ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

3. The assessee’s appeals being ITAs No. 1425 to 1429/Mum./2018 are delayed by 2 days. In the affidavits sworn by the former Director of the assessee, it has been submitted that since the FIR was lodged against the company and its directors, the same resulted in a complete disruption of affairs for a few days and therefore

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

3. The assessee’s appeals being ITAs No. 1425 to 1429/Mum./2018 are delayed by 2 days. In the affidavits sworn by the former Director of the assessee, it has been submitted that since the FIR was lodged against the company and its directors, the same resulted in a complete disruption of affairs for a few days and therefore

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

3. The assessee’s appeals being ITAs No. 1425 to 1429/Mum./2018 are delayed by 2 days. In the affidavits sworn by the former Director of the assessee, it has been submitted that since the FIR was lodged against the company and its directors, the same resulted in a complete disruption of affairs for a few days and therefore

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

3. The assessee’s appeals being ITAs No. 1425 to 1429/Mum./2018 are delayed by 2 days. In the affidavits sworn by the former Director of the assessee, it has been submitted that since the FIR was lodged against the company and its directors, the same resulted in a complete disruption of affairs for a few days and therefore

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

3. The assessee’s appeals being ITAs No. 1425 to 1429/Mum./2018 are delayed by 2 days. In the affidavits sworn by the former Director of the assessee, it has been submitted that since the FIR was lodged against the company and its directors, the same resulted in a complete disruption of affairs for a few days and therefore

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

3. The assessee’s appeals being ITAs No. 1425 to 1429/Mum./2018 are delayed by 2 days. In the affidavits sworn by the former Director of the assessee, it has been submitted that since the FIR was lodged against the company and its directors, the same resulted in a complete disruption of affairs for a few days and therefore

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

3. The assessee’s appeals being ITAs No. 1425 to 1429/Mum./2018 are delayed by 2 days. In the affidavits sworn by the former Director of the assessee, it has been submitted that since the FIR was lodged against the company and its directors, the same resulted in a complete disruption of affairs for a few days and therefore

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2 (1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

3. The assessee’s appeals being ITAs No. 1425 to 1429/Mum./2018 are delayed by 2 days. In the affidavits sworn by the former Director of the assessee, it has been submitted that since the FIR was lodged against the company and its directors, the same resulted in a complete disruption of affairs for a few days and therefore

PANKAJ PARASAR,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri Pankaj Parasar Acit, Circle 11(1) 1St Floor, Plot No. 376 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Didee House, 14Th Road Mumbai 400020 Khar (W), Mumbai 400052 Pan – Aaapp9015A Appellant Respondent

condone the delay of 248 days in filing this appeal. This appeal is accordingly admitted for consideration and adjudication. We hold and direct accordingly. 3 Shri Pankaj Parasar 3. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are as under: - 3.1 The assessee, Prop. M/s. Mazaa Films & M/s. Mazaa Productions, engaged in the production and direction of advertisement films, feature films

NEO SPORTS BROADCAST PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS)2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

3 Neo Sports Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 2642 & 2643/Mum/2016 28.03.2014 holding that tax ought to have been deducted u/s 194A of the Act, and against such an order assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT on 02.06.2014. Subsequently, the CIT(A) adjudicated the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Assessing Officer dated 18.03.2012 and dismissed

NEO SPORTS BROADCAST PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TDS) 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

3 Neo Sports Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 2642 & 2643/Mum/2016 28.03.2014 holding that tax ought to have been deducted u/s 194A of the Act, and against such an order assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT on 02.06.2014. Subsequently, the CIT(A) adjudicated the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Assessing Officer dated 18.03.2012 and dismissed

MHATRE PALACE CHSL,BORIVALI WEST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 42 1 3 MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: SHRI. NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

Delay condoned. 3. The solitary ground of appeal is the disallowance u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act of Rs. 2,27,780/- being the interest received from co-operative banks. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Co-operative Housing Society and had filed its return of income dated 30.12.2021, declaring total income

DCIT CIR 6(1), MUMBAI vs. AEGIS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, whereas appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosainaegis Limited, Essar Techno Park, Old Swan Mill Compound, Lbs Marg, Kurla (W), Mumbai 400 070 Pan:Aaace 8354Q ...... Appellant

delay may kindly be condoned. 3. Before we proceed to address the respective Grounds of appeal, we may briefly refer to the background of the case. The assessee is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is, inter-alia, engaged in the business of providing Customer interaction (customer acquisition, customer services), Back-office (Receivables management

AEGIS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, whereas appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosainaegis Limited, Essar Techno Park, Old Swan Mill Compound, Lbs Marg, Kurla (W), Mumbai 400 070 Pan:Aaace 8354Q ...... Appellant

delay may kindly be condoned. 3. Before we proceed to address the respective Grounds of appeal, we may briefly refer to the background of the case. The assessee is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is, inter-alia, engaged in the business of providing Customer interaction (customer acquisition, customer services), Back-office (Receivables management

REKHA MAHESHWARI ,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

condoning the delay is reversed as the appeal was filed within time. However, the Ld. CIT (A) also decided the appeal on merits. 5. The brief facts are that assessee is an individual and had declared income under the head ‘income from house property’ from rent of Rs.26,00,000/- received from tenant SVIL Mines Ltd in respect of property

MULCHAND SHAMJI CHHEDA HUF ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -26(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

194A applies and no tax audit\nor TDS is required to be deducted in AY. 2016-17.\nPage | 3\nITA No. 1700/Mum/2025\nA.Y. 2016-17\nMulchand Shamji Chheda HUF\nGround No. 3: Applicability of section 44AB\n(v) The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the Appellant is subject to tax\naudit u/s.44AB. He failed to take into consideration

PALM COURT M PREMISES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT - 30, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

condone the delay of 329 days for filing the present appeal. 4. Grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the Learned Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-30 is bad in law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed

DCIT (TDS) - 1(1), MUMBAI, CUMBALLA HILLS vs. ANANAD RATHI COMMODITIES LIMITED, A WING , TH FLOOR,

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue as well as cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

delay of 22 days is condoned. 3. In both the years the issues involved are common arising out of identical set of facts and therefore, same were heard together and have been disposed of by ways of this consolidated order. For the sake of ready reference appeal for A.Y.2013-14 is taken up wherein the Revenue has raised following grounds:- “Ground