for that reason, the credit appearing in their name or part of purchases effected from them cannot be held to be non–genuine. If the Assessing Officer entertained any doubt with regard to the genuineness of these creditors, he could have made enquiry as the identity and income tax particulars of the concerned parties are available