JAYANTILAL RAJMAL SETH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jayantilal Rajmal Seth, Dcit-Cc-4(3), A-3, Saibaba Shopping Centre, Bkc, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai Central, Vs. Mumbai-400008. Pan No. Agepj 0499 E Appellant Respondent

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for Jayantilal Rajmal Seth 19 such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year). referred to as the relevant assessment year

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

148A\nof the Act has been passed in such case vide DIN ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-\n23/1044144402(1) dated 27.07.2022 and annexed herewith for reference.\n(B) I have information that a search was initiated under section 132 of the Act in\nyour case or in the case of the person in respect of which\n(C) I have information that books

DCIT-14.1.1, MUMBAI vs. AMCOR FLEXIBLES INDIA PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

148A of the Income-tax Act was not followed and hence the Notice is bad in law. 4. Subsequently, the assessee was issued Notice under section 143(2) read with section 147 of the Act dated 11.12.2021 along with reasons for reopening. As per the reasons for reopening, the assessment was reopened to disallow the depreciation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHANTILAL CHIMANLAL SHETH, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed and the\ncross-objections by the assessee are partly allowed

148A of the Act has been passed in such case vide DIN:\nITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1044290649(1) dated 29.07.2022 and annexed herewith for reference,\n(B) I have information that a search was initiated under-section 132 of the Act in your case or in the case\nof the person in respect of which you are assessable under the Act on the date

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHANTILAL CHIMANLAL SHETH, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals by the revenue are dismissed and the\ncross-objections by the assessee are partly allowed

148A of the Act has been passed in such case vide DIN:\nITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1044290649(1) dated 29.07.2022 and annexed herewith for reference,\n(8)! have information that a search was initiated under-section 132 of the Act in your case or in the case\nof the person in respect of which you are assessable under the Act on the date

CHEMOX EXPORTS IMPORTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

section 148A of the Act has been passed\nin such case vide DIN ITBA/AST/F/148A/2021-22/1042134900(1) dated 30/03/2022 and\nannexed herewith for reference,\n2. I, therefore, propose to assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss\nor depreciation

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

148A(d) on 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, and issued notice under section 148 on the same date. In response, issued notice under section 148 on the same date. In response, issued notice under section 148 on the same date

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

148A(d) on 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, and issued notice under section 148 on the same date. In response, issued notice under section 148 on the same date. In response, issued notice under section 148 on the same date

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

148A(d) on 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, and issued notice under section 148 on the same date. In response, issued notice under section 148 on the same date. In response, issued notice under section 148 on the same date

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

148A(d) on 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, 29.07.2022, after obtaining approval from the specified authority, and issued notice under section 148 on the same date. In response, issued notice under section 148 on the same date. In response, issued notice under section 148 on the same date

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

148A of the Act has been passed in such case vide DIN ITBA/COM/F/17/2022- 23/1044144402(1) dated 27.07.2022 and annexed herewith for reference. (B) I have information that a search was initiated under section 132 of the Act in your case or in the case of the person in respect of which (C) I have information that books of accounts, other

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

148A of the Act has been passed in such case vide DIN ITBA/COM/F/17/2022- 23/1044144402(1) dated 27.07.2022 and annexed herewith for reference. (B) I have information that a search was initiated under section 132 of the Act in your case or in the case of the person in respect of which (C) I have information that books of accounts, other

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year). Explanation.—For the purposes of assessment or reassessment or recomputation under this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 8(1) , MUMBAI, MUMBAI

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for\nsuch assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections\n148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year).\nExplanation. For the purposes of assessment or reassessment or recomputation\nunder this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in\nrespect of any issue, which has escaped assessment

GLOBAL TRADEX LTD. (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS NAMCO STEEL PVT. LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

depreciation against the addition made u/s 41(1). That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the appellant being entitled to set off of such losses, the same may very kindly be now allowed.” 3. For the year under consideration, assessee contended on the legal issue that approval obtained by the ld. Assessing Officer

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly we direct the AO to delete the disallowance made under section\n36(1)(va) of the Act for AY 2019-20 & 2020-21 also.\n15. In result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2018-19 to AY 2020...

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for\nsuch assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections\n148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year).\nExplanation. For the purposes of assessment or reassessment or recomputation\nunder this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in\nrespect of any issue, which has escaped assessment

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 2(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

section 148A of the Act has been passed in such case vide DIN ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022- 23/1042879843(1) dated 27/04/2022 and annexed herewith for reference, 2. 1, therefore, propose to assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation

ACIT-CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. LOTUS LOGISTICS AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas cross-objection of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit-Cc-7(3) Lotus Logistics & Developers Room No. 655, Floor 6Th, Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Vs. 1301, 13Th Level, Lotus Trade Mumbai-400020 Centre, New Link Road, Near D N Nagar Metro Station, Andheri-West, Mumbai- 700013 Pan No. Aabcl 1198 G Appellant Respondent

section 148A of the Act has been passed in such case vide DIN ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-23/1044251346(1) dated 28.07.2022 and annexed herewith for reference. I, therefore, propose to assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation