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

253(3) of the Act, are being treated as being filed within limitation as the appeal has been filed within the extended time allowed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court vide order, dated 23/03/2020 and 27/04/2021 passed in the Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 read with order, dated 23/09/2021, passed

M/S EDELWISS RURAL & CORPORATE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S Edelweiss Rural & Acit Central Circle-1(2), Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 906, 9Th Floor, Old Vs. Edelweiss House, Off Cst Road, Cgo Building Annexe, Kalina, Santacruz (East), Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400098. Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aakcs 7311 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Jitendra Jain, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Sanjeev Kashyap, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 09/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement ___/03/2023 Order

reassessment and therefore the issue of M/s Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Ltd. M/s Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Ltd. 6 loss on sale of the jewelry below loss on sale of the jewelry below the market price was not the market price was not adjudicated being rendered as academic only. The learned consul adjudicated being rendered as academic only. The learne

R RAMESH & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-19(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2012 – 13 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm

reassessment proceedings and confirmed the addition on the merits of the case. 16. Assessee, aggrieved is in appeal before us, the learned authorised representative submitted a paper book containing 104 pages wherein he submitted that purchases made from these four parties are not bogus. For this he submitted the affidavit of the parties, the bank statement of the parties, purchase

R RAMESH & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-19(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2012 – 13 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm

reassessment proceedings and confirmed the addition on the merits of the case. 16. Assessee, aggrieved is in appeal before us, the learned authorised representative submitted a paper book containing 104 pages wherein he submitted that purchases made from these four parties are not bogus. For this he submitted the affidavit of the parties, the bank statement of the parties, purchase

ACIT-3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD., MUMBAI

253.\n21. However, on the other hand, the Ld. A.R. for the assessee\nchallenging the impugned findings in holding grant-in-aid received\nby the assessee company as capital in nature contended inter-alia\nthat since the grant-in-aid held by the assessee company for\npayment of compensation towards purchase of land to the land\nowner, rehabilitation

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD, NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRLCE-1 , THANE

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment has been rendered merely academic. Therefore, we are not has been rendered merely academic. Therefore has been rendered merely academic. Therefore adjudicating the grounds adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and same are left by the assessee and same are left open to the assessee open to the assessee to challenge in case the decision on merit

DCIT, CIRCLE-1 ,, THANE vs. EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment has been rendered merely academic. Therefore, we are not has been rendered merely academic. Therefore has been rendered merely academic. Therefore adjudicating the grounds adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and same are left by the assessee and same are left open to the assessee open to the assessee to challenge in case the decision on merit

DCIT CIRCLE-1 , THANE vs. M/S EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD. , DELHI

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment has been rendered merely academic. Therefore, we are not has been rendered merely academic. Therefore has been rendered merely academic. Therefore adjudicating the grounds adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and same are left by the assessee and same are left open to the assessee open to the assessee to challenge in case the decision on merit

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD.,NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRCLE- 1, THANE

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment has been rendered merely academic. Therefore, we are not has been rendered merely academic. Therefore has been rendered merely academic. Therefore adjudicating the grounds adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and same are left by the assessee and same are left open to the assessee open to the assessee to challenge in case the decision on merit

EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD,NOIDA vs. DY CIT CIRLCE-1, THANE

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment has been rendered merely academic. Therefore, we are not has been rendered merely academic. Therefore has been rendered merely academic. Therefore adjudicating the grounds adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and same are left by the assessee and same are left open to the assessee open to the assessee to challenge in case the decision on merit

DCIT CIRCLE-1 , THANE vs. M/S EVEREST INDUSTRIES LTD. , DELHI

In the result, the In the result, the assessee and Revenue are are educated as under:

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Everest Industries Limited, Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- 201301, Vs. Wing, 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Uttar Pradesh Estate, Thane(W)- 400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment has been rendered merely academic. Therefore, we are not has been rendered merely academic. Therefore has been rendered merely academic. Therefore adjudicating the grounds adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and same are left by the assessee and same are left open to the assessee open to the assessee to challenge in case the decision on merit

DCIT, CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. SATISH JAGANNATH AGGARWAL, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

253 CTR 80 wherein it is clearly held that "by virtue of section 158B-I the various provisions of Chapter XIV-B are made inapplicable to proceedings under section 153A/153C The effect of this is that while the provisions of Chapter XIV-B limit the inquiry by the Assessing Officer to those materials found during the search and seizure operation

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER - 19(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. KUVERBEN KANTILAL RAVAL, MUMBAI

In the result all the grounds of the appeal of the learned assessing officer are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm A.Y.2013-14 The Income Tax Officer Kunverben Ratilal Raval 7, Taldhwaj Bhavan 19 (2) (2) Mumbai 3 Road 503, 5Th Floor, Pinjrapole Lane Vs. Piramal Chambers Mumbai 400004 Lal Baug, Parel Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan Aadpr8076L Assessee By Mr Mitesh Mehta Ca Revenue By Shri P D Chougule Adl Cit Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 14-08-2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2024

253,369/– and has shown the gross profit of Rs. 1,308,107/–. The assessee has also filed the tax audit report along with the return of income which was assessed under section 143 (3). The reassessment

DWARKA CEMENT WORKS LIMITED(CONVERTED INTO DWARKA CEMENT WORKS LLP W.E.F 15-09-2022),MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-6(2)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

3) read with sections 147 and 144B accepted\nthe returned figure without making any further addition. Thus,\nthere is no dispute that no addition was made by the Assessing\nOfficer over and above the income declared in the return filed\npursuant to notice under section 148.\n22. In this factual background, the ratio laid down by the Co-\nordinate Bench

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

reassessment order of the AO be set aside as bad in law.” 22. Similar issue was considered by us in the Assessee’s Appeal in Ground No 6 for the A.Y. 2007-08 and held as under: - “58. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. It is observed that during the year under consideration assessee has sold

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

reassessment order of the AO be set aside as bad in law.” 22. Similar issue was considered by us in the Assessee’s Appeal in Ground No 6 for the A.Y. 2007-08 and held as under: - “58. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. It is observed that during the year under consideration assessee has sold

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

reassessment order of the AO be set aside as bad in law.” 22. Similar issue was considered by us in the Assessee’s Appeal in Ground No 6 for the A.Y. 2007-08 and held as under: - “58. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. It is observed that during the year under consideration assessee has sold

ULTRA TECH CEMENT LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CC 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

253 ITR 667/124 Taxman 797, where the expenditure incurred by the assessee by way contribution to the government for building a new bridge for providing access to the factory of the assessee was held to be on the revenue account. The Hon'ble Madras High Court held as follows: Page No. 55 ITA NO. 1789 & 1466/MUM/2021