LONGULF TRADING (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2008-2009

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Vp) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Longulf Trading (India) The Dcit 8 (2), Private Limited, Mumbai A-Wing, 5Th Floor, Unit 1B, Time Square, Vs. Andheri Kurla Road, Marol, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400059 Pan: Aaacl1075D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay R. Parikh (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav & Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (Drs) Date Of Hearing: 08/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 01/05/2019 O R D E R Per Ram Lal Negi, Jm This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Dated 31/10/2012 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2008-09, Whereby The Ld. Cit (A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against Assessment Order Passed U/S 143 (3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) & Further Directed The Ao To Disallow The Net Provision For Loss Of Rs. 51,515/-. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee An Exporter Engaged In The Business Of Supply Of Agriculture Commodities Industrial Chemical & Food Additives, Textiles & Engineering Goods Etc., Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration Declaring The Total Income Of Rs. 5,34,39,100/-. Since, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny, The Ao Issued Notice U/S 143 (2) & 142 (1) Of The Act. In Response Thereof The Finance Manager Of 2 Assessment Year: 2008-09

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. 8. Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that during the financial year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the assessee entered into a number of forward contracts

DCIT 9(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. CREDILA FINANCIAL SERVICES P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1491/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Dcit 9(2)(2) Credila Financial Services R.No. 665A, 6 T H Floor, Private Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, B-301 Citi Point, V. Mumbai-400020 Next To Kohinoor Continental Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri(E), Mumbai 400056 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaccc8789P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

condoned and consequentially the CO filed by the assessee is directed to be admitted for adjudication on merits. When technicalities are pitted against substantial justices, the Courts will always lean towards dispensation of justice instead of closing and shutting the doors of justice to a bonafide and genuine litigant although we are fully aware that right to appeal

FAZE THREE AUTOFAB LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-6(1)-2., MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

condone the delay of 76 days in filing these appeals. 4. The assessee has challenged the ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A), confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act and challenging the reopening, the addition on interest income and disallowance of deprecation as per section 43A

FAZE THREE AUTOFAB LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-6(1)-2, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

condone the delay of 76 days in filing these appeals. 4. The assessee has challenged the ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A), confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act and challenging the reopening, the addition on interest income and disallowance of deprecation as per section 43A

FAZE THREE AUTOFAB LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT, CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

condone the delay of 76 days in filing these appeals. 4. The assessee has challenged the ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A), confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act and challenging the reopening, the addition on interest income and disallowance of deprecation as per section 43A

FAZE THREE AUTOFAB LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT, CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

condone the delay of 76 days in filing these appeals. 4. The assessee has challenged the ex parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A), confirming the order of the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act and challenging the reopening, the addition on interest income and disallowance of deprecation as per section 43A

DCIT CIR 4 (2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S QUANT SECURITIES PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

43a[the principal business of which is the business of banking] or the granting of loans and advances) consists in the purchase and sale of shares of other companies, such company shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be carrying on a speculation business44 to the extent to which the business consists of the purchase and sale