ITO-26(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SAI PRERANA CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are decided as under:

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 217, 220 & 221, 218 & 219, 215, 214/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21 Sai Prerana Co-Op Credit Ito-17(3)(2), Society Ltd., Room No. 126, 1St Floor, Vs. 317, Puran Aasha Bldg, Gr. Fl. Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Narashi Natha Street, Katha 43, G Block Bandra Kurla Bazar Masjid Bunder (W), Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 009. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadts 5638 M Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings , therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same in this appeal in this appeal. 8. Now we take up the appeal of the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER-26(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SAI PRERANA CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are decided as under:

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 217, 220 & 221, 218 & 219, 215, 214/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21 Sai Prerana Co-Op Credit Ito-17(3)(2), Society Ltd., Room No. 126, 1St Floor, Vs. 317, Puran Aasha Bldg, Gr. Fl. Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Narashi Natha Street, Katha 43, G Block Bandra Kurla Bazar Masjid Bunder (W), Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 009. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadts 5638 M Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings , therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same in this appeal in this appeal. 8. Now we take up the appeal of the assessee

ITO-26(2)(1) , MUMBAI vs. SAI PRERANA CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are decided as under:

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 217, 220 & 221, 218 & 219, 215, 214/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21 Sai Prerana Co-Op Credit Ito-17(3)(2), Society Ltd., Room No. 126, 1St Floor, Vs. 317, Puran Aasha Bldg, Gr. Fl. Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Narashi Natha Street, Katha 43, G Block Bandra Kurla Bazar Masjid Bunder (W), Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 009. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadts 5638 M Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings , therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same in this appeal in this appeal. 8. Now we take up the appeal of the assessee

SAI PRERNA CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 17(3) (2) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are decided as under:

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 217, 220 & 221, 218 & 219, 215, 214/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21 Sai Prerana Co-Op Credit Ito-17(3)(2), Society Ltd., Room No. 126, 1St Floor, Vs. 317, Puran Aasha Bldg, Gr. Fl. Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Narashi Natha Street, Katha 43, G Block Bandra Kurla Bazar Masjid Bunder (W), Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 009. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadts 5638 M Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings , therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same in this appeal in this appeal. 8. Now we take up the appeal of the assessee

SAI PRERNA CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 17(3) (2) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are In the result, appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are decided as under:

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 217, 220 & 221, 218 & 219, 215, 214/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21 Sai Prerana Co-Op Credit Ito-17(3)(2), Society Ltd., Room No. 126, 1St Floor, Vs. 317, Puran Aasha Bldg, Gr. Fl. Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Narashi Natha Street, Katha 43, G Block Bandra Kurla Bazar Masjid Bunder (W), Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 009. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadts 5638 M Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings , therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, the issue is rendered merely academic and therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same therefore, we are not adjudicating upon the same in this appeal in this appeal. 8. Now we take up the appeal of the assessee

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

194A of the Act, therefore, it was alleged that income chargeable to tax within section 40(a)(ia) had escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

194A of the Act, therefore, it was alleged that income chargeable to tax within section 40(a)(ia) had escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

194A of the Act, therefore, it was alleged that income chargeable to tax within section 40(a)(ia) had escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

194A of the Act, therefore, it was alleged that income chargeable to tax within section 40(a)(ia) had escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

194A of the Act, therefore, it was alleged that income chargeable to tax within section 40(a)(ia) had escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

194A of the Act, therefore, it was alleged that income chargeable to tax within section 40(a)(ia) had escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

194A of the Act, therefore, it was alleged that income chargeable to tax within section 40(a)(ia) had escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

194A of the Act, therefore, it was alleged that income chargeable to tax within section 40(a)(ia) had escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of section 147 of the Act. In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response

MS. NISHA SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -1(2), THANE

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year 2011-12

reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (“AO”), vide order dated 29/12/2018 passed under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act made the addition on account of commission income at 8% of the amount credited in bank account of assessee’s proprietary concern. Further, as per 26AS data, the assessee had earned interest income

CHATTANATHAN DEVARAJAN ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 34(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Chattanathan Devarajan Income Tax Officer - 34(1)(1) 1101, Raheja Tipco Heights Mumbai Rani Sati Marg, Vs. Malad East Mumbai – 400067 (Pan: Abjpc6332P) (Assessee) (Respondent)

194A) (c) TDS-1941(b) Rent Received (TDS Form 26Q, 7,50,200 Section 1941(b) (d) AIR-002 Paid Rs. 2,00,000 or more 10,27,000 against Credit Card bills Total 1,14,49,259 3 Chattanathan Devarajan AY 2014-15 3.1. Since the amount exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to tax for which

UNITED BROTHERS MULTIPLAST LLP (SUCCESSOR TO M/S UNITED BROTHERS),MUMBAI vs. PCIT-17, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S.Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailunited Brothers Multiplast Llp (Successor To M/S. United Brothers) 301, Heritage Plazza, A Wing, R.S. Maharaj Marg, Teli Gali, ……………. Appellant Cross Lane, Andheri (E), Mumbai, Maharashtra – 400069 Pan: Aaafu0314K V/S

194A of the Act in the hands of the newly converted LLP but erroneously deducted the TDS in the hands of the erstwhile partnership firm. It was further submitted that despite repeated requests to such parties they have not revised the TDS return pertaining to the assessment year under consideration. It was further submitted that the LLP has duly accounted

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC- 2(2), , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

reassessment as well as the disallowance disallowance on merit. The ground No. 2 of the appeal being on merit, it was was taken firstfor adjudication. The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in . The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in . The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-2(2),, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

reassessment as well as the disallowance disallowance on merit. The ground No. 2 of the appeal being on merit, it was was taken firstfor adjudication. The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in . The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in . The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue