DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

survey proceedings has evidentiary value. In this regard, on perusal of the said decision, we find that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court had the following question before it: - (A) Whether in the present facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal erred in relying on the statement under Section 133A of the Act, recorded on oath

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

SHINE STAR IMPEX P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR (42), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

u/s. 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the premises of the assessee company in the month of December, 2008 by the Investigation Wing of Mumbai. A statement of Mr. Paras Jain who was the main promoter and director of the company was recorded wherein he has categorically stated the true business of the company. On perusal

SUNSHINE IMPORT & EXPORTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR (42), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

u/s. 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the premises of the assessee company in the month of December, 2008 by the Investigation Wing of Mumbai. A statement of Mr. Paras Jain who was the main promoter and director of the company was recorded wherein he has categorically stated the true business of the company. On perusal

SHINE STAR IMPEX P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR (42), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

u/s. 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the premises of the assessee company in the month of December, 2008 by the Investigation Wing of Mumbai. A statement of Mr. Paras Jain who was the main promoter and director of the company was recorded wherein he has categorically stated the true business of the company. On perusal

DCIT 27(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. GOPURAM DEVELOPERS , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

survey action u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) was carried out on 03-10-2022, wherein the Partner of the firm, Shri Kamal U. Jain stated voluntarily offered income of Rs. 5 crore relevant to year under confidential from the sale of Real Estate project. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed return

PEGASES PROPERTIES P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT - CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

house property' after one/two years from the end of the financial year in which the 12 ITA Nos.350-352/Mum/2021 M/s. Pegasus Properties Pvt. Ltd., certificate of completion of construction of the property is obtained on and from the A.Y. 2018-19. Instantly, we are concerned with the assessment year 2013-14. As such, the amendment cannot apply to the year under

INNOVATORS FACADE SYSTEMS P.LTD,THANE vs. ACIT CIR 2, THANE

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed in part

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

133A carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 22/11/2012. During the course of assessment proceedings, this addition was made on the basis of the finding that during year, the assessee has claimed expenses on purchase of materials which were not substantiated either at the time of surveyor subsequently during assessment. During the course of assessment proceedings

VAMA PVT LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD.) ,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 5(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

u/s 133A on 25-11- 02, in the premises of its sister concern, Le. VAIPL 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to take into consideration the observation made in the ITAT Order dated 06-04-2016, that the debit note seized pertained to AY 1999-2000 and the result of additions made in that year would be relevant to decide

VAMA PVT LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD.) ,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 5(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

u/s 133A on 25-11- 02, in the premises of its sister concern, Le. VAIPL 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to take into consideration the observation made in the ITAT Order dated 06-04-2016, that the debit note seized pertained to AY 1999-2000 and the result of additions made in that year would be relevant to decide

VAMA PVT LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD.) ,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 5(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

u/s 133A on 25-11- 02, in the premises of its sister concern, Le. VAIPL 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to take into consideration the observation made in the ITAT Order dated 06-04-2016, that the debit note seized pertained to AY 1999-2000 and the result of additions made in that year would be relevant to decide

VAMA PVT LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD.) ,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

u/s 133A on 25-11- 02, in the premises of its sister concern, Le. VAIPL 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to take into consideration the observation made in the ITAT Order dated 06-04-2016, that the debit note seized pertained to AY 1999-2000 and the result of additions made in that year would be relevant to decide

VAMA PVT LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD.) ,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 5(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

u/s 133A on 25-11- 02, in the premises of its sister concern, Le. VAIPL 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to take into consideration the observation made in the ITAT Order dated 06-04-2016, that the debit note seized pertained to AY 1999-2000 and the result of additions made in that year would be relevant to decide

VAMA PVT LTD(FORMERLY KNOWN AS VAMA DEPARTMENT STORE PVT LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE- 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

u/s 133A on 25-11- 02, in the premises of its sister concern, Le. VAIPL 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to take into consideration the observation made in the ITAT Order dated 06-04-2016, that the debit note seized pertained to AY 1999-2000 and the result of additions made in that year would be relevant to decide

DCIT 5(2), MUMBAI vs. LAHOTI OVERSEAS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee company in ITA

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3812/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Lahoti Overseas Ltd., बनाम/ Tax , 5(2),Room No. 571, 307, Arun Chambers, V. 5 Th Floor, Tardeo Road, Tardeo, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400034. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacl2578 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

133A of the Act on 5-4-2006 has been relied upon by the AO without providing opportunity of cross examination which is against the principles of natural justice and on this short ground itself the re-assessment is liable to be quashed. He submitted that during the course of original assessment proceedings u/s

SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 44, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5813/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shashikiran Shetty, Dcit, Cen. Cir. 44, बनाम/ 5 Th Floor, Diamond Square, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Cst Road Kalina, M.K. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 098. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ameps 5601 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

House and spent Rs. 17,15,980/- in cash for carrying out civil works for his property called SKS Enclave, Mangalore , totaling to Rs. 23,27,15,980/- which was offered for taxation by the assessee as undisclosed income in the statement recorded u/s 132 (4) of the Act on ITA 5813/Mum/2013 & 45 11/12th July

DCIT CEN CIR 44, MUMBAI vs. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5813/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shashikiran Shetty, Dcit, Cen. Cir. 44, बनाम/ 5 Th Floor, Diamond Square, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Cst Road Kalina, M.K. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 098. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ameps 5601 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

House and spent Rs. 17,15,980/- in cash for carrying out civil works for his property called SKS Enclave, Mangalore , totaling to Rs. 23,27,15,980/- which was offered for taxation by the assessee as undisclosed income in the statement recorded u/s 132 (4) of the Act on ITA 5813/Mum/2013 & 45 11/12th July

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

133A was conducted in the case of assessee firm and no search, as contemplated u/s 132 of the Act, was ever conducted at the business premises of the firm nor any requisition was made u/s 132A, therefore, the jurisdiction assumed by the Assessing Officer u/s 153A of the Act was held to be null and void, supports the case