ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

reopened and notice u/s 148 was\nissued to it on 29.01.2019 and the reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of\nthe Act was finalized assessing income at Rs.2,60,33,300/-.\n3.2 During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed\nby the Assessing Officer that the assessee had credited an amount of Rs.\n2,82,16,861/- as Rental

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1 , KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

reopened and notice u/s 148 was\nissued to it on 29.01.2019 and the reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of\nthe Act was finalized assessing income at Rs.2,60,33,300/-.\n3.2 During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed\nby the Assessing Officer that the assessee had credited an amount of Rs.\n2,82,16,861/- as Rental

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THANKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRLE - 5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

ITO 5(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. CRIMSON PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Ravish Soodi.T.O. Ward-5(1)(3), Crimson Properties Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 569, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Sunama House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Kemps Coner, Opp. Shalimar Hotel, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 036 Pan – Aaacc2206R (Appellant) (Respondent)

House without appreciating the fact that the assessee had not received any the rent from the tenants but it was deposited in the bank account of AOP namely M/s. M.D. Dhanwatay & Others as the property was in dispute and the suit for partition of the property amongst the original co-owners and restraining the co-owners from intermeddling the suit

ACIT (E) 20(3), MUMBAI vs. SEEMA DILIP VORA, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year:2007-08 Acit-20(3), Ms. Seema Dilip Vora, Room No.622, 71/72, Rajkamal Apartment बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Rajkamal Marg, Rajkamal Vs. Mumbai Studio, Near Gandhi Hospital, Parel, Mumbai-400012 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aabpv0816C

reopen the assessment under section 147(b) by virtue of proposition (4) of Kalyanji Mavji. The fact that the details of sales of house properties

DCIT 9(2), MUMBAI vs. MAGNUS PROPERTIES P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwaldy. Commissioner Of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–9(2), Mumbai V/S M/S. Magnus Properties Pvt. Ltd. Uniphos House, Madhu Park ……………. Respondent 11Th Road, Khar (West) Mumbai 400 052 Pan – Aadcm7520M

assessment order. Therefore, one has to conclude that the AO having examined the claim of the assessee has accepted the income 10 M/s. Magnus Properties Pvt. Ltd. generated from leave and licence fees as income from house property. That being the case, the reopening

KISHORE H AJMERA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

Housing Ltd., this decision already has already been dealt with and distinguished in the detailed Legal Note filed on 01.09.2021, apart from relying upon various other decisions, including that of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in support of this proposition. It is interesting to note that very same Madras High Court itself, subsequent to the Supreme Court decision

KISHORE H AJMERA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

Housing Ltd., this decision already has already been dealt with and distinguished in the detailed Legal Note filed on 01.09.2021, apart from relying upon various other decisions, including that of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in support of this proposition. It is interesting to note that very same Madras High Court itself, subsequent to the Supreme Court decision

JASMIN K AJMERA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2 (2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

Housing Ltd., this decision already has already been dealt with and distinguished in the detailed Legal Note filed on 01.09.2021, apart from relying upon various other decisions, including that of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in support of this proposition. It is interesting to note that very same Madras High Court itself, subsequent to the Supreme Court decision

JASMIN K AJMERA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2 (2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

Housing Ltd., this decision already has already been dealt with and distinguished in the detailed Legal Note filed on 01.09.2021, apart from relying upon various other decisions, including that of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in support of this proposition. It is interesting to note that very same Madras High Court itself, subsequent to the Supreme Court decision

JITEN K AJMERA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 2 (2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

Housing Ltd., this decision already has already been dealt with and distinguished in the detailed Legal Note filed on 01.09.2021, apart from relying upon various other decisions, including that of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in support of this proposition. It is interesting to note that very same Madras High Court itself, subsequent to the Supreme Court decision

DCIT CEN CIR 8(4), MUMBAI vs. PHOENIX MILLS LTD, MUMBAI

In the results, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Ramesh C Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 3991/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 3992/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 3993/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 3994/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Phoenix Mills Ltd. Income Tax, 462, Senapati Bapat Vs. Central Circle-8(4), Marg, Lower Parel, 6Th Floor, Room No. 658, Mumbai-400013. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp 3325 J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

house property by relying the decision of Hon’ble ITAT in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 and A.Y. 2010-11, without appreciating the fact that the department has not accepted the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2009- 10 and 2010-11 and appeal filed before the Hon’ble Bombay