JT CIT (OSD) 2(2), MUMBAI vs. THE MANJIRI STUD FARM P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

house property, depreciation on service apartments, interest disallowance on assets not put to use; however, deleted additions made by the AO towards professional fees to be amortised, unexplained credits and addition towards share capital u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee as well as the revenue are in appeal before

THE MANJIRI STUD FARM P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 2(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

house property, depreciation on service apartments, interest disallowance on assets not put to use; however, deleted additions made by the AO towards professional fees to be amortised, unexplained credits and addition towards share capital u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee as well as the revenue are in appeal before

ACIT-16(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREY GULERI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit, Circle-16(1) Shri Shrey Sharma Guleri बनाम/ Room No.439, Aayakar Prime Channel Software Bhawan, 101, M.K. Road Communications P. Ltd. Vs. Mumbai 400 020 215, Kuber Complex New Link Road Andheri (West) Mumbai 400 053 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaapg4566H याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri Saurabh Rai यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By Shri Dilip V. Lakhani ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/03/2018 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 22/03/2018

46A of I.T. Rules. 2.1 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts in brief are that the assessee declared original return of income on 29.07.2009, amounting to Rs. 6,85,460, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act). Subsequently, the case of the assessee

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. JIVESH DEVELOPERS & PROPERTIES P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue‟s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Properties Pvt. Ltd. an independent enquiry on his own to ascertain the correct factual position relating to construction of the housing project. Section 250 of the Act lays down the procedure to be followed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the matter of disposal of an appeal filed before him. Sub– section (4) of section 250, empowers the Commissioner (Appeals

ACIT 17(2), MUMBAI vs. JAGSHI J CHHEDA, MUMBAI

In the result, all of the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09

section 22 and 23, for the purpose of determining annual rental value, no amount of interest was required to be added on notional basis on the deposits received from the tenant and for this purpose reliance as placed upon many decisions from various courts of the country. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) held that addition

JAGSHI J. CHHEDA,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CIRCLE - 17(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all of the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09

section 22 and 23, for the purpose of determining annual rental value, no amount of interest was required to be added on notional basis on the deposits received from the tenant and for this purpose reliance as placed upon many decisions from various courts of the country. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) held that addition

RITESH AGGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO - 16(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal, Ito-16(3)(3), D 704, Imperial Heights Best Colony Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Road, Goregaon West, Opp. Vs. Karve Road, New Marine Lines, Goregaon Fire Bridge, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400104. Pan No. Aadpa 6828 R Appellant Respondent

house property (iv) (iv) Unverified Unverified and and non-genuine non genuine expenses expenses – ₹62,505/- (v) (v) (v) Interest Interest Interest on on on refund refund refund not not not offered offered offered – ₹1,461/- (vi) Disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI (vi) Disallowance of deduction under Chapter VI-A – ₹10,000/- Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal 2.3 In appeal

ACIT CIR-6(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. SHRI MOHIT DEEPAK KAMBOJ, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alckp2213G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

section 23(4)(a) during the appellate proceedings to treat the Juhu property as the Self- occupied Property. Consequently, the Worli property has to be treated A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2012-13 Mohit Deepak Kamboj as the deemed let out property for the purpose of computing the income from house property u/s 23(1). 10. In view of the above discussion

DCIT 4 (3)(1), MUMBAI vs. MOHIT DEEPAK KAMBOJ, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alckp2213G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

section 23(4)(a) during the appellate proceedings to treat the Juhu property as the Self- occupied Property. Consequently, the Worli property has to be treated A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2012-13 Mohit Deepak Kamboj as the deemed let out property for the purpose of computing the income from house property u/s 23(1). 10. In view of the above discussion

DCIT 4 (3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI MOHIT KEEPAK KAMBOJ, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alcpk2213Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

section 23(4)(a) during the appellate proceedings to treat the Juhu property as the Self- occupied Property. Consequently, the Worli property has to be treated A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2012-13 Mohit Deepak Kamboj as the deemed let out property for the purpose of computing the income from house property u/s 23(1). 10. In view of the above discussion

V.N. KARBHATKAR,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T.-6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain Shri V.N. Karbhatkar Income Tax Officer-19(3)(4) 4-5, Chapel Avenue Mumbai Vs. Chapel Road, Bandra (W) Mumbai 400050 Pan – Aacpk2651B Appellant Respondent

House Property" as against the claim of "Income from Other Source"] and car registered at Vasai but used for other business comprising of :- a. Property Tax Rs. 18,349, b. Factory Insurance Rs.15,024, c. Bank Interest & Charges Rs.84,078, d. Car Expenses Rs.40,843 (registered at Vasai address but used for other business carried on at Bandra and Jogeshwari

MRS. NIRMALA SUBRAMANIAN,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-26, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Cit (A)-26 Mrs. Nirmala Subramanian R.No.331, 3Rd Floor, 406, Vardhaman Market Tower No.6 Sector 17, Vashi, Vashi Station Complex Vs. Navi Mumbai Navi Mumbai, Mumbai-400 705 Mumbai-400 703 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahzps4849K Assessee By : Shri Nm Porwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ujjawal Chavan, Sr Ar Date Of Hearing: 20.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2022

house property was obtained as per possession letter dated 16th July, 2005. Therefore, assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 54 of the Act. Assessee further relied upon several judicial precedents, wherein it has been held that when the sale deed is registered should be the date of acquisition of the property. The learned CIT (A) noted the above facts

SEEMA HEERA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) (IT) - 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

house property. 7. The Ld. AO erred in initiating notice of penalty u/s 274 read with section 271 and 271F of the Act dated 26.12.2017. The Appellant prays that the penalty proceedings u/s 274 read with section 271 of the Act be dropped. 8. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred upholding the action of the Ld. AO in the levying

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

46A of the MMRDA Act are in line with section 154 of the MRTP Act, which emphasizes upon “Control by the State Government qua functions of an SPA”. Attention is now invited to the provisions of section 160 of MRTP Act, which provides that at the time of dissolution of any SPA/development authority, all the properties and liabilities shall vest

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

46A of the MMRDA Act are in line with section 154 of the MRTP Act, which emphasizes upon “Control by the State Government qua functions of an SPA”. Attention is now invited to the provisions of section 160 of MRTP Act, which provides that at the time of dissolution of any SPA/development authority, all the properties and liabilities shall vest

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -16(1), MUMBAI vs. ANEES AHMED BAZMEE, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiacit-16(1) Vs. Anees Ahmed Bazmee Room No.439 1502, Deep Tower Chs Aaykar Bhawan New Link Road, Oshiwara M.K.Road Andheri (West) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 053 Pan/Gir No.Aakpb2402P Appellant) .. Respondent)

house properties, on the basis of value of the property shown in books of accounts and accordingly, estimated ALV at 8%, 4 Anees Ahmed Bazmee the books value of the property. While doing so, the AO has also rejected explanation of the assessee that these properties were used for profession purpose of script writing, story writing and dialogue writing

KAMAT HOTELS (INDIA) LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

House, 70 C Nehru Road, Vile Parle East, Mumbai – 400 099. Maharashtra [PAN: AAACK2912L] ……….. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Dharmesh Shah For the Respondent/Department : Shri Biswanath Das Date Conclusion of hearing : 22.08.2024 Pronouncement of order : 04.11.2024 O R D E R Per Bench: 1. This a batch of 3 appeals consisting of cross-appeals for the Assessment Year

KAMAT HOTELS (INDIA) LIMITED,VILE PARLE MUMBAI vs. ACIT, MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

House, 70 C Nehru Road, Vile Parle East, Mumbai – 400 099. Maharashtra [PAN: AAACK2912L] ……….. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Dharmesh Shah For the Respondent/Department : Shri Biswanath Das Date Conclusion of hearing : 22.08.2024 Pronouncement of order : 04.11.2024 O R D E R Per Bench: 1. This a batch of 3 appeals consisting of cross-appeals for the Assessment Year