DY CIT-1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

254, section 260, section 262, section 263, or section 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding section 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding section 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding otherwise than by way of appeal otherwise than by way of appeal or reference under this

M/S THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO. OP BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO-1(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

254, section 260, section 262, section 263, or section 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding section 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding section 264 or in an order of any court in a proceeding otherwise than by way of appeal otherwise than by way of appeal or reference under this

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, MUMBAI vs. VIACOM18 MEDIA PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

254 or section 260 section 260 or section 262 or or section 263 or section 264, wholly or partly, , wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment

VIACOM 18 MEDIA PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-16(1), MUMBAI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

254 or section 260 section 260 or section 262 or or section 263 or section 264, wholly or partly, , wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment

VIACOM 18 MEDIA PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-16(1), MUMBAI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

254 or section 260 section 260 or section 262 or or section 263 or section 264, wholly or partly, , wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment

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

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section\n264. For ready perusal relevant provision is extracted as under:\n“153. Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Maharashtra Airport Deputy Commissioner Of Development Company Income Tax, Ltd., Circle (3)(2)(1), 6Th Floor, Room No.608, 6Th Floor, Vs. World Trade Centre, Aayakar Bhawan, Tower No.1, Cuffe Parade, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcm9623M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dy/Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Maharashtra Airport Income Tax-(3)(2)(1), Development Co. Ltd., Vs. 12Th Floor, Room No.608/674, 6Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Aayakar Bhavan, Tower No.1, Cuffe Parade

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264. For ready perusal relevant provision is extracted as under: “153. Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Maharashtra Airport Deputy Commissioner Of Development Company Income Tax, Ltd., Circle (3)(2)(1), 6Th Floor, Room No.608, 6Th Floor, Vs. World Trade Centre, Aayakar Bhawan, Tower No.1, Cuffe Parade, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcm9623M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dy/Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Maharashtra Airport Income Tax-(3)(2)(1), Development Co. Ltd., Vs. 12Th Floor, Room No.608/674, 6Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Aayakar Bhavan, Tower No.1, Cuffe Parade

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264. For ready perusal relevant provision is extracted as under: “153. Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

DCIT 3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA AIRPORT DEVELOPEMENT CO. LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Maharashtra Airport Deputy Commissioner Of Development Company Income Tax, Ltd., Circle (3)(2)(1), 6Th Floor, Room No.608, 6Th Floor, Vs. World Trade Centre, Aayakar Bhawan, Tower No.1, Cuffe Parade, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcm9623M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dy/Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Maharashtra Airport Income Tax-(3)(2)(1), Development Co. Ltd., Vs. 12Th Floor, Room No.608/674, 6Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Aayakar Bhavan, Tower No.1, Cuffe Parade

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264. For ready perusal relevant provision is extracted as under: “153. Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Maharashtra Airport Deputy Commissioner Of Development Company Income Tax, Ltd., Circle (3)(2)(1), 6Th Floor, Room No.608, 6Th Floor, Vs. World Trade Centre, Aayakar Bhawan, Tower No.1, Cuffe Parade, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcm9623M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Dy/Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Maharashtra Airport Income Tax-(3)(2)(1), Development Co. Ltd., Vs. 12Th Floor, Room No.608/674, 6Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Aayakar Bhavan, Tower No.1, Cuffe Parade

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264. For ready perusal relevant provision is extracted as under: “153. Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

DCIT 3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA AIRPORT DEVELOPEMENT CO. LTD, MUMBAI

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section\n264. For ready perusal relevant provision is extracted as under:\n“153. Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

MAHARASHTRA AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section\n264. For ready perusal relevant provision is extracted as under:\n“153. Time limit for completion of assessment, reassessment

SHRI AMIT MANGILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, - 33(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

reassessment proceedings and the consequent assessment order, the same is being taken up for adjudication in the paras to follow. 5. The assessee is an individual and is also a member in the AOP called Arkade Bhoomi Developers and Arkade Bhoomi Enterprise. A search action was conducted on M/s Ekta and Bhoomi Group on 05.10.2015 wherein one ledger account from

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S UNION OF BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264, wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment

DCIT-3(4) , MUMBAI vs. M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264, wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment

DCTI-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264, wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment

PRAKASH SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 12(2), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. Therefore, we reject the contention of the Appellant that provisions of Section 153(2A) of the Act would be attracted in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 9.5. In view of the above, we hold that the order, dated 28/12/2016, passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read

LATE SHARMISHTA MAFATLAL MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX (A), NFAC , DELHI, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings culminate into order, dated 26/03/2014, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act, whereby addition of INR.1,67,41,917/- was made in the hands of the Assessee under Section 69C of the Act holding the peak of aggregate purchases reflected in the name of alleged accommodation entry providers for bogus purchases as unexplained