SHREE DADAR JAIN PAUSHADHSHALA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E_ - 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2061/Mum/2019 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Shree Dadar Jain Ito(E)-1(2) Paushadhshala Trust, Room No. 501, 5 Th Floor, Aaradhana Bhavan, Piramal Chambers, V. 289, S K Bole Road, Lalbaug, Parel, Dadar West, Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400028 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaats7848E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri. Bhadresh Doshi Revenue By: Shri. Abhi Rama Karthikeyn S. सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 2061/Mum/2019, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 08/02/2019, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Cit(A)‖) In Appeal Number Cit(A)-3/It-10394/2017-18, For Assessment Year 2014-15, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 28.12.2006 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called ―The Ao‖) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ―The Act‖) For Ay:2014-15. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By Assessee In Memo Of Appeal Filed With The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called ―The Tribunal‖) Read As Under:-

iia) of clause (24) of section 2, shall, if the total income in respect of which he is assessable as a representative assessee (the total income for this purpose being computed under this Act without giving effect to the provisions of sections 11 and 12) exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax, furnish a return

VASHISHTHA LUXURY FASHION LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRALISED PROCESSING CENTER, BENGALURU,

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

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

iia) of sub-section(1) of section 32 along with various other conditions. It is also observed that the provision prescribes that the assessee exercises the said option only when it is in the prescribed manner filed on or before the due date specified in sub section (1) of section 139 of the Act for furnishing of the return

MISTRY CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 41, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

condone the delay and admit the appeal 5. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in rectifying the assessment order framed by the AO under section 143(3) of the Act by passing order under section 154 of the Act thereby the disallowing the claim

MADISON COMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhmadison Vs. Acit Circle 2(2)(1) Communications Pvt. 1St, Floor, Aayakar Ltd. Bhavan, New Marine 1St Floor, 349, Business Lines, Point, Western Express Highway, Andheri East, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400069 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacm5979P Appellant .. Respondent

32, except clause (iia) of sub-section (1) of the said section, determined in such manner as may be prescribed. 3)xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 4)xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 5) Nothing contained in this section shall apply unless the option is exercised by the person in the prescribed manner on or before the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139 for furnishing

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

iia) of clause (24) of section 2, where a person receiving such contribution does not maintain a record of the identity indicating the name and address of the person making such contribution and such other particulars as may be prescribed.” 19. It is noted that the above provision was inserted by the Finance Act, 2006 with effect 01.04.2007 with

SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

iia) of clause (24) of section 2, where a person receiving such contribution does not maintain a record of the identity indicating the name and address of the person making such contribution and such other particulars as may be prescribed.” 19. It is noted that the above provision was inserted by the Finance Act, 2006 with effect 01.04.2007 with

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

iia) of clause (24) of section 2, where a person receiving such contribution does not maintain a record of the identity indicating the name and address of the person making such contribution and such other particulars as may be prescribed.” 19. It is noted that the above provision was inserted by the Finance Act, 2006 with effect 01.04.2007 with

DY. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST(SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

iia) of clause (24) of section 2, where a person receiving such contribution does not maintain a record of the identity indicating the name and address of the person making such contribution and such other particulars as may be prescribed.” 19. It is noted that the above provision was inserted by the Finance Act, 2006 with effect 01.04.2007 with

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT, CIRCLR-2,, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for parity of reasons

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 1602/मुं/2020 ("न. व. 2015-16) आअसं. 1600/मुं/2020 ("न.व. 2017-18) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Taxation Section, 4Th Floor, Bharat Bhavan, 4 & 6 Currimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan: Aaacb-2902-M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -2, Room No.344, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Rahul Raman & B.K. Bagchi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/02/2022 आदेश/ Order

condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. Shri Jehangir Mistry, Sr. Advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the order passed by PCIT under section 263 of the Act was received by the assessee on 24/02/2020. On account of COVID-19 Pandemic the appeal could not be filed within a period of 60 days from the date

BHARAT PRTROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT CIRCLE-2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for parity of reasons

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 1602/मुं/2020 ("न. व. 2015-16) आअसं. 1600/मुं/2020 ("न.व. 2017-18) Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Taxation Section, 4Th Floor, Bharat Bhavan, 4 & 6 Currimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001 Pan: Aaacb-2902-M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -2, Room No.344, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Rahul Raman & B.K. Bagchi सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/02/2022 आदेश/ Order

condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. Shri Jehangir Mistry, Sr. Advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the order passed by PCIT under section 263 of the Act was received by the assessee on 24/02/2020. On account of COVID-19 Pandemic the appeal could not be filed within a period of 60 days from the date

M/S GODREJ AGROVET LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-14(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S Godrej Agrovet Ltd Vs. Dcit – 14(1)(2) C/O Kalyaniwalla & Room No. 455, Mistry Llp, Esplande Aayakar Bhavan, House, 29, Hazrimal M.K. Road, Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400001. Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg0617Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Raunak Vardhan.Ar Respondent By : Shri Harmesh Lal.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27.02.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Cit(A), Delhi Passed U/S 250 Of The Act.

condone the delay and admit the appeal. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1 The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in dismissing the Appellant's appeal against order under section 143(3) as withdrawn by relying on the application dated 11th October, 2021 seeking withdrawal of appeal against order under section 201. 2. The Appellant prays

GEMMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMP) - 1(3), MUMBAI

delay in filing the\nappeal is condoned. The request made by the appellant in that regard is\nallowed. The appeal is admitted for hearing on merit.\n8. We have also heard the Ld. AR as well as Ld. DR with respect to the\ngrounds of appeal. It is argued on behalf of the appellant by the Ld. AR\nthat

CHOMANSINGH M. DEORA ,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-19, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee and we proceed to decide the appeal on merits. 5. In its appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:– Chomansingh M. Deora ITA no.401/Mum./2023 ―[A] Grounds of Appeal: 1. In the facts of the case and in Law, the learned PCIT erred in invoking Section

FLAMINGO PHARMACEUTICALS LTD,SION TROMBAY ROAD CHEMBUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-14(1)(2), MUMBAI , AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condone the delay.\n4. It may also be stated here that the instant appeal is part of\nsecond round of litigation. Brief facts of the case are the assessee\nfiled return of income disclosing total income of Rs.15,27,38,623/-. The\nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was originally completed by the AO by\nmaking certain addition. During