NANDLAL TOLANI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed is dismissed in the above terms

disallowances in Assessment Order under section 143(3) the Taxable Income has been increased, the accumulation under section 11(2) should also be allowed as per tax Taxable Income as per Page | 7 ITA No. 113/Mum/2024 and ITA No. 650/Mum/2024 Nandlal Tolani Charitable Trust; A.Y. 2014-15 and A.Y. 2015-16 the Assessment Order and not the amount shown

NANDLAL TOLANI CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEM WARD 2(1), CUMBALLA HILL, MUMBAI

disallowances in Assessment Order under section\n143(3) the Taxable Income has been increased, the accumulation under\nsection 11(2) should also be allowed as per tax Taxable Income as per\nPage | 7\nITA No. 113/Mum/2024\nand ITA No. 650/Mum/2024\nNandlal Tolani Charitable Trust; A.Y. 2014-15 and A.Y. 2015-16\nthe Assessment Order and not the amount shown

M/S. EMERALD REALTORS P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CC-5(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2016-17

24A of the Act. The AO thereby framed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. 3. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing appeal who has confirmed the addition by partly allowing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee has come

DALU VASU HIRANANDANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO(IT)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as\nwithdrawn

disallowance of a standard deduction. Subsequently, the assessee filed an application to withdraw the appeal.", "held": "The assessee requested to withdraw the appeal due to a duplicate listing in the tribunal and an appearance before a different bench. The tribunal accepted the assessee's request after considering the application and hearing the DR.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "250", "147", "24A

DCIT CC 3(1), MUMBAI vs. WIND WORLD WIND FARMS (INDIA) LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in both the cases are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiआयकर अपील सुं./I.T.A. No.119 & 122/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 बिाम/ Dcit Cc 3(1) M/S. Wind World Wind R.No. 1924, 19Th Floor, Air Farms (India) Ltd., India Building, Nariman A-9, Enercon Tower, V. Point, Mumbai 400021 Veera Desai Road, Veera Indl. Estate, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400053 स्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan:Aaace3530A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri. Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh Assessee By: Shri. A.K Ghosh स िवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.05.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramlal Negi, Jm: These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against Two Orders Dated 10.10.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)- 51 In Respect Of Two Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2014-15, Whereby The Ld. Cit(A) Allowed Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against Assessment Orders Dated 20.04.2015. Since The Facts Of The Case & The Issues Involved Are Identical In Both The Appeals. The Same Were Clubbed Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common & Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience.

Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would not apply to the facts of this case as no exempt income was received or receivable during the relevant previous year. It is not the case of the Assessing Officer that any actual 4 | P a g e I.T.A. No.119 & 122/Mum/2018 income was received by the assessee and the same

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

disallow carry-forward, the FTC framework is silent in this regard. Accordingly, treaty-based interpretation and recognition under the available jurisprudence is looked into to resolve the present issue wherein more pertinent question involved is in respect of timing mismatch for the FTC paid and its claim as a credit by the assessee. AY 2013-14 11.4. In this regard

PRASAD SIDDHARTH THORAT,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, KAUTILYA BHAVAN

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosaina.Ys: 2019-20

Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, and not recognition. Since the donation was made by cheque, and required documentation (receipt, Form 24A, registration proof) was provided, the disallowance

REKHA NILESH SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 32(3)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

24A and 25 of the paper book. The assessee had sold shares on three different dates in the price bond of Rs. 228 to 211 per share. Thus, total consideration of Rs. 32,88,063/- was received on sale of shares. Closing balance of the shares in demat account of the assessee is 25,000. A copy of statement

KEWAL FULCHAND GUDHAKA,BHIWANDI vs. CIRCLE 1, KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

24A, 503, Ashok Nagar, Plaza, Wayale Nagar, Kalyan Bhiwandi Road, Khadakpada, Kalyan Bhiwandi West PAN:AHFPG2435H Maharashtra-421301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Vijay Parmar Respondent by Shri Asif Karmali, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 27/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement 31/01/2025 ORDER Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The present appeal arises out of order dated 15/02/2024 passed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance can\nbe made in respect to interest income and leasing activity income i.e. the rent\nand other fees, because these falls under the objects of the assessee's\ninstitution and hence on merits also the assessee has a case. Accordingly, we\nneed not to elaborate on the merits of the case, since we have already allowed\nregistration

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance can\nbe made in respect to interest income and leasing activity income i.e. the rent\nand other fees, because these falls under the objects of the assessee's\ninstitution and hence on merits also the assessee has a case. Accordingly, we\nneed not to elaborate on the merits of the case, since we have already allowed\nregistration

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

disallowance can be made in respect to interest income and leasing activity income i.e. the rent and other fees, because these falls under the objects of the assessee's institution and hence on merits also the assessee has a case. Accordingly, we need not to elaborate on the merits of the case, since we have already allowed registration

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

disallowance can be made in respect to interest income and leasing activity income i.e. the rent and other fees, because these falls under the objects of the assessee's institution and hence on merits also the assessee has a case. Accordingly, we need not to elaborate on the merits of the case, since we have already allowed registration

JAY PROPERTIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 6(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri D.Karunakara. Rao () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Jay Properties P. Ltd Vs. The Acit, Cir 6(1) 135 Continental Building Aayakar Bhavan Dr. A.B. Rd. Worli Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400018 Pan No. Aaacj1369C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri. B.S. Sharma Shri. Dalapat Shah Respondent By : Shri Sujit Bangar

section 24A @ 30%. The assessee also claimed all expenditure and derived loss from business activity and adjusted the same against income from house property. Subsequently the assessee, during the course of assessment proceedings, changed its stand and claimed the income declared as rental income as income from business and profession. The assessee has entered into agreement, the nomenclature given

DCIT-CC-4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAHEJA UNIVERSAL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the Assessee is allowed,\nwhereas appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed being infructuous

disallowance u/s\n14A r.w.r. 8D of Rs. 42,85,210 was made.\n2. Subsequently, it is found from the schedule 16 of the balance sheet of\nthe assessee for the year under consideration that the assessee has\nfinished goods in the form of flats and shops to the tune of Rs.\n32,46,76,775. However, it is also found

FULLERTON FINANCIAL HOLDINGS PTE. LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(3)(1) - MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

24A(3) requires only the incurrence of "annual expenditure on operations in that Contracting State". There is no requirement for a test of allowability under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, nor does the provision invite a disallowance

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. JAY PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Dy. Cit, Circle-6(1)(2) Jay Properties Private Limited 18Th Floor, A-Wing, Marathon Mumbai Vs. Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013

24A of the Act. 4. The assessee was in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), challenging the assessment order. 5. The ld. CIT(A) held that in assessee’s case for A.Ys. 2009-10 and 2014-15, the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) has accepted the contention of the assessee that the rental income was to be assessed as ‘income

ITO 6 (1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S A J COAL PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5th floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. PAN NO. AABCA 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., ITO-6(1)(1), C/o M/s Jayesh Sanghrajka and Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. LLP, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5th floor, M.K. Road

M/S A J COAL PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 6 (1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-6(1)(1), M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, 24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., Ito-6(1)(1), C/O M/S Jayesh Sanghrajka & Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. Llp, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5Th Floor, M.K. Road, New Marine Centre, Ds Phalke Road, Dadar Lines, Mumbai-400020. (East), Mumbai-400014. Pan No. Aabca 0386 M Appellant Respondent

24A, Coal Depot, Sewree (E), Vs. Room No. 503, 5th floor, M.K. Mumbai-400015. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. PAN NO. AABCA 0386 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s A.J. Coal Pvt. Ltd., ITO-6(1)(1), C/o M/s Jayesh Sanghrajka and Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. 503, Co. LLP, 405, Hind Rajasthan Vs. 5th floor, M.K. Road