DCIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VINAMRA UNIVERSAL TRADERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain Dy. C.I.T. – 8(3)(2) M/S. Vinamra Universal Room No. 615, 6Th Floor Traders Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Jai Centre, 1St Floor Mumbai 400020 34, P. D’Mello Rd., Opp. Red Gate Mumbai 400009 Pan – Aaccv5090J Appellant Respondent

section 271(1)(c) of the Act and prayed that the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the penalty be upheld. 4.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncements cited. In the impugned order, the learned CIT(A) after considering the assessee’s submissions

SUMITA SHREEGOPAL BARASIA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 16(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble G. Manjunatha, Ajm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4909/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09)

section 274 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 did not specify whether the 3 I.T.A. No. 4909/Mum/2015 SunitaShreegopalBarasia Notice is issued for concealing the particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income and therefore, it is bad in law and the order passed pursuant thereto is void. 7. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in holding

NAVNEETA R. MEHRA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 14(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4690/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Navneeta R. Mehra Ito. Wd.14(3)(1), Earnest बिधम/ Gopal Bhavan, 5Th Floor, 199 House, 6Th Floor, Nariman Princess Street, Mumbai Point, Mumbai- 400021 Vs. 400 002. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No Aaapm9702B ( Appellant) : (Respondent)

199 House, 6th Floor, Nariman Princess Street, Mumbai Point, Mumbai- 400021 Vs. 400 002. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No AAAPM9702B ( Appellant) : (Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से Appellant by : Shri V.K. Tulsian प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Arju Garodia, D.R सुनवाई की तारीख / : 07/04/2017 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 12/04/2017 Date of Pronouncement आदेश

THE BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP INC.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (IT) 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The Appellant prays that the learned AO be directed to delete the penalty of Rs. 52, 94,165. Ground No.2: Without prejudice to above Ground No.1, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C1T(A) erred in confirming penalty

DCIT - 8(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S S.M.ENERG TEKNIK AND ELECTRONICS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2663/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Deputy Commissioner Of M/S S.M. Energy Teknik बनाम/ Income Tax – 8(3) & Electronics Limited, V. R. No. 217, Sm Centre, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Marg, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai – 400 020. Marol Naka, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacs7312L .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

199 ITR 44(SC). The A.O. also referred to Section 145 of the Act and disallowed diminution of WIP by Rs. 1.95 crores and added the same to the income of the assessee company , vide assessment orders dated 31.01.2006 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. The assessee company carried the matter to the learned CIT(A) by filing

HEM BHATTAD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Hem Bhattad, National Faceless Appeal 104, Bajaj Bhavan, Centre (Nfac), Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Churchgate, Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaaah 2399 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit Circle-3(3)(1), Hem Bhattad, Room No. 609, Aayakar 104, Bajaj Bhavan, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Churchgate, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaaah 2399 L Appellant Respondent

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately. proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately.” 3.1 The Assessing Officer has similarly made disallowance for The Assessing Officer has similarly made disallowance for The Assessing Officer has similarly made disallowance for other items of the expenses. A detailed chart of the addition made of the expenses. A detailed chart

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S HEM BHATTAD , MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Hem Bhattad, National Faceless Appeal 104, Bajaj Bhavan, Centre (Nfac), Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Churchgate, Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaaah 2399 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit Circle-3(3)(1), Hem Bhattad, Room No. 609, Aayakar 104, Bajaj Bhavan, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Churchgate, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaaah 2399 L Appellant Respondent

penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately. proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated separately.” 3.1 The Assessing Officer has similarly made disallowance for The Assessing Officer has similarly made disallowance for The Assessing Officer has similarly made disallowance for other items of the expenses. A detailed chart of the addition made of the expenses. A detailed chart

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. JCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8 , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is having ITA No

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Dcit-Cc 8(3), 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Jcit, Central Range-8, 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

271(1)(c) of the Income initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” ” 13.3. The para No. 8 of the assessment order, 13.3. The para No. 8 of the assessment order, which relat which relates to Ground No. 6, is reproduced as under: , is reproduced as under: Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain Shri Sanjay

SHRI SANJAY SHANTILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-8 (3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is having ITA No

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Dcit-Cc 8(3), 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain, Jcit, Central Range-8, 72-7, Kalpataru Residency Tower 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. B, Sion Koliwada Road, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400022. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabpj 3761 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Cit- Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

271(1)(c) of the Income initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” ” 13.3. The para No. 8 of the assessment order, 13.3. The para No. 8 of the assessment order, which relat which relates to Ground No. 6, is reproduced as under: , is reproduced as under: Shri Sanjay Shantilal Jain Shri Sanjay

THE UNITED WESTERN BANK LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JALGAON

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as above

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

199 ITR 151. The learned Assessing Officer considered the provision of section 35D of the Act and held that as the assessee bank is not ITA Nos. 1738/PN/2005, 289/PN/2010 & 1339/PN/2007 IDBI Bank Ltd.; AY 02-03 eligible for deduction under that section since the provisions are applicable to ‘industrial undertaking’ and not to bank. As the above expenditure is also

THE UNITED WESTERN BANK LTD. (THROUGH SUCCESSORS IDBI BANK LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT,, SATARA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as above

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

199 ITR 151. The learned Assessing Officer considered the provision of section 35D of the Act and held that as the assessee bank is not ITA Nos. 1738/PN/2005, 289/PN/2010 & 1339/PN/2007 IDBI Bank Ltd.; AY 02-03 eligible for deduction under that section since the provisions are applicable to ‘industrial undertaking’ and not to bank. As the above expenditure is also

THE UNITED WESTERN BANK LTD.,,SATARA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, SATARA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as above

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

199 ITR 151. The learned Assessing Officer considered the provision of section 35D of the Act and held that as the assessee bank is not ITA Nos. 1738/PN/2005, 289/PN/2010 & 1339/PN/2007 IDBI Bank Ltd.; AY 02-03 eligible for deduction under that section since the provisions are applicable to ‘industrial undertaking’ and not to bank. As the above expenditure is also

UTI MUTUAL FUND,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRALISED PROCESSING CELL-TDS, TRACES, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2295/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Uti Mutual Fund, Dcit, Centralised Gn Block, Uti Tower, Processing Cell-Tds, Bandra Complex, Traces, V. Bandra (E), Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai-400051 Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Up- 201010 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaatu1088L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Krupa Gandhi Revenue By: Shri. Rajeev Gubgotra (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.07.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being

u/s 201(1A), as detailed here under:- Date Of Date of Due Date Date of TDS amount Delay in DELAY PERIOD Rate of Interest REMARKS Payment Deduction Deposit days both IN MONTHS interest payable DATES PER per month inclusive S.201(1A) 9 | P a g e I.T.A. No.2295/Mum/2018 7/10/2013 7/10/2013 7/11/2013 11/11/2013

ECONOMIC LAWS PRACTICE,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)59, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

u/s 201(1A), as detailed here under:- Date of Date of Due Date Date of TDS amount Delay DELAY Rate of Interest REMARK payme deductio Deposit in days PERIOD interest payabl S nt n both IN per e DATES MONTH month inclusiv S PER e S.201(1 A) 7/10/20 7/10/201 7/11/201 11/11/20

THE DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. ICICI BANK LTD. ( ERSTWHILE ANAGRAM FINANCE LTD), MUMBAI

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosain: A.Y : 1995-96

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 31.03.2006. 2 M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. 2. The sum and substance of the dispute in the present appeal is with regard to penalty of Rs. 6,44,09,354/- imposed by the Assessing Officer, which has since been deleted by the CIT(A). 3. Briefly

DCIT CEN CIR 7(3), MUMBAI vs. SANATHANAGAR ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and all Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

199 of 2015 dated 6.2.2018 We find that the SLPs preferred by the revenue against the aforesaid orders have been dismissed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Courts vide their orders dated 03/12/2018, 10/12/2018, 03/01/2019, 04/01/2019 and 21/01/2019. When this tribunal in series of decisions had relied upon the M/s. Sanathnagar Enterprises Ltd., observations of the Hon‟ble Jurisidctional High Court

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

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelife Insurance Corporation Of India V. Dcit – 3(2)(1) Central Office, F&A Department Room No. 608 3Rd Floor, West Wing Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent Acit – 3(2)(1) V. M/S. Life Insurance Corporation Of India Central Office Room No. 674, 6Th Floor “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act; The appellant craves, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other and craves, leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal.” 6 ITA No. 1710 and 1714/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2013-14) M/s. Life Insurance Corporation of India

ACIT-3(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelife Insurance Corporation Of India V. Dcit – 3(2)(1) Central Office, F&A Department Room No. 608 3Rd Floor, West Wing Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent Acit – 3(2)(1) V. M/S. Life Insurance Corporation Of India Central Office Room No. 674, 6Th Floor “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act; The appellant craves, to consider each of the above grounds of appeal without prejudice to each other and craves, leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal.” 6 ITA No. 1710 and 1714/MUM/2022 (A.Y. 2013-14) M/s. Life Insurance Corporation of India