RAMESH BUILDERS (INDIA),MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Ramesh Builders(India) in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1797/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Ramesh Builders (India), Income Tax बनाम/ 9, Dhiraj Chambers, Officer,12(1)(2),Aayakar V. 9, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Fort,Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafr4655E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

45(4) of the Act profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset by way of distribution of capital assets on the dissolution of a firm or other association of person or body of individuals(not being a company or a co-operative society) or otherwise , shall be chargeable to tax as the income of the firm

RAMESH BUILDERS,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Ramesh Builders(India) in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1797/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Ramesh Builders (India), Income Tax बनाम/ 9, Dhiraj Chambers, Officer,12(1)(2),Aayakar V. 9, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Fort,Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafr4655E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

45(4) of the Act profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset by way of distribution of capital assets on the dissolution of a firm or other association of person or body of individuals(not being a company or a co-operative society) or otherwise , shall be chargeable to tax as the income of the firm

D.C.I.T. CENT. CIR. - 7(2), MUMBAI vs. RAJAHMUNDHRY EXPRESSWAY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

disallowance made. Accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 42. In the result, appeal is allowed. ITA no.6484/Mum./2017 Revenue’s Appeal – A.Y. 2005–06 43. The issue in dispute relates to deletion of depreciation by invoking provisions of section 40A(2) of the Act. 44. This issue is identical to the issue raised by the Revenue

ELARA CAPITAL (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CIRCLE 6(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Elara Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd., The Acit-Circle 6(2)(2), Tower 3, 21St Floor, One Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Vs. International Center, Senapati Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Karve Road, Mumbai- Road (West), Mumbai-400013. 400020. Pan No. Aabce 6487 B Appellant Respondent

disallowance u 45. Having held so, the next question for our consideration Having held so, the next question for our consideration Having held so, the next question for our consideration is whether the following Explanation inserted by is whether the following Explanation inserted by is whether the following Explanation inserted by the Finance Act, 2022 in Section

DCIT - 9(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AMARTARA PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

section 45(3) but not given a categorical finding. The ITAT has give its findigs under different facts considering the fact that when a document is registered under the Provisions of Registration Act, 1908, the value determined by the stamp duty authority shall be replaced to determine full value of consideration. Therefore, we reverse the finding

AMARTARA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 9(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

section 45(3) but not given a categorical finding. The ITAT has give its findigs under different facts considering the fact that when a document is registered under the Provisions of Registration Act, 1908, the value determined by the stamp duty authority shall be replaced to determine full value of consideration. Therefore, we reverse the finding

BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

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

45. The assessee for the AY 2011-12 filed the return of income on 30.09.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 222,02,63,290/-. Subsequently the assessee filed the revised return on 28.03.2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 221,78,42,097/-. The AO complete the assessment by making the following disallowance: (i) Disallowance under section

BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

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

45. The assessee for the AY 2011-12 filed the return of income on 30.09.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 222,02,63,290/-. Subsequently the assessee filed the revised return on 28.03.2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 221,78,42,097/-. The AO complete the assessment by making the following disallowance: (i) Disallowance under section

DCIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

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

45. The assessee for the AY 2011-12 filed the return of income on 30.09.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 222,02,63,290/-. Subsequently the assessee filed the revised return on 28.03.2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 221,78,42,097/-. The AO complete the assessment by making the following disallowance: (i) Disallowance under section

ASIA INVESTMENTS PVT.. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CIRCLE 2 (1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

section 14A of the Act . The Assessing Officer, however, following the findings recorded by his predecessor Officer, however, following the findings recorded by his predecessor Officer, however, following the findings recorded by his predecessor in the assessment for assessment year 2011 in the assessment for assessment year 2011–12, proceeded to 12, proceeded to compute the disallowance in accordance with

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D is warranted. Therefore, we find merit in Ground No. (i) and (ii) of the appeal, the same are allowed. 44. In Ground No. (iii), the assessee has assailed addition on account of interest income from Bank under the head “Income from Other Sources”. The ld. Counsel for the assessee stated at Bar that this

APL LOGISTICS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D is warranted. Therefore, we find merit in Ground No. (i) and (ii) of the appeal, the same are allowed. 44. In Ground No. (iii), the assessee has assailed addition on account of interest income from Bank under the head “Income from Other Sources”. The ld. Counsel for the assessee stated at Bar that this

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D is warranted. Therefore, we find merit in Ground No. (i) and (ii) of the appeal, the same are allowed. 44. In Ground No. (iii), the assessee has assailed addition on account of interest income from Bank under the head “Income from Other Sources”. The ld. Counsel for the assessee stated at Bar that this

DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. APL LOGISTICS (INDIA ) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D is warranted. Therefore, we find merit in Ground No. (i) and (ii) of the appeal, the same are allowed. 44. In Ground No. (iii), the assessee has assailed addition on account of interest income from Bank under the head “Income from Other Sources”. The ld. Counsel for the assessee stated at Bar that this

DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D is warranted. Therefore, we find merit in Ground No. (i) and (ii) of the appeal, the same are allowed. 44. In Ground No. (iii), the assessee has assailed addition on account of interest income from Bank under the head “Income from Other Sources”. The ld. Counsel for the assessee stated at Bar that this

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D is warranted. Therefore, we find merit in Ground No. (i) and (ii) of the appeal, the same are allowed. 44. In Ground No. (iii), the assessee has assailed addition on account of interest income from Bank under the head “Income from Other Sources”. The ld. Counsel for the assessee stated at Bar that this

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

disallowances and assessed total income under normal provisions of the Act at ₹354,42,01,379/ 354,42,01,379/- and computed book profit of ₹40,69,06,175/-. As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB

THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

disallowances and assessed total income under normal provisions of the Act at ₹354,42,01,379/ 354,42,01,379/- and computed book profit of ₹40,69,06,175/-. As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB . As the income determined under section 115JB