ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, MUMBAI vs. MM/S EAGLE INFRA INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assess

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 2212 To 2214/Mum/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle-4, M/S Eagle Infra India Ltd., Room No. 9, A-Wing, 6Th Barrack No. 758, Room No. 16, Vs. Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Road, Eagle Nest Building, Behind 16-Z Wagle Industrial Chopra Court, Ulhasnagar Estate, Thane (W)-400604. 421003. Pan No. Aacce 7247 G Appellant Respondent

disallowance in terms of section 37 of the A in terms of section 37 of the Act observing as under: ct observing as under: “56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure

ACIT, CENRAL CIRCLE-4, , THANE vs. M/S EAGLE INFRA INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assess

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 2212 To 2214/Mum/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle-4, M/S Eagle Infra India Ltd., Room No. 9, A-Wing, 6Th Barrack No. 758, Room No. 16, Vs. Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Road, Eagle Nest Building, Behind 16-Z Wagle Industrial Chopra Court, Ulhasnagar Estate, Thane (W)-400604. 421003. Pan No. Aacce 7247 G Appellant Respondent

disallowance in terms of section 37 of the A in terms of section 37 of the Act observing as under: ct observing as under: “56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure

M/S EAGLE INFRA INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assess

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 2212 To 2214/Mum/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle-4, M/S Eagle Infra India Ltd., Room No. 9, A-Wing, 6Th Barrack No. 758, Room No. 16, Vs. Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Road, Eagle Nest Building, Behind 16-Z Wagle Industrial Chopra Court, Ulhasnagar Estate, Thane (W)-400604. 421003. Pan No. Aacce 7247 G Appellant Respondent

disallowance in terms of section 37 of the A in terms of section 37 of the Act observing as under: ct observing as under: “56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure

ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, MUMBAI vs. M/S EAGLE INFRA INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assess

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 2212 To 2214/Mum/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle-4, M/S Eagle Infra India Ltd., Room No. 9, A-Wing, 6Th Barrack No. 758, Room No. 16, Vs. Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Road, Eagle Nest Building, Behind 16-Z Wagle Industrial Chopra Court, Ulhasnagar Estate, Thane (W)-400604. 421003. Pan No. Aacce 7247 G Appellant Respondent

disallowance in terms of section 37 of the A in terms of section 37 of the Act observing as under: ct observing as under: “56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure

M/S EAGLE INFRA INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assess

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 2212 To 2214/Mum/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle-4, M/S Eagle Infra India Ltd., Room No. 9, A-Wing, 6Th Barrack No. 758, Room No. 16, Vs. Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Road, Eagle Nest Building, Behind 16-Z Wagle Industrial Chopra Court, Ulhasnagar Estate, Thane (W)-400604. 421003. Pan No. Aacce 7247 G Appellant Respondent

disallowance in terms of section 37 of the A in terms of section 37 of the Act observing as under: ct observing as under: “56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure

M/S EAGLE INFRA INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assess

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 2212 To 2214/Mum/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle-4, M/S Eagle Infra India Ltd., Room No. 9, A-Wing, 6Th Barrack No. 758, Room No. 16, Vs. Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Road, Eagle Nest Building, Behind 16-Z Wagle Industrial Chopra Court, Ulhasnagar Estate, Thane (W)-400604. 421003. Pan No. Aacce 7247 G Appellant Respondent

disallowance in terms of section 37 of the A in terms of section 37 of the Act observing as under: ct observing as under: “56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure

M/S EAGLE INFRA INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of assess

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 2212 To 2214/Mum/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 To 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle-4, M/S Eagle Infra India Ltd., Room No. 9, A-Wing, 6Th Barrack No. 758, Room No. 16, Vs. Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Road, Eagle Nest Building, Behind 16-Z Wagle Industrial Chopra Court, Ulhasnagar Estate, Thane (W)-400604. 421003. Pan No. Aacce 7247 G Appellant Respondent

disallowance in terms of section 37 of the A in terms of section 37 of the Act observing as under: ct observing as under: “56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure, it may be 56. As regards to the genuineness of the expenditure

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8 (3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is having ITA No

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Dcit-Cc 8(3), 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Jcit, Central Range-8, 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

undisclosed investment / expenditure the Ld. Assessing Officer for deciding after considering the Assessing Officer for deciding after considering the Assessing Officer for deciding after considering the submission and explanation of the assessee regarding each entry of submission and explanation of the assessee regarding each entry of submission and explanation of the assessee regarding each entry of the cash flow statement

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8 , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is having ITA No

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Dcit-Cc 8(3), 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Jcit, Central Range-8, 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

undisclosed investment / expenditure the Ld. Assessing Officer for deciding after considering the Assessing Officer for deciding after considering the Assessing Officer for deciding after considering the submission and explanation of the assessee regarding each entry of submission and explanation of the assessee regarding each entry of submission and explanation of the assessee regarding each entry of the cash flow statement

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

income and no addition or disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the course of search. course

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

income and no addition or disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the course of search. course

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. G NINE MODULAR PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

income and no addition or disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating disallowance can be made de hors the incriminating evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the evidences for the relevant year are recovered during the course of search. course

ANNAPURNA BUILDCON INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran\Nand\Nshri Anikesh Banerjee\N\Nita No.6827/Mum/2024 - A.Y. 2019-20\Nita No.6828/Mum/2024 - A.Y. 2020-21\Nita No.6829/Mum/2024 - A.Y. 2016-17\Nita No.6830/Mum/2024 - A.Y. 2014-15\Nita No.6831/Mum/2024 - A.Y. 2017-18\Nita No.6832/Mum/2024 - A.Y. 2015-16\Nita No.6833/Mum/2024 - A.Y. 2018-19\Nita No.6834/Mum/2024 - A.Y. 2021-22\N\Nannapurna Buildcon Infra Vs Dcit, Central Circle-1, Thane\Nprivate Limited,\Nroom No.10, 6Th Floor, Ashar\Nshop No.6, Ground Floor,\Nit Park, Wagle Industrial\Nrachana Chs Ltd, Opp. Estate, Thane(W).\Nmcf Club, Jogurs Park,\Nborivali (West),\Nmumbai\Nappellant\Npan: Aahca7229F\Nrespondent\N\Nfor Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta\Nfor Revenue: Dr. K.R. Subhash Cit-Dr\Ndate Of Hearing: 12-02-2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement: 06-03-2025\N\Norder\Nper Bench :\Nall The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The\Ncommon Order Dt.25-10-2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of\Nincome Tax (Appeals)-Pune-11, [‘Ld.Cit(A)] & They Relate To Ays.\N2014-15 To 2021-22. Since Common Issues Are Urged In These Appeals,\Nthey Were Heard Together. Hence, They Are Being Disposed Of By This\Ncommon Order, For The Sake Of Convenience.\N\N2. The Common Issue Contested In All These Years Is Related To The\Naddition Of Estimated Profit On The Alleged On-Money Received By The\Nassessee On Sale Of Flats.\N\N2.

undisclosed income Thus, while in\nview of the mandate of sub-section (1) of section 153A of the Act, in\nevery case where there is a search or requisition, the Assessing Officer\nis obliged to issue notice to such person to furnish returns of income\nfor the six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous\nyear in which

ACIT 25(1), MUMBAI vs. AMBER ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri, Amarjit Singh Jm Acit 25(1) Vs. M/S. Amber Enterprises Mumbai – 400 051 7, Taren Compound Behind Krishna Hotel Dahisar (E) Mumbai – 400 068 Pan/Gir No. Aalfa3071G Appellant) .. Respondent)

undisclosed income and also the calculation of the expense as per the impounded materials. The first quantum of dispute in the receipts is with respect to Rs.83 lacs being shown on page.97 of Annexure A-l disclosed by the appellant. The contention of the appellant that the said amount 5 M/s. Amber Enterprises does not pertain to the income

PUSHPAK AUXICHEM P. LTD,THANE vs. ITO WD 1(3), KALYAN

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Pushpak Auxichem Pvt. Income Tax Officer Ltd. Ward-1(3), बनाम/ 241/Business-2, Kasturi Mohan Plaza, 1St Floor, Vs. Plaza, 2Nd Floor, Manpada Wayle Nagar, Road, Dombivali (East), Khadak Pada, Thane-421201 Kalyan-421301 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aabcp0099E

undisclosed income, but the income or transactions referred to in the documents had been duly shown by him in his books of account or if the assessee gives any information to the effect that the first impression of the authorised officer with regard to the nature of the documents was not correct, we are sure that such a notice would

DCIT CIR.7(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. PJL CLOTHING INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010 - 2011 Dcit Circle 7(3)(1) Pjl Clothing India Ltd., Mumbai बनाम/ Unit No.19, Shree Madhu Estate, Pandurang Budhakar Vs. Marg, Worli, Mumbai 400 018 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacp2782R

undisclosed income, but the income or transactions referred to in the documents had been duly shown by him in his books of account or if the assessee gives any information to the effect that the first impression of the authorised officer with regard to the nature of the documents was not correct, we are sure that such a notice would

AKSHAR DEVELOPERS,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 3, THANE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesses in ITA No 6244

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

undisclosed income during the course of search and also in the post search investigation, rejected explanations of the assessee with regard to the peak cash theory and estimation of reasonable net profit of gross profit considering it as on-money and made addition of Rs.12,19,50,872 to the total income of the assessee. 7. Similarly, during the course

ANNAPURNA INFRATECH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

undisclosed income Thus, while in view of the mandate of sub-section (1) of section 153A of the Act, in every case where there is a search or requisition, the Assessing Officer is obliged to issue notice to such person to furnish returns of income for the six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which

ANNAPURNA PROPERTIES,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

undisclosed income Thus, while in view of the mandate of sub-section (1) of section 153A of the Act, in every case where there is a search or requisition, the Assessing Officer is obliged to issue notice to such person to furnish returns of income for the six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which