DCIT CIRCLE 2.3.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PRESTIGE HOLIDAY RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, ground no. 2 and 3 are

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

depreciation, addition on account of deemed dividend and partial disallowance of commissions expenditure. 8. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment

DCIT CIRCLE 2.3.1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PRESTIGE HOLIDAY RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, ground no. 2 and 3 are

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

depreciation, addition on account of deemed dividend and partial disallowance of commissions expenditure. 8. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment

RAMESH PREMJI SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1985/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13) Ramesh Premji Shah बिधम/ Dcit 3-6 Shreeji Apartments 45 Aayakar Bhavan, Marine Vs. Jp Road Andheri (W), Lines, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400058. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadps2715F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Subhas Bains Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 19/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 15.07.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: - “1The Cit(A)/Nfac Has Erred On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, In As Much As Upholding The Reassessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Rws 147 Of The It Act Dated 09.12.2019 Which Was Requested To Be Held As Illegal & Bad In Law As No Reassessment Can Be Made For Making Addition U/S 2(22)(E) Of The It Act U/S 147 Especially When The Disallowance Was Made From All The Details & Facts Available On Record And, Therefore, The Main Condition For Reopening The Case Beyond Four Years Which Is Failure On The Part Of Appellant To Disclose Fully & Truly All Material Facts Was Not Established By The Ao. Hon’Ble Itat Is Requested To Reverse The Order

dividend could have been paid to shareholders because of accumulative profits on 31/03/2011 are (-) Rs.74,80,633/-as per audited accounts. Hon’ble ITAT is requested to reverse the order of CIT(A)/NFAC on this account and allow the ground as neither there is any discussion by the CIT(A) NFAC in order nor the opportunity of being heard

BUSINESS INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 12 (1), MUMBAI

Accordingly appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2007-08 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3803 To 3806/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08 To 2008-09)

dividend can be charged only in the hands of the shareholders. In this regard, he relied on Godrej Agrovet Ltd. Vrs. DCIT (2010) 323 ITR 97 (Bom), in which Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has held as under:- 9 I.T.A. No. 3803 to 3806/Mum/2018 Business India Even after the introduction of the concept of deemed escapement of income by Explanation

DCIT CIR 6(1), MUMBAI vs. INFOMEDIA 18 LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi, (Jm) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4069/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year-2008-09) बनाम/ Infomedia Press Ltd (Formerly Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Known As Infomedia 18 Ltd), Range 6(1), Vs. Ruby House, A –Wing, Mumbai. J K Sawant Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai-400028 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4846/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year-2008-09) बनाम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Infomedia Press Ltd (Formerly Tax , Circle 6(1), Known As Infomedia 18 Ltd), Vs. Room No.506, 5Th Floor, Ruby House, A –Wing, Aayakar Bhavan, J K Sawant Marg, M K Road, Dadar West, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400028. (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

depreciation thereon. The Ld CIT(A) also confirmed the same with the observation that the assessee has not produced relevant bills and invoices before the AO as well as before him. However, we notice that the said observation is contradictory to the observations made by the AO, wherein he observes that he has perused the bills and details submitted. However

INFOMEDIA PRESS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN INFOMEDIA 18 LTD ),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 6(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi, (Jm) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4069/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year-2008-09) बनाम/ Infomedia Press Ltd (Formerly Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Known As Infomedia 18 Ltd), Range 6(1), Vs. Ruby House, A –Wing, Mumbai. J K Sawant Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai-400028 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4846/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year-2008-09) बनाम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Infomedia Press Ltd (Formerly Tax , Circle 6(1), Known As Infomedia 18 Ltd), Vs. Room No.506, 5Th Floor, Ruby House, A –Wing, Aayakar Bhavan, J K Sawant Marg, M K Road, Dadar West, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400028. (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

depreciation thereon. The Ld CIT(A) also confirmed the same with the observation that the assessee has not produced relevant bills and invoices before the AO as well as before him. However, we notice that the said observation is contradictory to the observations made by the AO, wherein he observes that he has perused the bills and details submitted. However

DCIT 9(1), MUMBAI vs. GHARDA CHEMICALS LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Ashwani Taneja, Am Gharda Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 5/6, Jer Mansion, W.P. Varde Marg, Tax, Circle-9(1), Mumbai. Off Turner Road, Bandra (West), Aaykar Bhawan, M. K. Marg, Mumbai-400 018. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. (Pan:Aaacg1255E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation in earlier years to be set off against income under the head Income from Other sources. 7. At the outset, Ld. counsel for the assessee stated that this issue relates to adjudication of the revenue’s issue in respect to addition estimated by CIT(A) of deemed dividend

GHARDA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 9(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Ashwani Taneja, Am Gharda Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 5/6, Jer Mansion, W.P. Varde Marg, Tax, Circle-9(1), Mumbai. Off Turner Road, Bandra (West), Aaykar Bhawan, M. K. Marg, Mumbai-400 018. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. (Pan:Aaacg1255E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

depreciation in earlier years to be set off against income under the head Income from Other sources. 7. At the outset, Ld. counsel for the assessee stated that this issue relates to adjudication of the revenue’s issue in respect to addition estimated by CIT(A) of deemed dividend

DCIT 3 (2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NEW INDIA MINING CORPORATION PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

deemed dividend u/s 2(22)( e ) of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. Accordingly, the Ground Nos. (i) to (iii) raised by the revenue are dismissed. 3. The Ground No. (iv) raised by the revenue is with regard to challenging the action of the ld CITA in granting relief to the extent

ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI vs. SAJID S. NADIADWALA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Sajid S. Nadiadwala, Ocean View, J.P. Road, Vs. Acit-11(1), Mumbai Versova, Andheri (W), Mumbai [Pan : Aagps5417D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

deemed dividend” u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. The CIT(A) after careful consideration of the facts and law, has decided the issue in favor of the assessee. The relevant discussion is contained in para 2.3 of his order, which reads as under: “2.3. I have considered the facts and perused the material on record. It is noticed that

VIVEK G BHARTU,MUMBAI vs. ITO 7(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhvivek G. Bhartu Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 764 E Umrigar Building, Tilak Road, Ward-7 (3) (1), Aayakar Opp. Bus Depot, Dadar, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai 400 14 Churchgate, Mumbai 400 021 Pan:Aacbp Appellant .. Respondent .. Appellant By Shri Devdatta Mainkar, Ar Respondent By .. Shri K. L. Kanak, Sr. Dr .. Date Of Hearing 11-08-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 11-08-2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

deemed dividend by invoking the provisions of Section 2(22) (e) of the Act in respect to loan taken by the assessee from the following concerns:- SN Name of Company Opening Transaction Closing Reserves Balance amount Balance and surplus during the year 1 M/s. Vivek Bhartu 389793.49 2509684 1381215 0 2 Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. 2 M/s. Aqua Elixir

ICICI BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT -2(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Icici Bank Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of Icici Bank Towers, Income-Tax 2(3)(1) Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. 5Th Floor, Room No.552, Badra (East), Mumbai-400 051 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci1195H

deemed dividend under section 1158BD of Rs.9,64,71,360 and has incurred long term capital loss of Rs.316,52,79,976 on the balance which the Bank has carried forward to the subsequent assessment year 2016- 17. The relevant statements are a part of the return of income and also submitted during the course of assessment proceedings vide letter

ACIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. VASANJI A MAMANIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purpose and the cross objection filed by the assesee become otiose

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.6171/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 बनाम/ The Acit-19(3), Vasanji A Mamania, Mumbai 301, Mangal Swagat, Vs. Of Turner Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai-400 050 C.O. No. 134/Mum/2014 (Arising Out Of I.Ta No.6171/Mum/2012) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 बनाम/ Vasanji A Mamania, The Acit-19(3), 301, Mangal Swagat, Mumbai Vs. Of Turner Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai-400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aampm 4503C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Department By: Shri Shridhar E ""यथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By: None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :15.12.2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement :23.12.2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per N.K. Billaiya, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assesee Are Directed Against The Very Same Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)- 30, Mumbai Dated 6.7.2012 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2 Ita. No. 6171/M/12 & C.O No. 134/M/14

deemed dividend. 3.1. The assessee filed a detailed reply vide letter dated 3.11.2010 in which it was strongly contended that although the matter is covered u/s. 2(22)(e), there is no accumulated profit, therefore no addition can be made. 3.2. It was further contended that the accumulated profit as per books of account of ASMCPL

SRILA CHATTERJEE,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 11(1), MUMBAI

dividend income of Rs.11.23 lakhs in the hands of the assessee, that the assessee had furnished the audited accounts before the AO and claimed that assessee was a net debtor, that provisions of section 2(22)(e) not applicable, that she was making payment on behalf of the company, that the credit balance with regard to credit card was nominal.We

SH KELKAR & CO. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT-4, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sh Kelkar & Company Principal Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax-4, Devkaran Mansion, 36, Vs. Room No. 629, 6Th Floor, Mangaldas Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 002. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacs 9778 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate & Shri Harsh Kothari Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 13/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/02/2023

depreciation claimed. h. Large loans/advances to sister concern(s) (Form Large loans/advances to sister concern(s) (Form Large loans/advances to sister concern(s) (Form 3CD). i. Loan/Advance to a substantial share holder u/s Loan/Advance to a substantial share holder u/s Loan/Advance to a substantial share holder u/s 2(22)(e) (Deemed dividend

MR MUKUND VALLABHDAS THAKKER ,MUMBAI vs. DYCIT. CC 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year : 2008-09 Mr. Mukund Vallabhdas Deputy Commissioner Of Thakker, Income Tax, Ground Floor, Vs. Central Circle-4(2)(1), Persian Apartments, Aayakar Bhavan, 434, Vp Road, M.K. Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400058. Pan : Aaapt3952A (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal (Virtually Appeared) For Revenue : Shri Anurag Tripathi Date Of Hearing : 26-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Delhi, Dated 27-08-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09, Wherein The Assessee Has Challenged The Sustenance Of Addition Of Rs. 9,73,306/- U/S. 2(22)(E) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟).

depreciation has been allowed, there is no basis to hold that any benefit has accrued to the shareholder and thus, the provisions of deemed dividend

NANDKUMAR YADAVRAO TASGAONKAR,DADAR (WEST) vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AYAKAR BHAVAN

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailnandkumar Yadavrao Tasgaonkar, 101, Sumati Krishna Niwas, Shivsena Bhavan Path, ……………. Appellant Near Hotel Ameya, Mumbai-400028. Pan – Aacpt5886F V/S Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road ……………. Respondent Mumbai-400020. Assessee By : Shri Hitesh P. Shah Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha – Sr. Ar

deemed dividend of Rs.2,40,398/-. 4. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of interest expenses of Rs.19,77,349/-. 5. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of depreciation

INFINITY CARS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PCIT03 CENTRAL MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarinfinity Cars Private V/S. Principal Commissioner Of Limited, 12/A, 1St Floor, बनाम Income Tax– 03 Central, Lotus Cinema Bldg., Worli Mumbai, Room No. 441, 4 Th S.O. Mumbai - 400 018, Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To Maharashtra C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East),Mumbai - 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabci5671H Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

deemed dividend in favour of the assessee on facts as well as on law, we don't find it necessary to address the same issue on the ground of limitation of invoking jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. Hence we refrain to give our findings in this regard on the issue of limitation. 5.8. In view of the aforesaid findings