DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

house property”, “Capital gains” or “Income ”, “Capital gains” or “Income from other sources”, or in from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

house property”, “Capital gains” or “Income ”, “Capital gains” or “Income from other sources”, or in from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance

DCIT CEN 5 3, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

house property”, “Capital gains” or “Income ”, “Capital gains” or “Income from other sources”, or in from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections or in sections 28 to [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance, [43B], the profits and gains of any business of insurance

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

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

Section 9 of the Income Tax Act.”\n23. We may observe that the decision in East India Housing (supra)\nwas considered by the Supreme Court in the decision in Chennai\nProperties & Investments Ltd. (supra) wherein the appellant\nassessee was a company incorporated under the Companies Act with\nmain objective, as contained in the Memorandum of Association, to\nacquire the properties

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

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

Section 9 of the Income Tax Act.”\n23. We may observe that the decision in East India Housing (supra)\nwas considered by the Supreme Court in the decision in Chennai\nProperties & Investments Ltd. (supra) wherein the appellant\nassessee was a company incorporated under the Companies Act with\nmain objective, as contained in the Memorandum of Association, to\nacquire the properties

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

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

Section 9 of the Income Tax Act.”\n23. We may observe that the decision in East India Housing (supra)\nwas considered by the Supreme Court in the decision in Chennai\nProperties & Investments Ltd. (supra) wherein the appellant\nassessee was a company incorporated under the Companies Act with\nmain objective, as contained in the Memorandum of Association, to\nacquire the properties

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

ASST CIT CC 8(4), MUMBAI vs. PHOENIX MILLS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

ASST CIT CC 8(4), MUMBAI vs. PHOENIX MILLS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

house property income, when the said issue has already been considered by AO while framing assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) and no tangible material was put on record by the AO to form a basis / foundation to his belief. 25. From the record we find that the assessee filed its return of income

M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,MUMBAI-400021 vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal is disposed off as being partly allowed

house property", "Capital gains" or "Income from other sources", or in section 199 or in sections 28 to 43B, the profits and gains of any business of insurance, including any such business carried on by a mutual insurance company or by a co-operative society, shall be computed in accordance with the rules contained in the First Schedule.‖ Section 44

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 under section 22 of the income tax act in concluded assessment without any incriminating material and in case of abated assessment years and concluded assessment year making the addition without determining annual value in accordance with the law, not deduction maintenance charges, vacancy allowance and percent deduction under section 24 (1) of the act. iii. Denial Of exemption

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 under section 22 of the income tax act in concluded assessment without any incriminating material and in case of abated assessment years and concluded assessment year making the addition without determining annual value in accordance with the law, not deduction maintenance charges, vacancy allowance and percent deduction under section 24 (1) of the act. iii. Denial Of exemption