SHAILY PRINCE GOYAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-27(3)(1), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No

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

SHANNO MOHAMMED YUSUF WARSI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-25(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initi u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income ated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income with a view to concealment of income. with a view to concealment of income.” 3. Before the Ld. CIT(A) Before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee challenged validity of the challenged validity

VINAY PARMANAND HARIANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT), WARD-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vinay Parmanand Hariani, Ito, Int. Taxation Ward 2(2)(1), Kempinski Private Residences Room No. 1725, 17Th Floor, Air Vs. Unit 40F Dki Jakarta, 10310 India Building, Nariman Point, Indonesia. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabph 4179 A Appellant Respondent

short term capital gain. apital gain. The gain on equity fund is being taxed @10% and gain on Hybrid The gain on equity fund is being taxed @10% and gain on Hybrid The gain on equity fund is being taxed @10% and gain on Hybrid Fixed Term Fund is taxed at 20% being debt fund. Penalty Fixed Term Fund

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

short-term capital loss exemptions. Since the assessee has not sold any shares of M/s.Rutron International Ltd., the question of long-term capital gains/short-term capital loss does not arise. Further, it is evident from the record that the assessee in order to substantiate the purchase transaction submitted that the sale consideration was paid through normal banking channel and the shares

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

short-term capital loss exemptions. Since the assessee has not sold any shares of M/s.Rutron International Ltd., the question of long-term capital gains/short-term capital loss does not arise. Further, it is evident from the record that the assessee in order to substantiate the purchase transaction submitted that the sale consideration was paid through normal banking channel and the shares

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

short-term capital loss exemptions. Since the assessee has not sold any shares of M/s.Rutron International Ltd., the question of long-term capital gains/short-term capital loss does not arise. Further, it is evident from the record that the assessee in order to substantiate the purchase transaction submitted that the sale consideration was paid through normal banking channel and the shares

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

short-term capital loss exemptions. Since the assessee has not sold any shares of M/s.Rutron International Ltd., the question of long-term capital gains/short-term capital loss does not arise. Further, it is evident from the record that the assessee in order to substantiate the purchase transaction submitted that the sale consideration was paid through normal banking channel and the shares

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

short-term capital loss exemptions. Since the assessee has not sold any shares of M/s.Rutron International Ltd., the question of long-term capital gains/short-term capital loss does not arise. Further, it is evident from the record that the assessee in order to substantiate the purchase transaction submitted that the sale consideration was paid through normal banking channel and the shares

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act, which would be premature for adjudication at this stage. Hence dismissed. 8. In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No. 1605/Mum/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed . Shri Yogesh Thakkar – ITA No. 1612/Mum/2021 – Asst Year 2015-16 - Assessee Appeal 9. Though the assessee

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

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act, which would be premature for adjudication at this stage. Hence dismissed. 8. In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No. 1605/Mum/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed . Shri Yogesh Thakkar – ITA No. 1612/Mum/2021 – Asst Year 2015-16 - Assessee Appeal 9. Though the assessee

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

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act, which would be premature for adjudication at this stage. Hence dismissed. 8. In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No. 1605/Mum/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed . Shri Yogesh Thakkar – ITA No. 1612/Mum/2021 – Asst Year 2015-16 - Assessee Appeal 9. Though the assessee

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act, which would be premature for adjudication at this stage. Hence dismissed. 8. In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No. 1605/Mum/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed . Shri Yogesh Thakkar – ITA No. 1612/Mum/2021 – Asst Year 2015-16 - Assessee Appeal 9. Though the assessee

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act, which would be premature for adjudication at this stage. Hence dismissed. 8. In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No. 1605/Mum/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed . Shri Yogesh Thakkar – ITA No. 1612/Mum/2021 – Asst Year 2015-16 - Assessee Appeal 9. Though the assessee

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

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act, which would be premature for adjudication at this stage. Hence dismissed. 8. In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No. 1605/Mum/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed . Shri Yogesh Thakkar – ITA No. 1612/Mum/2021 – Asst Year 2015-16 - Assessee Appeal 9. Though the assessee

NISHA YOGESH THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 3(4), MUMBAI

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act, which would be premature for adjudication at this stage. Hence dismissed. 8. In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No. 1605/Mum/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed . Shri Yogesh Thakkar – ITA No. 1612/Mum/2021 – Asst Year 2015-16 - Assessee Appeal 9. Though the assessee

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

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

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act, which would be premature for adjudication at this stage. Hence dismissed. 8. In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No. 1605/Mum/2021 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed . Shri Yogesh Thakkar – ITA No. 1612/Mum/2021 – Asst Year 2015-16 - Assessee Appeal 9. Though the assessee

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is initiated separately.” 5.2 On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) on the first issue of taxing entire On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) on the first issue of taxing entire

THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is initiated separately. proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act is initiated separately.” 5.2 On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) on the first issue of taxing entire On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) on the first issue of taxing entire