M/S G.L.CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT/NATIONAL FACE LESS APPEAL CENTRE, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for stati...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S G.L. Construction Pvt. Ltd, Acit/National Faceless 304, Gokul Arcade B, Subhash Appeal Centre, Road, Near Garware, Vs. 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vile Parle East, Churchgate, Mumbai-400057. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacg 3438 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. N.R. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Sonia Kumar, Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/02/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 23/02/2023

b) of Form No.3CD, i.e., due dates as prescribed u/s.36(1)(va) and the actual dates of payment rep u/s.36(1)(va) and the actual dates of payment rep u/s.36(1)(va) and the actual dates of payment reported, thus clearly indicating the deviations if any which attract such clearly indicating the deviations if any which attract such clearly indicating

PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

Disallowances. Keeping in mind the said scheme the position is that sections 30 to 38 are deductions which are limited by section 40. Therefore, even if an assessee is entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(iii), the assessee (firm) will not be entitled to claim deduction for interest payment exceeding 18/12 per cent per se. This is because section

ASST CIT 19(3), MUMBAI vs. PAHILAJRAI JAIKISHIN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1562/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

Disallowances. Keeping in mind the said scheme the position is that sections 30 to 38 are deductions which are limited by section 40. Therefore, even if an assessee is entitled to deduction under section 36(1)(iii), the assessee (firm) will not be entitled to claim deduction for interest payment exceeding 18/12 per cent per se. This is because section

STATE BANK OF MYSORE,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

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

7. From the perusal of AO's order, we notice that the recovery has been brought to tax under section 41(1) stating that the claim of deduction under section 36(1)(viia) is a prudential write off since the same ultimately gets reduced from the liability and is different from actual write off of bad-debts. Accordingly

DY..C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S STATE BANK OF MYSORE, BANGALORE

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

7. From the perusal of AO's order, we notice that the recovery has been brought to tax under section 41(1) stating that the claim of deduction under section 36(1)(viia) is a prudential write off since the same ultimately gets reduced from the liability and is different from actual write off of bad-debts. Accordingly

JAN SEVA MANDAL ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD -1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jan Seva Mandal, Central Processing Centre Income Vinayalaya, Mahakali Caves Tax Deparment, Bengaluru, Vs. Road, Andheri (East), Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400093. Ward 1(4), Mumbai. 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatj 4868 K Appellant Respondent

b) of of of the Act. 4. It It It is is is submitted submitted submitted that that that the the the denial denial denial of of of exemption exemption exemption under under under Section 11 of the Act, as discussed above, has led to Section 11 of the Act, as discussed above, has led to Section

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

b. Specific provision of sections 36(1)(iv)/36(1)(v) and 40A(7)/40A(9) of the Act are applicable to the pension liability. Further, the same should only be allowed on payment basis as per section 43B of the Act. Hence, a general provision like section 37(1) of the Act cannot apply. 18. We noted that

BRILLPHARMA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CPC,BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

b) in respect of contributions received from employees for various funds as referred to in Section 36(1)(va) and the fact that the expression „due date‟ has been defined under Explanation (now Explanation 1) to Section 36(1)(va) provides that “For the purposes of this clause, „due date‟ means the date by which the assessee is required

ROYAL PALMS (I) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 13(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

B Project was not fully completed during the relevant year; Ground No.VII: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2.51 crores on account of alleged bogus purchase from Pride Steel P Ltd. Without prejudice to above, The additions on account of alleged bogus purchase may please

KETAN BROTHERS DIAMONDS EXPORTS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 23(2) /ACIT 23(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

b) in respect of contributions received from employees for various funds as referred to in Section 36(1)(va) and the fact that the Ketan Brothers Diamondz Exports ITA No. 1627/Mum./2021 expression „due date‟ has been defined under Explanation (now Explanation 1) to Section 36(1)(va) provides that “For the purposes of this clause, „due date‟ means

TASKUS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2022-23 M/S Taskus India Pvt. Ltd., 1. Dy. Director Of Income- Ttc Industrial Area, Tower -9, Tax Central Processing Vs. Gigaplex It Park, 18Th & 19Th Centre Unit, Bengaluru, Floor, Midc, Plot No. 1 I.T.5, 1St Floor, Prestige Alpha Airoli Knowledge Park Rd, Airoli, No 48/1, 48/2 Navi Mumbai-400708. Beratenaagrahara Begur Hosur Rd Uttarahali Hobli, Bengaluru- 560100. 2. The Dy. Cit, Circle 8(3)(1), Mumbai. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aahct 0980 G Appellant Respondent

b) the Board has power to authorise any income tax authority other than Joint/ Commissioner (Appeals) income tax authority other than Joint/ Commissioner (Appeals) income tax authority other than Joint/ Commissioner (Appeals) to admit the belated claim made after the expiry of specified to admit the belated claim made after the expiry of specified to admit the belated claim made

MAGNUM INFRAPROJECTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

7. Please submit purchase list including name, PAN, contact no., Address of all purchase parties with amount and date of purchase. Submit details of all the purchases in case of the following concerns: (a) Dev Steel (b) Karma Ispat (c) Param Commercial Co. (d) Steelcon Infratrade Pvt. Ltd. (e) Magnum Infraprojects Ltd. (f) Mahendra Brothers (g) Dhani Products

MAGNUM INFRAPROJECTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

7. Please submit purchase list including name, PAN, contact no., Address of all purchase parties with amount and date of purchase. Submit details of all the purchases in case of the following concerns: (a) Dev Steel (b) Karma Ispat (c) Param Commercial Co. (d) Steelcon Infratrade Pvt. Ltd. (e) Magnum Infraprojects Ltd. (f) Mahendra Brothers (g) Dhani Products

MAGNUM INFRAPROJECTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

7. Please submit purchase list including name, PAN, contact no., Address of all purchase parties with amount and date of purchase. Submit details of all the purchases in case of the following concerns: (a) Dev Steel (b) Karma Ispat (c) Param Commercial Co. (d) Steelcon Infratrade Pvt. Ltd. (e) Magnum Infraprojects Ltd. (f) Mahendra Brothers (g) Dhani Products

MAGNUM INFRAPROJECTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

7. Please submit purchase list including name, PAN, contact no., Address of all purchase parties with amount and date of purchase. Submit details of all the purchases in case of the following concerns: (a) Dev Steel (b) Karma Ispat (c) Param Commercial Co. (d) Steelcon Infratrade Pvt. Ltd. (e) Magnum Infraprojects Ltd. (f) Mahendra Brothers (g) Dhani Products

M/S PAPER RECYCLE ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (APPEAL) , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

b) secondly, and perhaps much more importantly, that is just one of the 6 M/s. Paper Recycle permissible types of adjustments, denying a deduction, under section 143(1)(a) which goes well beyond such adjustments and includes the cases such as "(iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if the return of the previous year for which set off of loss

SAVANI HERITAGE CONSERVATION PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

b) secondly, and perhaps much more importantly, that is just one of the 6 M/s. Savani Heritage Conservation Pvt. Ltd., permissible types of adjustments, denying a deduction, under section 143(1)(a) which goes well beyond such adjustments and includes the cases such as "(iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if the return of the previous year for which

JOYO PLASTICS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-24 (1)

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Joyo Plastics, Acit Circle-24(1), 104, Jai Antariksh Co-Op Society, 601, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Makwana Road, Marol Naka, Chamber, Lalbaug, Marol, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aaafj 0286 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ajay R Sing/Akshay Pawar : Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2024 : 13/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement

7 3 of the appeal raised is whether the Assessing Officer, in 3 of the appeal raised is whether the Assessing Officer 3 of the appeal raised is whether the Assessing Officer proceedings u/s 143(1) of the Act, proceedings u/s 143(1) of the Act, was required to pass a speaking was required to pass a speaking and reasoned

SWAROOPSING BHADURSINGH RATHORE,THANE vs. ASSTT.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

b) secondly, and perhaps much more importantly, that is just one of the permissible types of adjustments, denying a deduction, under section 143(1)(a) which goes well beyond such adjustments and includes the cases such as "(iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if the return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond