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

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

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

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

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

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

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

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

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

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANAI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANAI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. CY CIT-CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 132A of the Act. 027. As in the present case there is an incriminating material in the form of balance sheet where certain properties are stated l to be owned by assessee with respect to the addition made by the AO of notional income from house

SHRI AMIT MANGILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, - 33(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

House, 1st Floor, Kandivali East, Mumbai- Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400101, Maharashtra 400021, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AABPJ0925G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Appellant by : Shri Naresh Jain & Shri Mahaveer Jain, ARs Respondent by : Shri Ram Krishn Kedia, (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing 13.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER PRABHASH SHANKAR

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

House, 18th floor, 10, MK Road, Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 1020, 1019, 1550 & 1548/M/2018 & 1970/M/2022 Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. 400020. Kolkata-700017. PAN No. AAACE 6607 L AAACE 6607 L Appellant Respondent Revenue by by : Smt. Nilu Jaggi, CIT-DR DR Assessee by Assessee by : Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. Sukanya Jayaram Ms. Sukanya Jayaram Date of Hearing Date

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

House, 18th floor, 10, MK Road, Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 1020, 1019, 1550 & 1548/M/2018 & 1970/M/2022 Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. 400020. Kolkata-700017. PAN No. AAACE 6607 L AAACE 6607 L Appellant Respondent Revenue by by : Smt. Nilu Jaggi, CIT-DR DR Assessee by Assessee by : Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. Sukanya Jayaram Ms. Sukanya Jayaram Date of Hearing Date

ABHUBHAI HIRABHAI DESAI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 19(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house\nproperty, profit and gain from business etc. Fact of the case as narrated\nin the assessment order reveal that the Assessing Officer of one Shri\nJaikishin Rohra handed over the documents which pertained to/related\nto the assessee, in whose case search action u/s.132 of the Act was\nconducted on 24.02.2014.Loose papers and other documents were\nseized. It was found

M/S.BALAJI BULLION & COMMODITIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-40, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Balaji Bullion & Commodities The Dy. Commissioner Of (India) Private Limited Income–Tax, 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Central Circle–40, Vs. House Zavri Baazar, Mumbai Mumbai-400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcbo236F Balaji Universal Tradelinks P. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income–Tax, 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Central Circle–40, Vs. House Zavri Baazar, Mumbai Mumbai-400 002

132A, the Assessing Officer shall issue a notice upon such person. The expression clearly relates to a person in respect of whom search u/s 132 has been initiated or as section 153A after 31st day of March 2003. The ratio laid down in Ramesh D. Patel (2014) 362 ITR 492(Guj.) supports our view. In that event the Assessing Officer

KASHYAP KANIYALAL MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

property being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account. (2) If any proceeding initiated or any order of assessment or reassessment made under sub-section (1) has been annulled in appeal or any other legal proceeding, then, notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1) or section 153, the assessment or reassessment relating

KASHYAP KANIYALAL MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

property being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account. (2) If any proceeding initiated or any order of assessment or reassessment made under sub-section (1) has been annulled in appeal or any other legal proceeding, then, notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1) or section 153, the assessment or reassessment relating