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

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

house property, it is submitted\nthat the apprehension of the Ld. AO is factually incorrect. It is submitted\nthat the assessee has shown the actual rent received at Rs.3,87,56,614/-\nafter claiming deduction on account of Municipal Taxes, Interest on\nborrowed capital u/s 24(b),interest on Term Loan and interest paid on\nborrowed funds. Thereafter, it claimed

JAYABEN V. SHETH & OTHERS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 19 (2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 7219 /मुं/2018 ("न.व.2015-16) M/S.Jayaben V Sheth & Others, 3, Ground Floor, Vincent View, Dr. B.A.Road, Dadar(E), Mumbai 400 014. : अपीलाथ"/ Appellant Pan:Aadfj4327Q बनाम/ Vs. The Acit 19(2), Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 034 : ""थ"/ Respondent

House Property’ . The assessee claimed set- off of loss under the head ‘Income from House Property’ against ‘Income from Other

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

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

house property, it is submitted\nthat the apprehension of the Ld. AO is factually incorrect. It is submitted\nthat the assessee has shown the actual rent received at Rs.3,87,56,614/-\nafter claiming deduction on account of Municipal Taxes, Interest on\nborrowed capital u/s 24(b),interest on Term Loan and interest paid on\nborrowed funds. Thereafter, it claimed

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

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

house property, it is submitted\nthat the apprehension of the Ld. AO is factually incorrect. It is submitted\nthat the assessee has shown the actual rent received at Rs.3,87,56,614/-\nafter claiming deduction on account of Municipal Taxes, Interest on\nborrowed capital u/s 24(b),interest on Term Loan and interest paid on\nborrowed funds. Thereafter, it claimed

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

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

house property, it is submitted\nthat the apprehension of the Ld. AO is factually incorrect. It is submitted\nthat the assessee has shown the actual rent received at Rs.3,87,56,614/-\nafter claiming deduction on account of Municipal Taxes, Interest on\nborrowed capital u/s 24(b),interest on Term Loan and interest paid on\nborrowed funds. Thereafter, it claimed

WADHWA & ASSOCIATES REALTORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 9(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri N. K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Wadhwa & Associates Asst. Commissioner Of Income Realtors Private Limited Tax 9(3) 301, 3Rd Floor, Platina, Mumbai. Plot C-59, G Block, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai - 400051 Pan:Aaacw5273G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Jain, Advocate & Shri Mahesh O. Rajora, Ca Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Patankar Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2018 O R D E R

set off of brought forward house property losses of Rs.20,98,59,295/- against the current year’s house property

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

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)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

ITO 5(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. CRIMSON PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Ravish Soodi.T.O. Ward-5(1)(3), Crimson Properties Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 569, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Sunama House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Kemps Coner, Opp. Shalimar Hotel, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 036 Pan – Aaacc2206R (Appellant) (Respondent)

set aside and the order of the A.O be restored. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground and/or add any other grounds which may be necessary.” 2. Briefly stated, the assessee company had filed its return of income for A.Y 2010-11 on 30.09.2010, declaring total income of Rs.12,34,630/-. The return of income was processed

SCHWAB EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY ETF ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

house property,\nprofit and gains from business of profession, capital gains and income from\nother sources. Section 66 to 80 deals with the aggregation of income and set\noff /carry forward of loss

DIRECTI INTERNET SOLUTIONS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 5(1)(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

set aside the judgment of the High Court and restore that of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. No orders as Court and restore that of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. No orders as Court and restore that of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. No orders as to costs.” 8.2 Thus, in the case of Chennai P in the case

DIRECTI INTERNET SOLUTIONS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 5(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

set aside the judgment of the High Court and restore that of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. No orders as Court and restore that of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. No orders as Court and restore that of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. No orders as to costs.” 8.2 Thus, in the case of Chennai P in the case