D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

disallowing of Rs.1,08,40,272/- being difference in stamp being difference in stamp duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, under section 43CA of the Act. under section 43CA

ATUL SHAMJI BHARANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC- 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee for the

disallowance made by the AO under section 69C of the Act. Accordingly,\nthe grounds no.3 and 4 raised in assessee's appeal are allowed.\n29. In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-\n12 is partly allowed.\nITA No. 2022/Mum./2023\nAssessee's appeal- A.Y. 2013-14\n30. In this appeal, the assessee has raised

SURENDRA GARG HUF ,MUMBAI vs. ITO- 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

153C should have been invoked.\n2. Whether the addition of sale proceeds of shares as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act and the disallowance

ATUL SHAMJI BHARANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC- 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee for the

disallowance made by the AO under section 69C of the Act. Accordingly,\nthe grounds no.3 and 4 raised in assessee's appeal are allowed.\n29. In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-\n12 is partly allowed.\nITA No. 2022/Mum./2023\nAssessee's appeal- A.Y. 2013-14\n30. In this appeal, the assessee has raised

SURENDRA GARG HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO - 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

153C instead of Section 147 of the\nAct. In our view accepting the aforesaid contention advanced in\nbehalf of the Assessee would amount to substitution of opinion of\nappellate authority in place of opinion of the Assessing Officer of the\nAssessee but also the opinion of Assessing Officer of the searched\npersons (to not prepare the aforesaid satisfaction note

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. JIVESH DEVELOPERS & PROPERTIES P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue‟s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

disallowed assessee‟s claim of deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act for the assessment years 20050–06 to 2011–12. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid decision of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred appeals before the first appellate authority. 6. In the appeals preferred for assessment years 2005–06 to 2010– 11, wherein, proceedings were initiated under section

D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(4), CENTRAL RANGE - 4, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for

disallowing of Rs.1,08,40,272/- being difference in stamp duty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year, under section 43CA of the Act.\n6. The Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s 271AAB(IA) of the Act vide letter dated 30.12.2018. The Appellant prays that the penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s

D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 12(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for

disallowing of Rs.1,08,40,272/- being difference in stamp\nduty value and sale price of some properties sold during the year,\nunder section 43CA of the Act.\n6. The Ld. AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 274\nr.w.s 271AAB(IA) of the Act vide letter dated 30.12.2018. The\nAppellant prays that the penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s

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

153C r.w.s. was to start the computation of income under section 153 was to start the computation of income under section 153 153A with the last assessed income or last income upheld in 153A with the last assessed income or last incom 153A with the last assessed income or last incom appellate proceedings appellate proceedings and then add the disallowance

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

153C r.w.s. was to start the computation of income under section 153 was to start the computation of income under section 153 153A with the last assessed income or last income upheld in 153A with the last assessed income or last incom 153A with the last assessed income or last incom appellate proceedings appellate proceedings and then add the disallowance

RUPAL KASHYAP MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowed and taxed accordingly in the relevant years? Ans. Sir, I am not aware that D. B. (International) Stock Brokers Limited is a paper company or not. All documentary evidences including demat statement and contract notes pertaining to D. B. (International) Stock Brokers Limited within a week’s time. 5. Further, as is mentioned in the relevant para

RUPAL KASHYAP MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowed and taxed accordingly in the relevant years? Ans. Sir, I am not aware that D. B. (International) Stock Brokers Limited is a paper company or not. All documentary evidences including demat statement and contract notes pertaining to D. B. (International) Stock Brokers Limited within a week’s time. 5. Further, as is mentioned in the relevant para

RUPAL KASHYAP MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowed and taxed accordingly in the relevant years? Ans. Sir, I am not aware that D. B. (International) Stock Brokers Limited is a paper company or not. All documentary evidences including demat statement and contract notes pertaining to D. B. (International) Stock Brokers Limited within a week’s time. 5. Further, as is mentioned in the relevant para

RUPAL KASHYAP MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowed and taxed accordingly in the relevant years? Ans. Sir, I am not aware that D. B. (International) Stock Brokers Limited is a paper company or not. All documentary evidences including demat statement and contract notes pertaining to D. B. (International) Stock Brokers Limited within a week’s time. 5. Further, as is mentioned in the relevant para

KREZ HOTEL & REALTY LTD,MUMBAI vs. JTCIT (OSD) CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar

section 153C of the Income Tax Act and therefore the notice issued by the A.O. u/s 153 A r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act is illegal, void, bad in law and /or without jurisdiction and therefore the impugned order is liable to be quashed. M/s. Krez Hotel & Realty Ltd. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case

KREZ HOTEL & REALTY LTD,MUMBAI vs. JTCIT (OSD) CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar

section 153C of the Income Tax Act and therefore the notice issued by the A.O. u/s 153 A r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act is illegal, void, bad in law and /or without jurisdiction and therefore the impugned order is liable to be quashed. M/s. Krez Hotel & Realty Ltd. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case

KREZ HOTEL & REALTY LTD,MUMBAI vs. JTCIT (OSD) CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar

section 153C of the Income Tax Act and therefore the notice issued by the A.O. u/s 153 A r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act is illegal, void, bad in law and /or without jurisdiction and therefore the impugned order is liable to be quashed. M/s. Krez Hotel & Realty Ltd. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case

KREZ HOTEL & REALTY LTD,MUMBAI vs. JTCIT (OSD) CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar

section 153C of the Income Tax Act and therefore the notice issued by the A.O. u/s 153 A r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act is illegal, void, bad in law and /or without jurisdiction and therefore the impugned order is liable to be quashed. M/s. Krez Hotel & Realty Ltd. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case