MADISON TEAMWORKS FILM PROMOTIONS AND ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 10(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2013-14 Madison Teamworks Film Deputy Commissioner Of Promotions & Entertainment Income Tax-10(2)(2), Private Limited, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 1St Floor, 349 Business Point, M.K. Road, Western Express Highway, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (East), Mumbai-400069. Pan : Aaecm1006B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Mr. Siddesh Chaugule & Ms. Manmeet Kaur Saini For Revenue : Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr.Dr

deemed dividend u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act besides an amount of Rs. 20,28,653/- on account of 26AS mismatch and made a disallowance

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

disallow the same in entirety. 14. We have considered the rival submissions made before us and ve considered the rival submissions made before us and ve considered the rival submissions made before us and perused the material placed on record. Firstly, we have decided in perused the material placed on record. Firstly, we have decided in perused the material placed

ITO - 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S MULTIVENTURE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance by holding that

M/S MULTIVENTURE FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 3 (2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance by holding that

ACIT 12(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ASSOCIATED HOSPITALITY LTD DEVELOPERS P. LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2013-14 Dcit-12(1)(1), M/S Associated Hospitality & Room No.223, 02Nd Floor, Developers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Floor, Techniplex-1, Off. Vs. M.K. Road, Veer Savarkar Flyover, Mumbai-400020 Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400062 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aafca7847P Shri Anadi Varma Cit-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Rajesh S. Shah

deemed dividend envisaged u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. First Appellate Authority. The Ld. CIT(A), for the detailed reasons recorded in its appellate order dated 28/11/2016 allowed appeal filed by the assessee and deleted additions made by the AO towards disallowance

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

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

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

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

DY CIT CC-1(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

deemed dividend u/s 2 (22) (a) of the act. xii. It also cited many judicial precedents on all the above issues. ITA Nos. 1935/MUM/2020 & 41/MUM/2021 Grasim Industries Ltd. 2018-19 15. Subsequently, another show cause notice was issued on 1 March 2019 stating that i. Aditya Birla Nuvo limited in assessment year 2015 – 16 has stated while contesting disallowance

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

deemed dividend u/s 2 (22) (a) of the act. xii. It also cited many judicial precedents on all the above issues. ITA Nos. 1935/MUM/2020 & 41/MUM/2021 Grasim Industries Ltd. 2018-19 15. Subsequently, another show cause notice was issued on 1 March 2019 stating that i. Aditya Birla Nuvo limited in assessment year 2015 – 16 has stated while contesting disallowance

ACIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI vs. VIJAYDEEP HOTELS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3291,3293,3384 & 3385/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2007-08 The Acit, M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. बनाम/ Cent. Cir-29, Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Hotel Bawa International, Mumbai-400 020 Nehru Road Ext, Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3241 & 3243/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. The Acit, बनाम/ Ltd., Cent. Cir-29, Vs. Hotel Bawa International, Aayakar Bhavan, Nehru Road Ext, Mumbai-400 020 Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 1582D आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 951 To 953/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08 Shri Karanveer Singh G. The Acit, बनाम/ Bawa, Cent. Cir-29, Vs. 22, Sahib Guru Angad Aayakar Bhavan, Niwas, Mumbai-400 020 Vitthal Nagar Co. Op. Soc. N.S. Road No. 22, Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aejpb 8856F

disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) by the Revenue in ITA No. 3384/M/11 for assessment year 2006-07 are dismissed. 17. The third issue in the appeal of the revenue for Assessment Year 2006-07 is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made u/s. 2(22)(e) as deemed dividend

VIJAYDEEP HOTELS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3291,3293,3384 & 3385/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2007-08 The Acit, M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. बनाम/ Cent. Cir-29, Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Hotel Bawa International, Mumbai-400 020 Nehru Road Ext, Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3241 & 3243/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. The Acit, बनाम/ Ltd., Cent. Cir-29, Vs. Hotel Bawa International, Aayakar Bhavan, Nehru Road Ext, Mumbai-400 020 Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 1582D आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 951 To 953/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08 Shri Karanveer Singh G. The Acit, बनाम/ Bawa, Cent. Cir-29, Vs. 22, Sahib Guru Angad Aayakar Bhavan, Niwas, Mumbai-400 020 Vitthal Nagar Co. Op. Soc. N.S. Road No. 22, Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aejpb 8856F

disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) by the Revenue in ITA No. 3384/M/11 for assessment year 2006-07 are dismissed. 17. The third issue in the appeal of the revenue for Assessment Year 2006-07 is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made u/s. 2(22)(e) as deemed dividend

AMAR VITHALDAS GANDHI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 42(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Amar Vithaldas Gandhi, Dy. Cit Circle 35(1), 203, Panorama Apartments, Kautilya Bhavan, Jaisukhlal Mehta Road, Santacruz Vs. Mumbai. West, Mumbai-400054. Pan No. Aefpg 2142 G Appellant Respondent

deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act; and (ii) disallowance of expenses of Rs.16,87,356/ disallowance of expenses

MADISON TEAMWORKS FILM PROMOTIONS AND ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 10(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of INR.55,00,000/-, (b) Account of mismatch of 26AS details of INR.20,28,653/-, and (c) disallowance

MAANRAJ TRADING P. LTD ( UNDERLIQUIDATION),MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 3414/Mum/2009 : (A.Y : 2005-06) M/S Maanraj Trading Pvt. Ltd Vs. Acit Cir 6(3) Poonam Chambers, 101E, 1St Floor Aayakar Bhavan Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 018 New Marine Lines Pan : Aaacm0150 Mumbai – 400 020

dividend income bears to the total income, which is coming to around 13.06%. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submits that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) directed the Assessing Officer to compute the disallowance following Rule 8D. The Ld. Counsel submits that in view of the jurisdictional High Court’s decision in the case of Godrej and Boyce

ACIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI vs. MAANRAJ TRADING P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 3414/Mum/2009 : (A.Y : 2005-06) M/S Maanraj Trading Pvt. Ltd Vs. Acit Cir 6(3) Poonam Chambers, 101E, 1St Floor Aayakar Bhavan Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 018 New Marine Lines Pan : Aaacm0150 Mumbai – 400 020

dividend income bears to the total income, which is coming to around 13.06%. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submits that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) directed the Assessing Officer to compute the disallowance following Rule 8D. The Ld. Counsel submits that in view of the jurisdictional High Court’s decision in the case of Godrej and Boyce

ITO 7(2)(4, MUMBAI vs. SUNJEWLES INTERNATIONAL LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 10AA of the Act, on the grounds that assessee has set up new unit in SEZ by splitting/reconstruction of already existing unit. The AO also made addition towards deemed dividend

ASST CIT 7(2), MUMBAI vs. SUNJEWELS INTERNATONAL P. LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 10AA of the Act, on the grounds that assessee has set up new unit in SEZ by splitting/reconstruction of already existing unit. The AO also made addition towards deemed dividend

DCIT CEN CIR 2(3), MUMBAI vs. VIPUL D SHAH, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross objection is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumardy. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle–2(3), Mumbai V/S Shri Vipul D. Shah Smag House, 1St Floor Sarojini Road Extension ……………. Respondent Vile Parle (W), Mumbai 400 056 Pan – Aahps5253J

deemed dividend and disallowance of interest under section 57(iii) of the Act. However, he confirmed the imposition of penalty