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

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

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 income

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

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

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 income

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

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

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 income

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

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

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 income

CHEMOX EXPORTS IMPORTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

HOUSE, 7TH\nBARRACK ROAD BOMBAY HOSPITAL\nLANE\nMUMBAI 400020, Maharashtra\nIndia\nPAN:\nAAACC4120G\nA.Y:\n2018-19\nDated:\n14/03/2022\nDIN & Notice No:\nITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2021-\n22/1040721057(1)\nNotice under clause(b) of section 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961\nSir/Madam/M/s\n1. Whereas I have information which suggests that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year\n2018-19 has escaped

MODERN ABODES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 12(3)(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blemodern Abodes Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer – 12(3)(4) C/O. Gulabani & Co. Room No. 148, Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 506, 5Th Floor Shree Prasad House 35Th Road, Off. Linking Road Bandra (W), Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Aagcm1595B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Neelam Jadhav Shri Ashish Kumar Deharia Department Represented By :

148, Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 506, 5th Floor Shree Prasad House 35th Road, Off. Linking Road Bandra (W), Mumbai - 400050 PAN: AAGCM1595B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Ms. Neelam Jadhav Shri Ashish Kumar Deharia Department Represented by : Date of Hearing : 03.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 03.04.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal

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

NILANJANA ARVINDER SINGH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

House, Tamrind Lane, Fort, Mumbai, G.P.O. Mumbai - 400001 Maharashtra ……………. Appellant PAN – BGAPS2172J v/s DCIT, Circle – 16(3), ……………. Respondent Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Bharat Kumar Revenue by : Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR Date of Hearing – 12/03/2025 Date of Order – 13/03/2025 O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The assessee has filed the present appeals against the separate impugned order

DY CIT-1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

house property”. 6.2 As far as the issue of claim of the TDS is concerned As far as the issue of claim of the TDS is concerned As far as the issue of claim of the TDS is concerned, The assessee has taken credit of TDS of Rs. assessee has taken credit of TDS of Rs. Rs 1

M/S THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO. OP BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO-1(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

house property”. 6.2 As far as the issue of claim of the TDS is concerned As far as the issue of claim of the TDS is concerned As far as the issue of claim of the TDS is concerned, The assessee has taken credit of TDS of Rs. assessee has taken credit of TDS of Rs. Rs 1

NAVBHARAT POTTERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above\nterms

section 23(1)(c). In other words, vacancy allowance can be given\nonly when the property is let and vacant for part of the year. No contrary\njudgment of any other High court or the Hon'ble Apex Court has been\nbrought to our notice. Accordingly, the claim of vacancy allowance in\nrespect of 12 units which remained vacant

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

148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall— ITA Nos. 1291 & 1292/Mum/2018 M/s Balaji Universal Tradelinks P. Ltd. & Balaji Bullion & commodities

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

House Property\", as the property was allegedly a deemed let-out property. On this basis, proceedings under section 148A were initiated, and after passing an order under section 148A(d) dated 28.07.2022, notice under section 148 was issued on 29.07.2022.\n4. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee filed

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORP. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR. 1(1), MUMBAI

property by its owner. In the given\ncase, the deployment of funds in short term investment is part and parcel of\nhousing finance business of the assessee since the idle funds are available in\nthe regular course of business of housing finance and as part of the business\nactivity the assessee keeps these funds in short term investments which earn

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

DCIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

property by its owner. In the given\ncase, the deployment of funds in short term investment is part and parcel of\nhousing finance business of the assessee since the idle funds are available in\nthe regular course of business of housing finance and as part of the business\nactivity the assessee keeps these funds in short term investments which earn

THE DY CIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

property by its owner. In the given\ncase, the deployment of funds in short term investment is part and parcel of\nhousing finance business of the assessee since the idle funds are available in\nthe regular course of business of housing finance and as part of the business\nactivity the assessee keeps these funds in short term investments which earn

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOP,MENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

property by its owner. In the given\ncase, the deployment of funds in short term investment is part and parcel of\nhousing finance business of the assessee since the idle funds are available in\nthe regular course of business of housing finance and as part of the business\nactivity the assessee keeps these funds in short term investments which earn