DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-7(3),, MUMBAI vs. M/S MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LTD(EARLIER KNOWN AS M/S LODHA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD), MUMBAI

disallowances / additions. In the said assessment order, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had carried out certain transactions in contravention of provisions of section 269SS of the Act which would invite the assessee with penalty u/s 271D of the Act. Accordingly, separate penalty proceedings u/s 271D of the Act were initiated for the Asst Year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LTD.(SUCCESSOR TO M/S LODHA DEVELOPER PVT LTD), MUMBAI

disallowances / additions. In the said assessment order, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had carried out certain transactions in contravention of provisions of section 269SS of the Act which would invite the assessee with penalty u/s 271D of the Act. Accordingly, separate penalty proceedings u/s 271D of the Act were initiated for the Asst Year

SUPARSHWA CONSTRUCTIONS,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 6, MUMBAI

In the result, additional ground of appeal raised by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

271E of the Income tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"], is bad, illegal, void and without jurisdiction as the same being time barred. 2 ITA No. 3083 & 3084 Mum 2014-M/s Suparshwa Constructions 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partner, engaged in the business of construction and belongs to Sanghvi Group. A search and seizure

WEST COAST FINE FOODS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,ANDHERI, MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 13(3)(2), AAYKAR BHAWAN, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowances to arrive at the assessed income of Rs. 11,06,05,110/-. Subsequently the AO issued a show-cause notice initiating penalty proceedings under section 271B of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 271B read as under: “Failure to get accounts audited. 271B. If any person fails to get his accounts audited in respect of any previous year

VISEN INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TRANSFER PRICING )-4(3)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The TPO initiated penalty proceeding under section 271G of the Act before passing the order under section 92CA(3) of the Act for the reason that the assessee has not responded to the show cause notices issued by the TPO. Accordingly the TPO vide order dated 30.09.2019 levied a penalty

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. SANATHANAGAR ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and all Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

section 271D and 271E has been sustained on the issue of transaction through journal entries in spite of the significant judgment of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Triumph International Finance (I) Ltd. (supra). 5. Per contra, the ld. AR defended each and every argument of the ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue. The gist

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. NAMINATH BUILDERS & FARMS P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271E could be imposed for contravening the provisions of section 269T of the Act. 7.5. In the appellant’s case the genuineness of the transaction made through journal entries is not in doubt and it has not been shown either in the assessment proceedings or in the penalty proceedings that unaccounted income of the lender or the borrower was involved

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. NAMINATH BUILDERS & FARMS P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271E could be imposed for contravening the provisions of section 269T of the Act. 7.5. In the appellant’s case the genuineness of the transaction made through journal entries is not in doubt and it has not been shown either in the assessment proceedings or in the penalty proceedings that unaccounted income of the lender or the borrower was involved

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271E could be imposed for contravening the provisions of section 269T of the Act. 7.5. In the appellant’s case the genuineness of the transaction made through journal entries is not in doubt and it has not been shown either in the assessment proceedings or in the penalty proceedings that unaccounted income of the lender or the borrower was involved

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. NAMINATH BUILDERS & FARMS P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271E could be imposed for contravening the provisions of section 269T of the Act. 7.5. In the appellant’s case the genuineness of the transaction made through journal entries is not in doubt and it has not been shown either in the assessment proceedings or in the penalty proceedings that unaccounted income of the lender or the borrower was involved

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL STANDARD INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271E could be imposed for contravening the provisions of section 269T of the Act. 7.5. In the appellant’s case the genuineness of the transaction made through journal entries is not in doubt and it has not been shown either in the assessment proceedings or in the penalty proceedings that unaccounted income of the lender or the borrower was involved

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. NAMINATH BUILDERS & FARMS P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271E could be imposed for contravening the provisions of section 269T of the Act. 7.5. In the appellant’s case the genuineness of the transaction made through journal entries is not in doubt and it has not been shown either in the assessment proceedings or in the penalty proceedings that unaccounted income of the lender or the borrower was involved

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

disallowed, a separate list thereof for the period A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. 24. Submit list of equity shareholders holding shares more than 10 percent individually along with add5ress/PAN for A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. Name, PAN, Any sum Specify Address and credited to head & contact no. No.of %shareh equity amount Sr.No. of the party shares

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

disallowed, a separate list thereof for the period A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. 24. Submit list of equity shareholders holding shares more than 10 percent individually along with add5ress/PAN for A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. Name, PAN, Any sum Specify Address and credited to head & contact no. No.of %shareh equity amount Sr.No. of the party shares

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

disallowed, a separate list thereof for the period A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. 24. Submit list of equity shareholders holding shares more than 10 percent individually along with add5ress/PAN for A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. Name, PAN, Any sum Specify Address and credited to head & contact no. No.of %shareh equity amount Sr.No. of the party shares

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

disallowed, a separate list thereof for the period A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. 24. Submit list of equity shareholders holding shares more than 10 percent individually along with add5ress/PAN for A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. Name, PAN, Any sum Specify Address and credited to head & contact no. No.of %shareh equity amount Sr.No. of the party shares

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

disallowed, a separate list thereof for the period A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. 24. Submit list of equity shareholders holding shares more than 10 percent individually along with add5ress/PAN for A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. Name, PAN, Any sum Specify Address and credited to head & contact no. No.of %shareh equity amount Sr.No. of the party shares

AVARSEKAR & SONS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

disallowed, a separate list thereof for the period A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. 24. Submit list of equity shareholders holding shares more than 10 percent individually along with add5ress/PAN for A.Y. 2006-07 to A.Y. 2012-13. Name, PAN, Any sum Specify Address and credited to head & contact no. No.of %shareh equity amount Sr.No. of the party shares