H.K. ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT - CC-2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

additional income offered before Hon. ITSC. 11. We also noticed that the present proceedings were carried out u/s 153A of the Act and therefore in our view the assessment has to be guided by the said provision. 22 HK Enterprises, Mumbai 12. As per Sec. 153A of the Act, any assessment or reassessment

H.K. ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT-CC-2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

additional income offered before Hon. ITSC. 11. We also noticed that the present proceedings were carried out u/s 153A of the Act and therefore in our view the assessment has to be guided by the said provision. 22 HK Enterprises, Mumbai 12. As per Sec. 153A of the Act, any assessment or reassessment

H.K. ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT-CC-2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

additional income offered before Hon. ITSC. 11. We also noticed that the present proceedings were carried out u/s 153A of the Act and therefore in our view the assessment has to be guided by the said provision. 22 HK Enterprises, Mumbai 12. As per Sec. 153A of the Act, any assessment or reassessment

H.K. ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT-CC-2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

additional income offered before Hon. ITSC. 11. We also noticed that the present proceedings were carried out u/s 153A of the Act and therefore in our view the assessment has to be guided by the said provision. 22 HK Enterprises, Mumbai 12. As per Sec. 153A of the Act, any assessment or reassessment

H.K. ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CC - 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

additional income offered before Hon. ITSC. 11. We also noticed that the present proceedings were carried out u/s 153A of the Act and therefore in our view the assessment has to be guided by the said provision. 22 HK Enterprises, Mumbai 12. As per Sec. 153A of the Act, any assessment or reassessment

DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue s filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S., Hon’Ble

additional income was out of the development of infrastructure facilities. income was out of the development of infrastructure facilities. income was out of the development of infrastructure facilities. 35.8 In respect of the deficiencies in the information supplied 35.8 In respect of the deficiencies in the information supplied 35.8 In respect of the deficiencies in the information supplied

DCIT-1(2)1, MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. PATIL CONSTRUCTION AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result In the result, all the three appeals filed by the revenue s filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S., Hon’Ble

additional income was out of the development of infrastructure facilities. income was out of the development of infrastructure facilities. income was out of the development of infrastructure facilities. 35.8 In respect of the deficiencies in the information supplied 35.8 In respect of the deficiencies in the information supplied 35.8 In respect of the deficiencies in the information supplied

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 41(1)(1), MUMBAI, KAUTILYA BHAWAN, BKC vs. JAJ INTERNATIONAL, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds relating to merit the file of the Ld

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

additional ground of appeal to the effect that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO effect that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO effect that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO u/s.148 are illegal and void ab initio. In the instant case, the u/s.148 are illegal and void ab initio. In the instant case, the learned

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAUTILYA BHAWAN vs. JAJ INTERNATIONAL, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds relating to merit the file of the Ld

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

additional ground of appeal to the effect that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO effect that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO effect that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO u/s.148 are illegal and void ab initio. In the instant case, the u/s.148 are illegal and void ab initio. In the instant case, the learned

M/S. BIOBUILD DEVELOPERS ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 24(1)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassessment is invalid. 2. Estimation without Evidence – Addition on Presumption : The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made on presumption without any corroborative material, books of account entries, or supporting documentation. No actual interest income

TATA MOTORS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.631/मुं/2013 (िन.व. 2008-09) Tata Motors Limited Bombay House, 24,Homi Mody Street, Hutama Chowk, Mumbai – 400001. Pan: Aaact-2727-Q ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle -2(3), Mumbai. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr.Advocate With Shri Nikhil Tiwari,Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Vatsala Jha, Cit-Dr & Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/11/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 05/02/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

additional grounds of appeal) vide application dated 22/02/2023. The same are taken on record. Ground No.1 : Allowability of Pro-rata amount for the year in respect of Leasehold Lands – Rs.71,86,777/-: 13. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee had claimed deduction towards pro-rata amount of Leasehold land. The assessee had made claim

THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Income tax who had passed the assessment order had valid authority to perform and exercise the powers and functions of an Assessing Officer of the assessee and to pass the impugned assessment order. Under these circumstances, we have no other option but to hold the same as nullity and, therefore, the impugned assessment order is quashed having been passed without

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

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

Income from Long term capital gain based upon such report. Once the addition made in reassessment order based upon reasons

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

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

Income from Long term capital gain based upon such report. Once the addition made in reassessment order based upon reasons

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

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

Income from Long term capital gain based upon such report. Once the addition made in reassessment order based upon reasons

JULIET INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 6(3)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5452/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Juliet Industries Limited Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Lower Parel M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5975/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Juliet Industries Limited Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Vs. M.K.Road Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

income of the assessee by placing reliance on several judicial pronouncements. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee contested the reassessment proceedings on legal grounds as well as on merits with partial success before Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 20/07/2016 where Ld. CIT(A) while upholding the reassessment proceedings, confirmed additions

ITO 6(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. JULIET INDUSTRIES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JULIET PRODUCTS LTD.), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5452/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Juliet Industries Limited Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Lower Parel M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5975/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Juliet Industries Limited Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Vs. M.K.Road Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

income of the assessee by placing reliance on several judicial pronouncements. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee contested the reassessment proceedings on legal grounds as well as on merits with partial success before Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 20/07/2016 where Ld. CIT(A) while upholding the reassessment proceedings, confirmed additions

NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD,,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. C.I.T,RANGE 3(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

Additional Commissioner of Income tax had no jurisdiction to act as tax had no jurisdiction to act as its Assessing Officer its Assessing Officer and hence, the assessment order passed by him is and hence, the assessment order passed by him is and hence, the assessment order passed by him is without without without jurisdiction. jurisdiction. jurisdiction. This This This