DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

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

Section 37(1) of the Act.We have perused the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal in that case it was stated, during the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer noted that as per material available on record, the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Chennai Zone (DGCEI) had carried out investigation in respect of certain auto dealers and intermediaries. In course

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

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

Section 37(1) of the Act.We have perused the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal in that case it was stated, during the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer noted that as per material available on record, the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Chennai Zone (DGCEI) had carried out investigation in respect of certain auto dealers and intermediaries. In course

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

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

Section 37(1) of the Act.We have perused the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal in that case it was stated, during the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer noted that as per material available on record, the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence, Chennai Zone (DGCEI) had carried out investigation in respect of certain auto dealers and intermediaries. In course

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

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

section 201(1) of the Act. The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. statistical purposes. Shri Narendra S Shah ITA Nos. 2005 to 2007/M/ 2004/M/2004

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

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

section 201(1) of the Act. The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. statistical purposes. Shri Narendra S Shah ITA Nos. 2005 to 2007/M/ 2004/M/2004

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

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

section 201(1) of the Act. The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. statistical purposes. Shri Narendra S Shah ITA Nos. 2005 to 2007/M/ 2004/M/2004

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

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

section 201(1) of the Act. The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. statistical purposes. Shri Narendra S Shah ITA Nos. 2005 to 2007/M/ 2004/M/2004

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

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

section 201(1) of the Act. The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. statistical purposes. Shri Narendra S Shah ITA Nos. 2005 to 2007/M/ 2004/M/2004

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

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

section 201(1) of the Act. The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. statistical purposes. Shri Narendra S Shah ITA Nos. 2005 to 2007/M/ 2004/M/2004

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

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

section 201(1) of the Act. The ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. statistical purposes. Shri Narendra S Shah ITA Nos. 2005 to 2007/M/ 2004/M/2004

ACIT-16(2), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN vs. FAKHRUDDIN TAIYEBALI PADARIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2017-18 Acit- 16(2), Mumbai Fakhruddin Taiyebali Padaria 5Th Floor, Shabbir Place, 80 Vs. Dr. A.L. Nair Road, Mumbai- 400008. Pan: Abdpp 7103 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Dinesh A Chourasia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.01.2025

201, for the proposition that an assessment made without strictly complying with section 24- B (section 159 in the present Act) is not void or illegal and that any infractions in that behalf can be waived by the assessee. The court also placed reliance upon its earlier decision in Estate of Late Rangalal Jajodia v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras

LABDHI LOGICAL FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS LLP,DOMBIVALT EAST, THANE vs. ITO 3(2) , KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarlabdhi Logical Financial Ito-3(2), Solutions Llp 2Nd Floor, Rani B-22, Gao Devi Prasad, Vs. Mansion, Murbad Domvivali East, Thane, Road, Kalyan, Maharashtra-421 201 Maharashtra- 421 301 Pan/Gir No. Aaefl7209G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Deepak Shah, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 04.02.2026

201 Maharashtra- 421 301 PAN/GIR No. AAEFL7209G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Deepak Shah, Ld. AR Revenue by Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. DR Date of Hearing 28.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 04.02.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal is directed against the order dated 27.08.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

JAIPRAKASH L. SINGH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands\nallowed

reassessment as\nprescribed in sub-section (2) of section\n150 of the Act limitation provided\nunder section 149 of the Act has to be\ncounted from the end of relevant\n assessment year till date of order which\nis subject matter of appeal wherein\ndirections were passed.\"\nV. THE TRIBUNAL DO NOT HAVE POWER TO GIVE ANY FINDING OR\nDIRECTION

AKANSHA YOGESH DESHMUKH,BPCL STAFF COLONY vs. ITO/DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION MUMBAI, INCOME TAX BUILDING

reassessment proceedings stand\nvitiated.\n8. General Ground:\nThe appellant denies her liability to be assessed at the income and tax\ndetermined. The additions confirmed by the learned CIT(A) are arbitrary,\nunjustified, and liable to be deleted in toto. The appellant craves leave to add,\namend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, or delete any or all grounds of appeal

SHAKUNTALA KAMBLE (LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF PREMCHAND KAMBLE),THANE vs. DCIT -CENT. CIR `, THANE

201, Casa Marina, Hiranandani Estate, Patlipada, ……………. Respondent ITA Nos. 1764-1767 & 1911-1912/Mum/2021 & ITA No. 1394-1396/Mum/2020 AY 2005-06-2008-09, AY 2006-07- to 2008-09 Thane (West), Thane - 400607 [PAN: AFKPK6065J] Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Pravin Tembhekar Ms. Prachi Nalawde For the Respondent/Department : Shri K.C. Selvamani Date Conclusion of hearing : 31.07.2023 Pronouncement of order

DCIT-C-6(2), MUMBAI vs. SAMIRA HABITATS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross-objection by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.5714/Mum/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assessment Year : 2009-10

reassessment proceedings and there was no explanation of the source of expenditure incurred for making the bogus purchases, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Kanak Impex (supra) restored the addition made under section 69C of the Act. 11. Before considering the applicability of the ratio of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Kanak Impex (supra) to the present

A.C..I.T. CIRCLE-41(4)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI AWADHNARAYAN LAXMINARAYAN SINGH, MUMBAI

201 (Mumbai) The Supreme Court in the case of\nRajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 2Taxman 204\nVIII. 6 YEARS FROM END OF ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS LAPSED WHEN\nAPPEAL ORDER WAS PASSED Jaiprakash L Singh, Mumbai Sub-section (2)\nto section 150 restricted the applicability of provision of section 150 in a case\nwhere 6 years are already lapsed when appeal

A.C.I.T. CIRCLE-41(4)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI AWADHNARAYAN LAXMINARAYAN SINGH, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the\nRevenue is dismissed

201 (Mumbai) The Supreme Court in the case of\nRajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 2Taxman 204\nVIII. 6 YEARS FROM END OF ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS LAPSED WHEN\nAPPEAL ORDER WAS PASSED Jaiprakash L Singh, Mumbai Sub-section (2)\nto section 150 restricted the applicability of provision of section 150 in a case\nwhere 6 years are already lapsed when appeal