STATE BANK OF INDIA HRMS DEPARTMENT,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)RANGE-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3111& 3112/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 State Bank Of India Hrms Acit (Tds) Rg-2(2), Department, Peddar Road, Vs. 4Th Floor, Cidco Tower No. 7, Mumbai-400014. Belapur Railway Station Complex-400614. Tan No. Mums 63193 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Desai & Mr. Sachin Lopes, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr

condone the delay for filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. appeal for adjudication on merit. 8.1 As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign leg is the ITAT G bench in decision in the case

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUM vs. ACIT-TDS-2(2), MUM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3111& 3112/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 State Bank Of India Hrms Acit (Tds) Rg-2(2), Department, Peddar Road, Vs. 4Th Floor, Cidco Tower No. 7, Mumbai-400014. Belapur Railway Station Complex-400614. Tan No. Mums 63193 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Desai & Mr. Sachin Lopes, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr

condone the delay for filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. appeal for adjudication on merit. 8.1 As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign leg is the ITAT G bench in decision in the case

STATE BANK OF INDIA- NRI BRANCH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-TDS-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3111& 3112/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 State Bank Of India Hrms Acit (Tds) Rg-2(2), Department, Peddar Road, Vs. 4Th Floor, Cidco Tower No. 7, Mumbai-400014. Belapur Railway Station Complex-400614. Tan No. Mums 63193 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Desai & Mr. Sachin Lopes, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr

condone the delay for filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. appeal for adjudication on merit. 8.1 As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign leg is the ITAT G bench in decision in the case

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUM vs. ACIT-TDS-2(2), MUM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3111& 3112/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 State Bank Of India Hrms Acit (Tds) Rg-2(2), Department, Peddar Road, Vs. 4Th Floor, Cidco Tower No. 7, Mumbai-400014. Belapur Railway Station Complex-400614. Tan No. Mums 63193 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Desai & Mr. Sachin Lopes, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr

condone the delay for filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. appeal for adjudication on merit. 8.1 As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign leg is the ITAT G bench in decision in the case

STATE BANK OF INDIA-RBO II THANE WESTERN BRANCH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-TDS-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3111& 3112/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 State Bank Of India Hrms Acit (Tds) Rg-2(2), Department, Peddar Road, Vs. 4Th Floor, Cidco Tower No. 7, Mumbai-400014. Belapur Railway Station Complex-400614. Tan No. Mums 63193 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Desai & Mr. Sachin Lopes, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr

condone the delay for filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. appeal for adjudication on merit. 8.1 As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign leg is the ITAT G bench in decision in the case

STATE BANK OF INDIA-ISB BRANCH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-TDS-2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3111& 3112/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 State Bank Of India Hrms Acit (Tds) Rg-2(2), Department, Peddar Road, Vs. 4Th Floor, Cidco Tower No. 7, Mumbai-400014. Belapur Railway Station Complex-400614. Tan No. Mums 63193 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Desai & Mr. Sachin Lopes, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr

condone the delay for filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. appeal for adjudication on merit. 8.1 As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign leg is the ITAT G bench in decision in the case

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUM vs. ACIT-TDS-2(2), MUM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3111& 3112/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 State Bank Of India Hrms Acit (Tds) Rg-2(2), Department, Peddar Road, Vs. 4Th Floor, Cidco Tower No. 7, Mumbai-400014. Belapur Railway Station Complex-400614. Tan No. Mums 63193 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Desai & Mr. Sachin Lopes, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr

condone the delay for filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. appeal for adjudication on merit. 8.1 As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign leg is the ITAT G bench in decision in the case

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUM vs. ACIT-TDS-2(2),, MUM

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3111& 3112/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13& 2013-14 State Bank Of India Hrms Acit (Tds) Rg-2(2), Department, Peddar Road, Vs. 4Th Floor, Cidco Tower No. 7, Mumbai-400014. Belapur Railway Station Complex-400614. Tan No. Mums 63193 E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Desai & Mr. Sachin Lopes, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr

condone the delay for filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. appeal for adjudication on merit. 8.1 As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign As far as taxability of the LTC containing foreign leg is the ITAT G bench in decision in the case

ASTEC LIFE SCIENCES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negim/S. Astec Lifesciences Ltd. D C I T - 2(1) 3Rd Floor, Godrej One Room No. 561, 5Th Floor Vs. Pirojshnagar,Vikroli (E) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaaca4832D Appellant Respondent

condone this delay both i.e. the meritorious proposition justifying admission of this belated appeal and the reasonable cause which has prevented in filing the appeal belatedly which were not disputed nor found frivolous, thus the delay was not held as deliberate or as a result of negligence and hence ought to have decided on merit as the issue was similar

STUDIO & ENTERTAINMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 11(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 S.J. Studio & Entertainment Ltd., The Acit, Range 11(1), Ground Floor, Hindustan Oil Mills 438, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Compound, Kherani Road, Saki Road, Naka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aajcs 0805 P Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rakesh Singh, Adv. : Revenue By Dr. Ujjwal Kumar Chavhan, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/12/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/02/2023

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. In our opinion, due to medical reasons stated in the affidavit by the director of the medical reasons stated in the affidavit by the director of the medical reasons stated in the affidavit by the director of the assessee company, the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause assessee company, the assessee was prevented

VAMA PVT LTD. [FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD] ,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CIRCLE- 5(3) , MUMBAI

Appeals are dismissed as infructuous

condonation of delay 336 days. The order of learned CIT(A) read as under :- “The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is the owner of Air Conditioned Show Room in a well known building " Kanchanjunga' on Pedder Road, Mumbai. The Brand Name is" VAMA. A part of the premises was given to M/s. Vama Appearls Indian

VAMA PVT LTD [FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD],MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 5 (3), MUMBAI

Appeals are dismissed as infructuous

condonation of delay 336 days. The order of learned CIT(A) read as under :- “The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is the owner of Air Conditioned Show Room in a well known building " Kanchanjunga' on Pedder Road, Mumbai. The Brand Name is" VAMA. A part of the premises was given to M/s. Vama Appearls Indian

VAMA PVT LTD. ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE-5 (3), MUMBAI

Appeals are dismissed as infructuous

condonation of delay 336 days. The order of learned CIT(A) read as under :- “The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is the owner of Air Conditioned Show Room in a well known building " Kanchanjunga' on Pedder Road, Mumbai. The Brand Name is" VAMA. A part of the premises was given to M/s. Vama Appearls Indian

MATRIX INDIA ENTERTAINMENT CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC -8(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals for 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 &

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ramlal Negi

133A of the Act on 24.01.2011. So the score the order of the AO is bad in law. Further so far as proceedings u/s 153C of the Act is concerned on the person other than the searched person, it is prerequisite that proper satisfaction is recorded by the AO of the searched person that some incriminating documents seized during search

TAURUS TRANSPORT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 13(2), MUMBAI

The Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

delay is condoned. 3. Now, we shall take up the appeal of the assessee on merit. The crux of arguments on behalf of the assessee is that the disallowance were made by the Ld. Assessing Officer on estimate basis and identically for Assessment Year 2007- 08 and 2008-09, the claim of the assessee was accepted though

TAURUS TRANSPORT,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 13(2), MUMBAI

The Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

delay is condoned. 3. Now, we shall take up the appeal of the assessee on merit. The crux of arguments on behalf of the assessee is that the disallowance were made by the Ld. Assessing Officer on estimate basis and identically for Assessment Year 2007- 08 and 2008-09, the claim of the assessee was accepted though

KANAIYALAL B SHAH,MUMBAI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 19(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhkanaiyalal B. Shah Jcit Range-19(2), 31, Jai Bhavani Society, Mumbai. Vs. 3 Rr Thakker Marg, Mumbai-400006. Pan: Aahpk4505D Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Divya Jeswant (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (Dr)

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. Now, we shall proceed to consider the appeal on merit. 5. Brief facts of the case as extracted from the order of lower authorities, leading to levy of penalty under section 272A(2)(c) are that assessment of assessee was reopened on the basis of information received by Government of India from

JAIMIN JEWELLERY EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-19(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Ms. Padmavathy S, Am Jaimin Jewellery Exports Private Acit-19(2) Limited Dcit, Circle-5(2)(1), Marine Lines, 52, Marble Arch, 5Th Floor, Mumbai-400 021 Vs. Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400 026

133A of the Act dated 01.10.2007 were undertaken and the assessee then declared additional income of Rs.1,36,74,755/- on account of unaccounted cash purchase of Rs.43,20,023/- and Rs.93,54,732/- on account of excess physical stock over and above the book stock was declared as ‘additional income’ by the assessee. The ld. A.O. made an addition