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

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

property’. [CIT\nv Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd (2016) 72 Taxman.com 254].\nThus, the AO is not justified in treating the rental receipts of Rs.\n2,82,16,861/- as business receipts and deny the Appellant standard\ndeduction amounting to Rs.83,74,762/- allowable under section 24(a) of\nthe Act.\n3.1 Brief facts of the case are that

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

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

property’. [CIT\nv Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd (2016) 72 Taxman.com 254].\nThus, the AO is not justified in treating the rental receipts of Rs.\n2,82,16,861/- as business receipts and deny the Appellant standard\ndeduction amounting to Rs.83,74,762/- allowable under section 24(a) of\nthe Act.\n3.1 Brief facts of the case are that

DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue s filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S., Hon’Ble

Property and Land Developers P Ltd, Vs. ACIT, [2018] 93 taxmann.com 296 P Ltd, Vs. ACIT, [2018] 93 taxmann.com 296 (Bom) (Bom) 4. Pr. CIT Vs. Montecarlo Construction Ltd, [2024] 161 Pr. CIT Vs. Montecarlo Construction Ltd, [2024] 161 Pr. CIT Vs. Montecarlo Construction Ltd, [2024] 161 taxmann.com 222 (Guj) taxmann.com 222 (Guj) 7. We have heard the counsels

DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue s filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S., Hon’Ble

Property and Land Developers P Ltd, Vs. ACIT, [2018] 93 taxmann.com 296 P Ltd, Vs. ACIT, [2018] 93 taxmann.com 296 (Bom) (Bom) 4. Pr. CIT Vs. Montecarlo Construction Ltd, [2024] 161 Pr. CIT Vs. Montecarlo Construction Ltd, [2024] 161 Pr. CIT Vs. Montecarlo Construction Ltd, [2024] 161 taxmann.com 222 (Guj) taxmann.com 222 (Guj) 7. We have heard the counsels

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

DEEPAK KANTILAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-19(1), MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Jm) & Shri Girish Agrawal (Am)

house property amounting to Rs.12,95,147/- to next year also disallowed. 6.1.2 In appellate proceeding, appellant has repeated his contention which was placed before the AO during assessment proceeding. Appellant contended that as per section

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

House, 121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar & Ms. Sukanya Jayaram Department represented by : Smt. Shailja Rai Date of Hearing : 21.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023 2 ITA NO.3135& 3136/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. ACC Limited O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

House, 121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar & Ms. Sukanya Jayaram Department represented by : Smt. Shailja Rai Date of Hearing : 21.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023 2 ITA NO.3135& 3136/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. ACC Limited O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

House, 121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar & Ms. Sukanya Jayaram Department represented by : Smt. Shailja Rai Date of Hearing : 21.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023 2 ITA NO.3135& 3136/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. ACC Limited O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

JOHAR HASAN ZOJWALLA,KALYAN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

Housing and Johar Hasan Zojwalla. Properties Private Ltd to the tune of ₹ 29,80,340, wherein the assessee is a Director and has more than 10% voting share, proceedings under section 147

MACK STAR MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)\nAND\nSHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER)\nITA No. 4994/MUM/2024\nAssessment Year: 2013-14\nMack Star Marketing Pvt. Ltd.,\nUnit 404, Kaledonia, 19 Sahar Road,\nAndheri (E),\nMumbai-400069.\nPAN NO. AADCM 7564 K\nAppellant\nNational Faceless Appeal Centre.\nVs.\nRespondent\nAssessee by\n: Mr. Yash Varmani\nRevenue by\n: Mr. R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR\nDate of Hearing\n: 17/12/2024\nDate of pronouncement\n: 21/01/2025\nORDER\nPER OM PRAKASH KANT (Accou

147 of the Act is applicable to facts of this case\nand the assessment year under consideration is deemed to be a case\nwhere income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.\n5. In this case a return of income was filed for the year under\nconsideration and regular assessment u/s.143(3) was made on\n30.03.2016. Since, 4 years from

TODI INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 8(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

section 27(iiib), the appellant\nwas 'deemed owner of the premises as it had acquired leasehold\nright in the land for more than 12 years; in agreements for sub-\nlicensing the words lease compensation were used instead of\nlicense fees and deposits were referred as 'sub-lease deposits",\nproperty tax had been levied on the assessee.\n14.3. The Tribunal also

JOLLY MAKER 1 PREM CO-OP SOC LTD,MUMBAI CITY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purpose

property and interest income, and the disallowance of service charges, to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["Section 250", "Section 80P", "Section 143(2)", "Section 60", "Section 148", "Section 147", "Section 57", "Section 24", "Section 161"], "issues": "Whether income from house

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

DCIT-CC-4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAHEJA UNIVERSAL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the Assessee is allowed,\nwhereas appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed being infructuous

section 147 for failure to offer income from unsold flats as house property.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the reopening

NAVJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) RANGE-II(NOW ASSESSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(2)), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed, while appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

House, 24, Homy Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 [PAN: AAATN0202B] Appearances by: Percy Pardiwalla along with Sukhsagar Syal for the appellant Dr. Mahesh Akhade for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 28/03/2022 Date of pronouncing the order : 27/06/2022 O R D E R Per Bench These cross appeals are directed against the order 15th December 2017, passed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 17(2)), MUMBAI vs. NAVJBAI RATAN TATA TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed, while appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

House, 24, Homy Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 [PAN: AAATN0202B] Appearances by: Percy Pardiwalla along with Sukhsagar Syal for the appellant Dr. Mahesh Akhade for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 28/03/2022 Date of pronouncing the order : 27/06/2022 O R D E R Per Bench These cross appeals are directed against the order 15th December 2017, passed

APCOTEX INDUSTRIES LIMITED,RAOGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - CIRCLE 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

house property at Rs. 41,50,749/-. Accordingly, depreciation of Rs. 54,90,410/- was disallowed and notional rental income of Rs. 41,50,749/- was added, resulting in a total addition of Rs. 96,41,159/-. The assessment was thus completed at a total income of Rs. 12,31,86,729/- vide order dated 27.05.2023 passed under section 147