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

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

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

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016 and the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016 and the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016 and the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

GANESH POLYCHEM LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-3(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

reassessment proceedings, income has to be computed as per the provisions of Act and non-taxable should not be just taxed on technicalities. He submitted that the hyper-technical approach of the revenue ought to be shunned as Sun Engineering was not in this background and a just and fair approach be must be adopted. There is no estopple against

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

section\n2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel\nrelied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case\nof Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.\n47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016\nand the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

section\n2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel\nrelied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case\nof Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.\n47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016\nand the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

section\n2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel\nrelied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case\nof Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.\n47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016\nand the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

section\n2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel\nrelied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case\nof Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.\n47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016\nand the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

ITO-15(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANJAYKUMAR SHANKARLAL EXPORT PRIVATE LIMITED, NAVI MUMBA

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

reassessment notices. 1) Bhagwan Sahai Sharma VS. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 14 (Delhi) 2) Lalit Gulati VS. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 273 (Delhi); 3) The Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Jay Jay Agro Industries vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Karnal & Anr in CWP 7405/2025

ACIT 27 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BHAVESH RANCHHODAS MADIYAR, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

reassessment notices. 1) Bhagwan Sahai Sharma VS. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 14 (Delhi) 2) Lalit Gulati VS. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 273 (Delhi); 3) The Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Jay Jay Agro Industries vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Karnal & Anr in CWP 7405/2025

ACIT 27 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BHAVESH RANCHHODAS MADIYAR, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

reassessment notices. 1) Bhagwan Sahai Sharma VS. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 14 (Delhi) 2) Lalit Gulati VS. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2025] 174 taxmann.com 273 (Delhi); 3) The Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Jay Jay Agro Industries vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Karnal & Anr in CWP 7405/2025

M/S G M BUILDERS,MUMBAI vs. PCIT(MUMBAI), OLD-ACIT CIRCLE-22(1), PIRAMAL CHAMBER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhailm/S. G M Builders, 115, Veena Beena Shipping Center, Turner Road, Bandra West, Mumbai - 400050 Pan – Aaafg1872G ……………. Appellant

reassessed has the effect of reducing the loss or converting such loss into income.” 13. Therefore, as per the learned PCIT, since in the present case, the assessee did not file its original return of income and the income assessed 8 vide order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act is greater than the maximum

B S R & ASSOCIATES LLP,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-8 , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

273 was provided to the JAO in\nthe reassessment proceedings highlighting that the professional\nservices were rendered outside India and that the payments were\ncovered by either Article 7 (Business Profits) or Article 15\n(Independent Professional Services) of the respective treaties and\nwould not be chargeable to tax in India in the absence of a\npermanent establishment/ fixed base

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