VIR ALLOYS AND STEEL COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 11(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, with directions as aforesaid

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Natural Justice have been duly complied. Therefore, the corresponding grounds been duly complied. Therefore, the corresponding grounds been duly complied. Therefore, the corresponding grounds of appeal are found to be unsubstantiated, made in a of appeal are found to be unsubstantiated, made in a of appeal are found to be unsubstantiated, made in a mechanical fashion and hence a mechanical

VIR ALLOYS AND STEEL COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 11(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, with directions as aforesaid

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Natural Justice have been duly complied. Therefore, the corresponding grounds been duly complied. Therefore, the corresponding grounds been duly complied. Therefore, the corresponding grounds of appeal are found to be unsubstantiated, made in a of appeal are found to be unsubstantiated, made in a of appeal are found to be unsubstantiated, made in a mechanical fashion and hence a mechanical

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

natural justice. 6. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue-in- dispute and perused the relevant material on r dispute and perused the relevant material on record. In the case ecord. In the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. TRIUMPH SECURITIES LTD, MUMBAI

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

natural justice and was valid under section 274 of the Act.\nAccordingly, the Ld.DR fully relied on the order of the Ld.AO and argued that the\nsaid notice issued by the Ld.AO on dated 27/12/2011 is valid notice. So the\npenalty will be sustained.\n5.\nThe Ld.AR invited our attention to the notice dated 27/12/2011 issued by\nthe ACIT, Central

EVEREST KANTO CYLINDER LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Prabhash Shankareverest Kanto Cylinder V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd. बनाम Income Tax, Circle – 3(4), 204,Raheja Centre, Free World Trade Centre 1, Cuffe Press Journal Marg, Parade, Mumbai – 400005, Nariman Point, Mumbai – Maharashtra 400 021, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace0836F Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

natural justice inasmuch as he was himself unsure and assessee was not made aware as to which of the two limbs of section 271(1)(c) of the Act it had to respond. 6.2 In view of plethora of decisions of various courts and coordinate benches of ITAT, this issue is no longer res integra. The coordinate ITAT, Mumbai bench

AASAN CORPORATE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

various grounds including violation of natural justice, disallowance of interest expenses, depreciation, and additions based on discrepancies with Form 26AS." } }

SCHOTT GLASS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, ITA 7356/Mum/2014 of the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhschott Glass India Private Vs. Income Tax Officer 8(3)-1 Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Room No. 201, Aayakar 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Schott Glass India Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Income Tax 8(3) 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 204, Aayakar Andheri Kurla Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ketan Ved Respondent By : Mahesh Jiwade Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Agasint The Different Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai. Since Both These Appeals

natural justice and hence is bad in law. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in not considering and understanding the rationale behind the economic adjustments carried out by the appellant for the purpose of benchmarking with respect to manufacturing segment. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that charging entire depreciation

SCHOTT GLASS INDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 8(3), MUMBAI

In the result, ITA 7356/Mum/2014 of the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Amarjit Singhschott Glass India Private Vs. Income Tax Officer 8(3)-1 Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Room No. 201, Aayakar 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400020 Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Schott Glass India Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Dynasty “A” Wing Income Tax 8(3) 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 204, Aayakar Andheri Kurla Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai – 400 059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcs8583L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ketan Ved Respondent By : Mahesh Jiwade Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): Both These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Agasint The Different Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-15, Mumbai. Since Both These Appeals

natural justice and hence is bad in law. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in not considering and understanding the rationale behind the economic adjustments carried out by the appellant for the purpose of benchmarking with respect to manufacturing segment. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that charging entire depreciation

MUKON CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Natural Justice cannot be read\nin abstract and the assessee, being a limited company, having wide\nnetwork in various financial services, should definitely be precluded\nfrom raising such a plea at this belated stage. By claiming depreciation

DHANLAXMI FABRICS LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - CIRCLE -1 , KALYAN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledhanalaxmi Fabrics Limited V. Acit – Circle – 1 401, Kailas Corporate Lounge Kalyan - 421204 Veer Savarkar Marg, Park Site Vikhroli (W), Mumbai - 400079 Pan: Aabcd1592N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Bharat Gadhi & Assessee Represented By : Ms. Poonam Kotkar Department Represented By : Shri Ashish Kumar

depreciation and the same was added back to the income of the assessee. Subsequently, Assessing Officer Initiated Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. On appeal Ld.CIT(A) 3 Dhanalaxmi Fabrics Limited sustained the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. Against, this order of the Ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us. 3. In the present

M.LAKHAMSI& CO. ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Natural Justice cannot be read\nin abstract and the assessee, being a limited company, having wide\nnetwork in various financial services, should definitely be precluded\nfrom raising such a plea at this belated stage. By claiming depreciation

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

Justice\n4. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- being a commission paid on the ground\nthat no return of income of concerned parties provided by the assessee even though\nthe nature of services details provided during the assessment proceedings and\nappellate

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

Justice\n4. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- being a commission paid on the ground\nthat no return of income of concerned parties provided by the assessee even though\nthe nature of services details provided during the assessment proceedings and\nappellate

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

Justice\n4. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- being a commission paid on the ground\nthat no return of income of concerned parties provided by the assessee even though\nthe nature of services details provided during the assessment proceedings and\nappellate

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

Justice\n4. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- being a commission paid on the ground\nthat no return of income of concerned parties provided by the assessee even though\nthe nature of services details provided during the assessment proceedings and\nappellate

DCIT CENT. CIR. -5(3) (ERSTWHILE DCIT CENT. CIR. -36), MUMBAI vs. JYOTI A. KULKARNI, PUNE

Justice\n4. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- being a commission paid on the ground\nthat no return of income of concerned parties provided by the assessee even though\nthe nature of services details provided during the assessment proceedings and\nappellate

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

Justice\n4. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in\nconfirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- being a commission paid on the ground\nthat no return of income of concerned parties provided by the assessee even though\nthe nature of services details provided during the assessment proceedings and\nappellate

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result ground no. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed and AO is directed to give benefit on whole deposit of Rs

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal- A.Y.2007-08 - A.Y.2008-09 - A.Y.2009-10 - A.Y.2010-11 - A.Y.2011-12 - A.Y.2012-13

Justice Mrs. JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI 4. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 9,59,295/- being a commission paid on the ground that no return of income of concerned parties provided by the assessee even though the nature of services details provided during