INVENTURUS KNOWLEDGE SERVICES P.LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO 5(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee company is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: - 2009-10 Inventurus Knowledge Services V. Income Tax Officer Pvt. Ltd. 5(2)(1), C/O. Seren Properties Pvt. Ltd. 525, Aaykar Bhavan, (Sez), Unit No. 204, Build No. 5, M.K. Road, Mindspace Airoli Camp, Plot No. Mumbai - 400 020. 3, Gat No. 95, Kalwa Trans, Thane Creek, Midc Industrial Area, Thane Belapur Road, Airoli, Navi Mumbai – 400 708. Pan/Gir No. Aabck4601P

d) Bank of India, 218 ITR 371 (Bom) (e) Eveready Industries (I) Ltd., 78 ITD175 (Cal) (f) Indian Molasses Co. Ltd., 37 ITR 66 (SC) 39. Shri F.V.Irani, ld counsel for the assessee submitted that there is no dispute regarding allowability of assessee's claim and the only dispute is regarding timing i.e. year of allowability. The whole controversy

JM FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) 4(3), MUMBAI

Accordingly dismissed. However, in view of our findings given above, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. J.M. Financial Services The Joint Commissioner Of Ltd., Income-Tax (Osd)-4(3), (Formerly Jm Financial Room No.635, Services Pvt. Ltd.), Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 7Th Floor, Cnergy, M.K. Road, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025 Pan: Aaacj5977A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10

depreciation and finance charges on the leased assets. In this regard, the AO relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC). 6. The ld. CIT(A) following his own decision in earlier year, confirmed disallowance so made by the AO. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee

SHREE PUSHKAR FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)-WARD 2(30, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shree Pushkar Foundation, Ito (Exemption) – Ward 2(3), 301/302, 3Rd Floor, Cumbala Hill Tele Exchange Atlanta Centre, Vs. (Mtnl), Peddar Rd, Tardeo, Near Udyog Bhavan, Mumbai-400026. Sonawala Road, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aawts 2303 N Appellant Respondent

d forward or set-off of any loss. Filing a revised return under section 139(5) of the IT off of any loss. Filing a revised return under section 139(5) of the IT off of any loss. Filing a revised return under section 139(5) of the IT Act and taking a contrary stand and/or claiming the exemption, which

DCIT , CC- 8(1), MUMBAI vs. NIRSHILP SECURITIES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

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

section (4) of Section 73 so as to reduce the period of carry forward of speculation losses from eight assessment years to four assessment years. These amendments will take effect from 1st April, 2006and will, accordingly, apply in relation to assessment year 2006-07 and subsequent years. 24. The revenue has clearly held that the assessee is in the trading

ROCKLINE DEVELOPERS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, ground “A” raised in the appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

d) the amount by way of provision for losses of subsidiary companies; or (e) the amount or amounts of dividends paid or proposed ; or (f) the amount or amounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which section 10 (other than the provisions contained in clause (38) thereof) or section 11 or section 12 apply; or (fa) the amount

M/S. GLOBAL CRICKET CORPORATION PTE. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DDIT IT-3(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

5 of Heads Agreement, SET was permitted to reconfigure, combined and/or package the Feed for the purpose of exploiting the „Rights‟ (i.e. the right to transmit, broadcast, exhibit, perform, include in cable programmes, and/or otherwise distribute or make available to the public, any moving visual and/or audiovisual representations including the Feed, Highlights Package and any recordings by specified means

ADIT (IT)-3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GLOBAL CRICKET CORPORATION PTE. LTD., MUMBAI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

5 of Heads Agreement, SET was permitted to reconfigure, combined and/or package the Feed for the purpose of exploiting the „Rights‟ (i.e. the right to transmit, broadcast, exhibit, perform, include in cable programmes, and/or otherwise distribute or make available to the public, any moving visual and/or audiovisual representations including the Feed, Highlights Package and any recordings by specified means

M/S. GLOBAL CRICKET CORPORATION PTE. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADIT (INT. TAXATION) - 3(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

5 of Heads Agreement, SET was permitted to reconfigure, combined and/or package the Feed for the purpose of exploiting the „Rights‟ (i.e. the right to transmit, broadcast, exhibit, perform, include in cable programmes, and/or otherwise distribute or make available to the public, any moving visual and/or audiovisual representations including the Feed, Highlights Package and any recordings by specified means

DCIT 10(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. PHOENIX MECANO (I) PLTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year:2011-12

D E R The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 20/05/2015 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai. The only ground raised in this appeal, by the 2 M/s Phoenix Mecano (I) Pvt. Ltd. Revenue, is with respect to the learned CIT(A) holding that deduction claimed u/s 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

ACIT CC 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj

ACIT, CC 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj

ACIT, CC 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj

OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMTIED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj

ACIT, CC-6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj

OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMTIED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj

OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -6 , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj

ACIT, CC-6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj

ACIT, CC 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. OVERSEAS INFRASTRUCTURE ALLIANCE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

depreciable - - - - - - - - - asset 5% on bldg. used for office 16 Adhoc 30% disallowance from - - - - - 5 1 - 5 reimbursement of expenditure to director 17 Unexplained cash loan recd from Paresh - - - - - - - 4 4 - - 1, 2 Shah u/s. 69A 18 Adjustment in 143(1) for treatment of - - - - - - - - - contingent liability 19 Payment in Ethopia based on WhatsApp - - - - - - - - 4 chat u/s. 69C 20 Payment to Manoj