SHRI NITIN POPATLAL THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DY.CITI CENT. CIR -3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

271(1)(c ) are initiated as the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. 15.6.2 There is a cost attached to getting undisclosed income converted into disclosed income without attracting penalty & prosecution and a much higher cost to convert undisclosed income into disclosed tax exempt income. As per the prevailing rate of conversion, it is held that the assesseee

SHRI NITIN POPATLAL THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CENT.CIR-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

271(1)(c ) are initiated as the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. 15.6.2 There is a cost attached to getting undisclosed income converted into disclosed income without attracting penalty & prosecution and a much higher cost to convert undisclosed income into disclosed tax exempt income. As per the prevailing rate of conversion, it is held that the assesseee

SMT. HARSH A NITIN THAKKAR,RAIGAD vs. THE DCIT CENT. CIR -3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

271(1)(c ) are initiated as the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. 15.6.2 There is a cost attached to getting undisclosed income converted into disclosed income without attracting penalty & prosecution and a much higher cost to convert undisclosed income into disclosed tax exempt income. As per the prevailing rate of conversion, it is held that the assesseee

SMT HARHSA NITIN THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CITI CENT. CIR -3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

271(1)(c ) are initiated as the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. 15.6.2 There is a cost attached to getting undisclosed income converted into disclosed income without attracting penalty & prosecution and a much higher cost to convert undisclosed income into disclosed tax exempt income. As per the prevailing rate of conversion, it is held that the assesseee

SHRI YOGESH P. THAKKAR,PANVEL vs. THE DCIT , CC-3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

271(1)(c ) are initiated as the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. 15.6.2 There is a cost attached to getting undisclosed income converted into disclosed income without attracting penalty & prosecution and a much higher cost to convert undisclosed income into disclosed tax exempt income. As per the prevailing rate of conversion, it is held that the assesseee

DINESHCHANDRA D. CHHAJED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

271(1)(c ) are initiated as the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. 15.6.2 There is a cost attached to getting undisclosed income converted into disclosed income without attracting penalty & prosecution and a much higher cost to convert undisclosed income into disclosed tax exempt income. As per the prevailing rate of conversion, it is held that the assesseee

SHRI YOGESH P.THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

271(1)(c ) are initiated as the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. 15.6.2 There is a cost attached to getting undisclosed income converted into disclosed income without attracting penalty & prosecution and a much higher cost to convert undisclosed income into disclosed tax exempt income. As per the prevailing rate of conversion, it is held that the assesseee

ACIT-23(1), MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBER, MUMBAI vs. PARISHI DIAMONDS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit-23(1), Parishi Diamonds, 511, 5Th Floor, Piramal Chamber, Cc2091 To Cc 2093 Tower Central Vs. Lalbaug, Parel, Wings Bharat Diamond Bourse Bandra Mumbai-400012. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aajfp 2118 B Appellant Respondent

196 lof Rs. 1,86,34,620/-? 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty levied u/s

BALAJI BUILLION & COMMODITIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - CC- 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2009-10 M/S Balaji Bullion & Dcit Central Circle-7(1), Commodities (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Vs. House Zaveri Baazar, Mumbai-400 002. Pan No. Aadcb 0236 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. N.M. Porwal Assessee By Revenue By : Mr. S. Srinivasu, Cit-Dr : 27/03/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 03/04/2024

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee filed additional grounds on 04.12.2019 however The assessee filed additional grounds on 04.12.2019 however The assessee filed additional grounds on 04.12.2019 however finally revised its additional ground vide letter dated 16.03.2023 finally revised its additional ground vide letter dated

MR. PRASHANT PAWAR ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 41(3)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar & Prashant Pawar V/S. Ito, Ward 41(3)(3), 1801, Jayshree Chsl, Navy Mumbai बनाम Nagar Colony, Malad West, Bkc, Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadpp3644C .. Appellant/अपीलाथ" Respondent/""तवाद"

196 SC 361 has held that the party will have to show sufficient cause not only for not filing the appeal on the last day but to explain the to show sufficient cause not only for not filing the appeal on the last day but to explain the to show sufficient cause not only for not filing the appeal

MR. PRASHANT PAWAR ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 41(3)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar & Prashant Pawar V/S. Ito, Ward 41(3)(3), 1801, Jayshree Chsl, Navy Mumbai बनाम Nagar Colony, Malad West, Bkc, Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadpp3644C .. Appellant/अपीलाथ" Respondent/""तवाद"

196 SC 361 has held that the party will have to show sufficient cause not only for not filing the appeal on the last day but to explain the to show sufficient cause not only for not filing the appeal on the last day but to explain the to show sufficient cause not only for not filing the appeal

DY CIT -CC-4(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. RESONANT REALTORS PROJECTS P. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.820 & 819/Mum/2021 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) बनाम/ Dcit-Cc-4(3) M/S. Resonant Realtors Air India Bldg Room Projects Pvt. Vs. No.1921, Nariman Point, Ltd.(Erstwhile M/S. Mumbai-400021. Omkar Realtors Projects Pvt. Ltd.) Omkar House Off Eastern Express Highway, Opp. Sion Chunnabhatti Signal, Sion (E), Mumbai- 400022. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacco0277C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dharmesh Shah/Akshay Jain/Mitali Gopani Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13 /02/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-52, Mumbai Dated 16.02.2021 For Ay. 2015-16 & Ay. 2016-17 Respectively.

196] during the course of search action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of MA. Omkar Group of companies 03/06/2015. Relevant extract at the statement are as under: Q 15= Please furnish details of name, addresses, consideration and brokerage in respect of sale of flats of in the project “1973, Worli” of M/s Omkar Realtors

DY CIT -CC-4(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. RESONANT REALTORS PROJECTS P. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.820 & 819/Mum/2021 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) बनाम/ Dcit-Cc-4(3) M/S. Resonant Realtors Air India Bldg Room Projects Pvt. Vs. No.1921, Nariman Point, Ltd.(Erstwhile M/S. Mumbai-400021. Omkar Realtors Projects Pvt. Ltd.) Omkar House Off Eastern Express Highway, Opp. Sion Chunnabhatti Signal, Sion (E), Mumbai- 400022. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacco0277C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dharmesh Shah/Akshay Jain/Mitali Gopani Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13 /02/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-52, Mumbai Dated 16.02.2021 For Ay. 2015-16 & Ay. 2016-17 Respectively.

196] during the course of search action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of MA. Omkar Group of companies 03/06/2015. Relevant extract at the statement are as under: Q 15= Please furnish details of name, addresses, consideration and brokerage in respect of sale of flats of in the project “1973, Worli” of M/s Omkar Realtors

UDAYAN GROVER,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE(NFAC), DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) rws 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are initiated separately. (Add: Rs. 4,59,10,500/-) 9. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions. Detailed submissions filed before Ld. CIT(A) are reproduced below: - “Applicability of sec. 68 The provisions of section 68 are deeming provisions

AGRAWAL DISTILLERIES PVT LTD,INDORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act against\nthe Appellant.\nAll the above grounds are without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves\nfor leave to add, amend, vary, withdraw, omit or substitute any of the aforesaid\ngrounds at any time before or at the time of hearing of the matter with the\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal

MAMTA MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 31(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.1442 /मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.1534 /मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2016-17) Mamta Mehta, B-3, Bldg No.3, Saibaba Enclave, Behind Citi Centre, Goregaon West Mumbai 400 062. Pan: Afxpm-6021-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 31(2)(3), Kautalya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Choughule सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

196 (Bom) . In respect of ground No.4 of appeal, the ld. Departmental Representative 6 ITA NO.1534/MUM/2022(A.Y.2016-17) submitted that turnover of the assessee is more than Rs.1.00 crore. The assessee was required to maintain books of account and get them audited u/s. 44AB of the Act. The assessee has failed to comply with the conditions as mandated under the provisions

MAMTA MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.1442 /मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.1534 /मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2016-17) Mamta Mehta, B-3, Bldg No.3, Saibaba Enclave, Behind Citi Centre, Goregaon West Mumbai 400 062. Pan: Afxpm-6021-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 31(2)(3), Kautalya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Choughule सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

196 (Bom) . In respect of ground No.4 of appeal, the ld. Departmental Representative 6 ITA NO.1534/MUM/2022(A.Y.2016-17) submitted that turnover of the assessee is more than Rs.1.00 crore. The assessee was required to maintain books of account and get them audited u/s. 44AB of the Act. The assessee has failed to comply with the conditions as mandated under the provisions

SVP GLOBAL TEXTILES LTD FORMERLY SVP GLOBAL VENTURES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

penalty u/s 271AAB(1A) in the instant case where no additions were made and, in a year, where the section was non- existent. o. In the case of Citron Infraprojects Ltd, for AY 2012-13 to AY 2018-19, the approval number granted by the Addl. CIT has not been mentioned in the Assessment Orders. p. In the case