SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

section 271(1)(c) of the Act are fulfilled. In view of the above, the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess depreciation is also cancelled cancelled. The relevant grounds of the appeal of The relevant grounds of the appeal

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DICT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

section 271(1)(c) of the Act are fulfilled. In view of the above, the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess the penalty in respect of interest and the excess depreciation is also cancelled cancelled. The relevant grounds of the appeal of The relevant grounds of the appeal

NSE IT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5935/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06) बिाम/ M/S. Nse. It Ltd, Dcit 8(2), Mumbai Trade Globe, Ground Floor, Andheri Kurla Road, V. Andheri (E), Mumbai 400059 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcn0159P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

3) r.w.s. 147 dated 06-07-2010 . The AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and the assessee submitted during the course of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) , as under:- “ It will be appreciated that the assessee has filed revised return in response to notice u/s. 148 on suo motto basis by withdrawing its claim

IQBAL AHMED KHALILAMED SUBEDAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(1)(2), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2135/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 ) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4896/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) should not be initiated. III Notices u/s 133(6) for purchase verification issued the following parties but returned unserved by the postal department: M/s B K Enterprises; M/s Vijay Laxmi Traders; M/s Soni Brothers; M/s Shubh Trading Co; M/s Karnimata Emporium; M/s Ratan Enterprises; M/s Keshav Enterprises; M/s Sana Tradings and M/s Pawan Sheth

IQBAL AHMAED KHALIL AHMED SUBEDAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2135/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 ) आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4896/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) should not be initiated. III Notices u/s 133(6) for purchase verification issued the following parties but returned unserved by the postal department: M/s B K Enterprises; M/s Vijay Laxmi Traders; M/s Soni Brothers; M/s Shubh Trading Co; M/s Karnimata Emporium; M/s Ratan Enterprises; M/s Keshav Enterprises; M/s Sana Tradings and M/s Pawan Sheth

ILA JITENDRA MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2014-15

3. Subsequently, notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act dated 28.07.2016 and 22.08.2016 along with a detailed questionnaire calling for various details was served on the assessee. 4. Further, during the course of Assessment Proceedings Your Goodself observed that, Assessee has claimed exemption u/s. 54F on sale of shares of M/s. Halford Reaties Pvt. Ltd., Rutham Builders

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

40A(3) of the Act. CIT(A) however was of the view that these seized paper does not CIT(A) however was of the view that these seized paper does not CIT(A) however was of the view that these seized paper does not manifest cash sales but these are unaccounted cash financial manifest cash sales but these are unaccounted

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

40A(3) of the Act. CIT(A) however was of the view that these seized paper does not CIT(A) however was of the view that these seized paper does not CIT(A) however was of the view that these seized paper does not manifest cash sales but these are unaccounted cash financial manifest cash sales but these are unaccounted

SUSHIL S. JHUNJHUNWALA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(1)(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Ita Nos. 3001 To 3007/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2002-03 To 2008-09) Shushil S. Jhujhunwala (Huf) Income Tax Officer-19(1)(4) बिधम/ Flat No. 41/42, 4Th Floor, Mumbai Meghna Apt, S.V. Road, Vs. Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aajhs5267C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961. On facts & Circumstances of the case & law on the subject the CIT(A) erred in upholding the penalty of Rs.7466/- On facts & circumstances of the case & law on the subject the levied penalty be deleted. The appellant craves to add or amend or alter the grounds of appeal.” The assessee

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014-15 to AY\n2020-21 are partly allowed

40A(ia) of the Act\nbut upheld the penalty in respect of disallowance of 'salary and\nwages' and 'administrative expenses' on estimate basis and ‘interest'\nand 'excess depreciation'. The finding of the ld CIT(A) in respect of\nsalary, wages and administrative expenses is reproduced as under:\n“7.5 Before me, appellant has again submitted that since\nsalary and administrative

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014-15 to AY\n2020-21 are partly allowed

40A(ia) of the Act\nbut upheld the penalty in respect of disallowance of 'salary and\nwages' and 'administrative expenses' on estimate basis and ‘interest'\nand 'excess depreciation'. The finding of the ld CIT(A) in respect of\nsalary, wages and administrative expenses is reproduced as under:\n“7.5 Before me, appellant has again submitted that since\nsalary and administrative

GLOBAL PROSERV LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 9, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

section 143(3) made certain additions/disallowances as under : I Addition u/s 68 1,53,55,000 Ii Disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) 10,15,007 iii Disallwnce u/s 40A(2)(b) 25,45,459 iv Disllwance of deprecition 37,850 V Disllwnce u/s 40(a)(ia) 7,77,886 vi Disalwnce of travelling expenses 62,89,119 vii Disallwne

GLOBAL PROSERV LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 9, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

section 143(3) made certain additions/disallowances as under : I Addition u/s 68 1,53,55,000 Ii Disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) 10,15,007 iii Disallwnce u/s 40A(2)(b) 25,45,459 iv Disllwance of deprecition 37,850 V Disllwnce u/s 40(a)(ia) 7,77,886 vi Disalwnce of travelling expenses 62,89,119 vii Disallwne

GLOBAL PROSERV LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 9, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

section 143(3) made certain additions/disallowances as under : I Addition u/s 68 1,53,55,000 Ii Disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) 10,15,007 iii Disallwnce u/s 40A(2)(b) 25,45,459 iv Disllwance of deprecition 37,850 V Disllwnce u/s 40(a)(ia) 7,77,886 vi Disalwnce of travelling expenses 62,89,119 vii Disallwne

IINCOME TAX OFFICER -30(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. VILAS TRANSPORT COMPANY, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

section 40A(3) undergone major amendment vide finance Act, 2007 w.e.f. 01.04.2008 and hence added to the total income of the assessee returned. Penalty proceeding u/s. 271

MADISON TEAMWORKS FILM PROMOTIONS AND ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 10(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2013-14 Madison Teamworks Film Deputy Commissioner Of Promotions & Entertainment Income Tax-10(2)(2), Private Limited, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 1St Floor, 349 Business Point, M.K. Road, Western Express Highway, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (East), Mumbai-400069. Pan : Aaecm1006B (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Mr. Siddesh Chaugule & Ms. Manmeet Kaur Saini For Revenue : Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr.Dr

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated while issuance of notice u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, dt. 30-10-2015. 3. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) challenging the addition on account of mismatch of income vis-à- vis Form-26AS and it was partly

THE DCIT-1(3)(1) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S FERN INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

3) of the Act. The LAO had passed a suitable order after verifying submissions of the appellant. Subsequently, a mistake was found by another LAO. Appellant would like to point out that while the LAO is willing to implicitly accept that his predecessor had made a bonafide error due 10 ITA.NO.1402/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2012-13) M/s Fern Infrastructure

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

40A(ia) of the Act\nbut upheld the penalty in respect of disallowance of 'salary and\nwages' and 'administrative expenses' on estimate basis and ‘interest'\nand 'excess depreciation'. The finding of the ld CIT(A) in respect of\nsalary, wages and administrative expenses is reproduced as under:\n“7.5 Before me, appellant has again submitted that since\nsalary and administrative