RAMEL AJIT SINGH,NAVI MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

In the result, the ground of appeal

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon’Blems. Padmavathy S, Hon’Ble(Physical Hearing) Ramel Ajit Singh Income Tax Officer, Ward No.28(2)(1), Building No. A6, 3Rd Floor Vashi, Mumbai. Swagat Chs,Plot No. 14 Vs Nerul (W),Navi Mumbai-400706 Maharashtra

delay in filing appeal is condoned. Now adverting the merits of the case. 9. We find that case of assessee was reopened on the basis of information with the Assessing Officer that there were cash deposits of Rs.5,87,678/- with Himachal Mitra Mandal Co-op Credit Society. The assessing officer after recording reasons of reopening and serving notice under

LINTAS EMPLOYEES HOBBIES AND CRAFT TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 22(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee's appeal ITA no

delay is condoned.\n7. Coming to the merits of the case, we observe that the Assessee had claimed the amounts of Rs.6,74,181/- on account of dividend from mutual funds and Rs.5,76,033/- on account of interest from tax free bonds as exempt from tax. We observe that the then Ld. Addl./JCIT-2 in the Assessee

LAKSHMI RAO,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon’Bleshri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble(Physical Hearing) Lakshmi Rao Ito – Ward – 22(1)(4) (Now Ito-Ward-22(1)(1) A3102 Lodhabellissimo Piramal Chambers Off: N.M. Joshi Marg Vs Mumbai – 400012 Mahalakshmi, Mumbai – 400013 Maharashtra Maharashtra

condoning delay 4. To delete interest charged u/s 234 A, B & C and penalty initiated u/s 271[4][c] [C] General: • The appellant reserve rights to add alter or delete any portion of this appeal before its conclusion. • This appeal is filed in time and may please be allowed in full. • A Detailed paper book along with case laws will

NEW INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,BORIVALI(WEST) vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE

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

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blenew Infrastructure Private Limited V. Acit- 13(1)(1) 23, B, Ganjawala Apartment 218, 2Nd Floor Svp Road, Borivali (W) Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai- 400092 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaccn1678G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Bhupendra Shah Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha Department Represented By :

234 & initiation of penalty u/s 271[1][c]. [D] General: The appellant reserve rights to add alter or delete any portion of this appeal before its conclusion. This appeal is filed in time and may please be allowed in full. A detailed paper book will be filed at the time of hearing.” 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel

APURVA MUKESH THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 41(2)(1) MUMBAI, KAUTILIYA BHAVAN

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla& Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarapurva Mukesh Ito Ward 41 Thakkar (2)(1) Mumbai 11 Dr Rp Road & Ns Vs. Room No. 234 Mataji Bungalow Bldg Kautilya Bhavan Cross Road Near City C41 To C43 Block Bank Atm Mumbai Bkc Bandra East 400080 - Mumbai Mumbai 400051, Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Adspt8293K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shriparth J. Bhatt Revenue By Shrisurendra Mohan (Sr. Dr.) Date Of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22.01.2026

234 Mataji Bungalow Bldg Kautilya Bhavan Cross Road Near City C41 to C43 Block Bank ATM Mumbai BKC Bandra East 400080 - Mumbai Mumbai 400051, Mumbai PAN/GIR No. ADSPT8293K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by ShriParth J. Bhatt Revenue by ShriSurendra Mohan (SR. DR.) Date of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 22.01.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal filed

LINTAS EMPLOYEES HOBBIES AND CRAFT TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 22(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee's appeal ITA no

delay is condoned.\n7. Coming to the merits of the case, we observe that the\nAssessee had claimed the amounts of Rs.6,74,181/- on account of\ndividend from mutual funds and Rs.5,76,033/- on account of\ninterest from tax free bonds as exempt from tax. We observe that\nthe then Ld. Addl./JCIT-2 in the Assessee

VIDYA BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8 (3) (3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

condone the small delay in present matters. Vidya Buildcon Private Ltd. ITA No. 4654/Mum/2024 AY 2010-11 3. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee (AR) submitted that the assessee is a Private Limited Company, engaged in the business of trading and investment. That during the year under consideration an addition of Rs. 3,44,47,000/- under section

VIDYA BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

condone the small delay in present matters. Vidya Buildcon Private Ltd. ITA No. 4654/Mum/2024 AY 2010-11 3. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee (AR) submitted that the assessee is a Private Limited Company, engaged in the business of trading and investment. That during the year under consideration an addition of Rs. 3,44,47,000/- under section

SHAILESH HATMAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO-19(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. At the outset, I noticed that present appeal is time barred and in this regard an affidavit for seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee, the same is reproduced herein below

SHRI PARESH HARJI RAMANI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -29(2)(5), MUMBAI

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

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

section 143 (3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, making an addition in respect of purchase of shares from the stock exchange. The said re-assessment was attended te by Mr. Navin Rathod and his associates, keeping the assessee in the dark. In the said re-assessment proceeding, it has even been wrongly stated that the Appellant is an exit provider

DCIT-CC-4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAHEJA UNIVERSAL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the Assessee is allowed,\nwhereas appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed being infructuous

delay of 47 days in filling of the instant CO, is condoned.\n10. Coming to the merits of the CO, we observe that admittedly the\nAssessee before the Ld. Commissioner did not challenge the reopening of\nthe assessment by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act as well as passing of\nthe assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s

MUNIRA FAIYAZ RATANGIRI,MUMBAI vs. ITO-20(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

section 253(3) of the Act, the appeal before the Tribunal was required to be filed within 60 days from the date of receipt of the impugned order. Munira Faiyaz Ratangiri ITA no.1829/Mum./2023 However, as evident from the record, the assessee filed the appeal on 22/05/2023. In the affidavit seeking condonation of delay, filed along with the appeal

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. EVERGREEN FINANCIAL SERVICES, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross objection by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Central Circle-4(1), Room No. 1916, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. ……………. Appellant V/S Evergreen Financial Services, Kanakia Future City, Cts 101, Behind Dr. L H Hiranandani Hospital, Mumbai-400093. ……………. Respondent Pan : Aabfe 9028 R

condone the delay in filing the cross-objection by the assessee and we proceed to decide the same on merits. 7. The issue arising in Ground No.1, raised in assessee’s cross-objection, pertains to the validity of additions made under section 153A of the Act in the absence of incriminating material found during the search. 8. The brief facts

VIPUL PARIMAL THAKORE,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal

condone the delay in filling the Form No. 67 and the CIT(A)has confirmed the action of A.O and dismissed the ITA No. 3595 & 3597/Mum/2023 Vipul Parimal Thakore, Mumbai. appeal. We find in respect of foreign tax credit (FTC), the assessee is required to file Form no. 67 with details of the statement of income from a country

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

MAMTA MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.1442 /मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.1534 /मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2016-17) Mamta Mehta, B-3, Bldg No.3, Saibaba Enclave, Behind Citi Centre, Goregaon West Mumbai 400 062. Pan: Afxpm-6021-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 31(2)(3), Kautalya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Choughule सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

234 deals with tax paid by deduction or advance payment. The said section was omitted by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987. In so far as ; challenge to initiation of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) and 271B of the Act is concerned, the same is premature at this stage. The ground No.6 of appeal is dismissed, accordingly

MAMTA MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 31(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.1442 /मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.1534 /मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2016-17) Mamta Mehta, B-3, Bldg No.3, Saibaba Enclave, Behind Citi Centre, Goregaon West Mumbai 400 062. Pan: Afxpm-6021-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 31(2)(3), Kautalya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Choughule सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

234 deals with tax paid by deduction or advance payment. The said section was omitted by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987. In so far as ; challenge to initiation of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) and 271B of the Act is concerned, the same is premature at this stage. The ground No.6 of appeal is dismissed, accordingly

MR. RAJEEV KUMAR JAIN,VIVENDI BUILDING, SAROJINI ROAD, SANTACRUZ (W) vs. CIRCLE 42(3)(1), MUMBAI, KAUTILYA BHAVAN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankarshri Rajeev Kumar Jain Vs Income-Tax Officer Circle 42(3)(1), 301, Vivendi Building, Mumbai, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc Santacruz (West) S.O., Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 054 Pan : Acopj0782E Applicant Respondent

delay for 219 days is condoned. 3. The appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the denial of credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) pertaining to his spouse. The assessee contends that since the income of the spouse, amounting to Rs. 46,76,589/-, was clubbed with his own income and duly declared in the Return of Income