BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

Section 153A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word „reassess‟ to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

Section 153A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word „reassess‟ to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

Section 153A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word „reassess‟ to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

1(4) DID NOT HAVE THE JURISDICTION TO PASS THE ORDER UNDER SECTION JURISDICTION TO PASS THE ORDER UNDER SECTION JURISDICTION TO PASS THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153C 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153C On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and circumstances of the case

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

1(4) DID NOT HAVE THE JURISDICTION TO PASS THE ORDER UNDER SECTION JURISDICTION TO PASS THE ORDER UNDER SECTION JURISDICTION TO PASS THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153C 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153C On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and circumstances of the case

ABHISHEK LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result both the appeals are allowed

1) postulates one assessment; putting the total income of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search was conducted or requisition was made. 14. In para no. 3 of the judgment the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court while discussing the cited decisions in the cases CIT vs. Chetan

MANJULA MANGALPRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3)(ERSTWHILE CEN CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

1) postulates one assessment; putting the total income of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search was conducted or requisition was made. 14. In para no. 3 of the judgment the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court while discussing the cited decisions in the cases CIT vs. Chetan

MANGAL PRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3) ERSTWHILE CE CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

1) postulates one assessment; putting the total income of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search was conducted or requisition was made. 14. In para no. 3 of the judgment the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court while discussing the cited decisions in the cases CIT vs. Chetan

MANGAL PRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3) ERSTWHILE CE CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

1) postulates one assessment; putting the total income of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search was conducted or requisition was made. 14. In para no. 3 of the judgment the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court while discussing the cited decisions in the cases CIT vs. Chetan

MANJULA MANGALPRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3)(ERSTWHILE CEN CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

1) postulates one assessment; putting the total income of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search was conducted or requisition was made. 14. In para no. 3 of the judgment the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court while discussing the cited decisions in the cases CIT vs. Chetan

MANGAL PRABHAT LODHA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 7(3) ERSTWHILE CE CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3456,3457&3458/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha, 412, 4Th Floor, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpl 6198F (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No. 3465 &3466 /Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Manjula Mangalprabhat Lodha, 412, Dcit, Central Circle -7(3), Room बिधम/ 4Th Floor, 17G, Vardhaman Chamber, No.655, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpl 5846 M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri N.P. Singh सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A. M.: These Are The Appeals By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The I.T. Act ,1961. 2 Ita No.3456,57&58/M/15 (A.Y. 2008-11) Mangal Prabhat Lodha Vs. Dcit

1) postulates one assessment; putting the total income of six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search was conducted or requisition was made. 14. In para no. 3 of the judgment the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court while discussing the cited decisions in the cases CIT vs. Chetan

GOVIND AGARWAL. HUF,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 32, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4531,4566,876,877,878/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2006-07, 2007-08, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2005-06) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Manidevi Agarwal, 720, A- 1, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakpa 4962 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4528/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Shri Govind Agarwal, 701, A-1, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adopa 4038 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.873,874/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Shri Govind Agarwal(Huf), 720/A-5, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aiepa 3109 A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) 876,828,4566,4547,218/11 &957/13&Co203.13

disallowance of Rs. 1,01,300 under section 14A, are beyond the scope of section 153A / 153C. Consequently, we set aside

SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowances under section 37(1), or unexplained cash credits under section 68. These heads of income do not qualify as ―assets‖ within the meaning ascribed in Explanation 2 to section 153A

SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowances under section 37(1), or unexplained cash credits under section 68. These heads of income do not qualify as ―assets‖ within the meaning ascribed in Explanation 2 to section 153A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 8 (1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowances under section 37(1), or unexplained cash credits under section 68. These heads of income do not qualify as ―assets‖ within the meaning ascribed in Explanation 2 to section 153A

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIVSHANKAR RAMSWAROOP SHARMA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowances under section 37(1), or unexplained cash credits under section 68. These heads of income do not qualify as ―assets‖ within the meaning ascribed in Explanation 2 to section 153A

SHRI SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowances under section 37(1), or unexplained cash credits under section 68. These heads of income do not qualify as ―assets‖ within the meaning ascribed in Explanation 2 to section 153A

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallowances under section 37(1), or unexplained cash credits under section 68. These heads of income do not qualify as ―assets‖ within the meaning ascribed in Explanation 2 to section 153A

SHRI SHIV SHANKAR SHARMA ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

disallowance of expenses was upheld.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "132", "132(4)", "143(3)", "147", "153A", "65B", "153A(1)", "68", "69C", "37(1