DCIT CENT. CIR. -7(3), MUMBAI vs. PALAVA DWELLERS PVT. LTD. , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 71-G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor C.P. Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent) Lodha Developers Limited Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. {Since Merged M/S. Palava Dwellers Pvt. Ltd.,} Central Circle – 7(3) 412, 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhman Chamber Room No. 655, 6Th Floor Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fort, Mumbai - 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabcl1117D (Appellant) (Respondent)

135] condoned delay of one day in uploading the return of income. The facts in this case, the assessee had uploaded its return sometime immediately past midnight on 15.10.2010 i.e. last date of filing return due to floods. The CBDT rejected the application seeking condonation of delay on the ground that there were no floods and hence, the assessee could

CAN PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Can Properties Pvt. Ito-9(2)(1), Ltd., Shop No. 13, Lumbini Mumbai-400020 बनाम/ Palace Chs Ltd., 91, Tejpal Vs. Road, Ville Parle East, Mumbai – 400 057 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aadcc 7832 L

section 23(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act). 2. During hearing, ld. counsel for the assessee Dr. P. Daniel invited my attention for condonation of delay of 135

MSEB HOLDING COMPANY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (HQ) (JUDL) TO THE CIT 14, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-13

condoning delay in filing the appeal. doning delay in filing the appeal. MSEB Holding Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 1181/M/2018 & 6.4 The appeal filed by the assessee is not admitted and rejected The appeal filed by the assessee is not admitted and rejected The appeal filed by the assessee is not admitted and rejected in limine without giving any finding

MSEB HOLDING COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-13

condoning delay in filing the appeal. doning delay in filing the appeal. MSEB Holding Co. Ltd. ITA Nos. 1181/M/2018 & 6.4 The appeal filed by the assessee is not admitted and rejected The appeal filed by the assessee is not admitted and rejected The appeal filed by the assessee is not admitted and rejected in limine without giving any finding

PRAJATMA TRADING COMPANY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhprajatma Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. Cit-7, (Now Merged With Sprit Textiles Room No. 620, Pvt. Ltd. W.E.F.01.10.2012), Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, 18Th Floor, A Wing, Marathon Vs. Mumbai-400020. Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aaacp8386K (Appellant) (Respondent) Prajatma Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-, Circle 7(1), 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (Now Merged With Sprit Textiles Pvt. Ltd. W.E.F.01.10.2012), M. K. Road, Vs. 135, Continental Building, Dr. Mumbai-400020. Ab. Road, Mumbai-400018 Pan: Aaacp8386K (Appellant) (Respondent)

135, Continental Building, Dr. Mumbai-400020. AB. Road, Mumbai-400018 PAN: AAACP8386K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Dalpat Shah with B.S. : Sharma (AR) Revenue by : Shri H.N. Singh (CIT-DR) Date of hearing : 28.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.09.2017 Order Under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. These two appeal by assessee under section

PRAJATMA TRADING CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT -7, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhprajatma Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. Cit-7, (Now Merged With Sprit Textiles Room No. 620, Pvt. Ltd. W.E.F.01.10.2012), Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, 18Th Floor, A Wing, Marathon Vs. Mumbai-400020. Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aaacp8386K (Appellant) (Respondent) Prajatma Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-, Circle 7(1), 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (Now Merged With Sprit Textiles Pvt. Ltd. W.E.F.01.10.2012), M. K. Road, Vs. 135, Continental Building, Dr. Mumbai-400020. Ab. Road, Mumbai-400018 Pan: Aaacp8386K (Appellant) (Respondent)

135, Continental Building, Dr. Mumbai-400020. AB. Road, Mumbai-400018 PAN: AAACP8386K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Dalpat Shah with B.S. : Sharma (AR) Revenue by : Shri H.N. Singh (CIT-DR) Date of hearing : 28.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.09.2017 Order Under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. These two appeal by assessee under section

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

JAY MAHARASHTRA CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(1)(5), MUM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowe

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble () Assessment Year: 2020-21 Jay Maharashtra Co-Op. Credit Ito 19(1)(5), Society Ltd., Piramal Chamber, Lal Baug, Vs. Room No. 1, Ground Floor, Shiv Parel, Bhavan, Bldg. No. 25, 4Th Mumbai-400012. Kamathipura, Mumbai Central, Mumbai-400 008. Pan No. Aafaj 3385 B Appellant Respondent

section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, as applicable to appellate proceedings under Limitation Act, 1963, as applicable to appellate proceedings under Limitation Act, 1963, as applicable to appellate proceedings under the Act. Accordingly, i the Act. Accordingly, in the interest of substantial justice, the delay n the interest of substantial justice, the delay is condoned, and the appeal

FIRMENICH AROMATICS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman(Virtual Hearing In Virtual Court No.2)

condonation of delay raised another objection that the appeal of revenue is not maintainable and submitted that sub-section (2A) of section 253 was inserted by Finance Act 2014 with retrospective effect from 01.06.2013, however, the same was omitted by Finance Act 2016 from 01.06.2016. It was argued that, the sub-section (2A) was omitted from the statue

NEW VASANT APARTMENT CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CPC BANGALORE, WARD 27(2)(1), MUMBAI, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI BR BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

135/-. The intimation order u/s. 143(1) of the Act was passed on 31.05.2019 assessing assessee’s total income at Rs. 7,63,762/-. Aggrieved, assessee filed first appeal on 09.06.2022. Learned CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal upon rejection of assessee’s application for condonation of delay. 3. Assessee has approached this Tribunal on the ground that learned

ACIT-6(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailaditya Birla Sun Life Amc Ltd., Tower 1, Jupiter Mill Compound, 17Th Floor, One World Center, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Mumbai - 400013 Pan : Aaacb6134D V/S

delay of 4 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue is condoned. 15. The issue arising in Ground No.1, raised in Revenue’s appeal, pertains to the deduction claimed under section 80G of the Act on Corporate Social Responsibility (“CSR”) expenses. 16. The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue, as emanating from the record, are: During

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

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

delay of 4 days in filing the appeal\nby the Revenue is condoned.\n15. The issue arising in Ground No.1, raised in Revenue's appeal, pertains\nto the deduction claimed under section 80G of the Act on Corporate Social\nResponsibility (“CSR\") expenses.\n16. The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue, as emanating from\nthe record, are: During

SRM SITES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 7(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2010-2011 and 2011-12 are allowed

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-2012 M/S Srm Sites Pvt. Ltd., The Commissioner Of Income Shree Ram Mills Premises, Tax (Appeals)-14 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Mumbai Lower Parel, Vs. Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aancs0873M (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2010-2011 M/S Srm Sites Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer-7(2)(4), Shree Ram Mills Premises, Mumbai Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Vs. Mumbai - 400013 Pan: Aancs0873M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pradeep Sharma (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 15/03/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/05/2019

condonation of delay filed by the assessee in the interest of justice and permitted the Ld. counsel for the assessee to argue the case of the assessee on merits. 10. Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee was awarded construction contract by the M/s Shree Ram Urban Infra Ltd. which is a holding company

TAPTI EXPORTS ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-19(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Tapti Exports Dy. Cit-19(3) Aw 5030 Tower A-Block G, Mumbai – 400 020 Bandra Kurla Coomplex, Bandra (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 051

135 (MP) on identical facts has condoned the delay in filing Form 10CCB belatedly after filing the return of income but before 6 Tapti Exports vs. Dy. CIT completion of the assessment proceedings. In the present case, the assessee has filed the Form 10CCB on 29.01.2022 which was much before the extended due date for filing of return

JT. CIT -(OSD),CC- 6(3), MUMBAI vs. KROSSLINK INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhjcit (Osd), Central Circle-6(3) M/S Krosslink Infrastructure Room No. 1926, 19Th Floor, Ltd., 507/511, Vypar Bhavan, Air India Building, Vs. 49, P.D. Mellor Road, Nariman Point, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400009 Pan: Aabck2801R Appellant Respondent

delay in filing the present appeal is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing on merit. 17. We have heard the submission of ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue on merit and perused the material available on record. The learned AR of the assessee submits that initially

AMAR HARSHAD DANI ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD, 3(1), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

condone the delay of 694 days in filing the appeal. 5. Being aggrieved the Appellant has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds reproduced in paragraph 2 above. 6. We have heard the rival submission and perused the material on record. In the affidavit filed by the Appellant before us explaining the delay in filing the appeal

ACIT, CIRCLE - 3 3 1, MUMBAI vs. JAMNAGAR UTILITIES AND POWER PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed\npartly

delay in filing the appeals is condoned.\n4. Now, we take up the appeal of the Revenue for assessment\nyear 2019-2020. The grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced\nas under:\n1. \"Whether the contribution or donation made by assessee not\nvoluntarily, but to discharge legal obligation arising from section 135