DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

46,95,341/- stating that the bad-debts claimed should be reduced to the extent of the credit balance as per the proviso to section 36(1)(vii). The CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO by placing reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee's own case

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 3(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

46,95,341/- stating that the bad-debts claimed should be reduced to the extent of the credit balance as per the proviso to section 36(1)(vii). The CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO by placing reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee's own case

INCOME TAX OFFICER (IT)-3(2)(1), KAUTILYA BHAWAN vs. SHAPOORJI PALLONJI MISTRY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be.] (2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.) 13 ITA Nos. 3674/Mum/2025 and ors. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 7.1. Finance Act, 2021 amended re-assessment related provisions w.e.f. 01.04.2021. These amended provisions made

INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 3(2)(1), KAUTILYA BHAWAN MUMBAI vs. SHAPOORJI PALLONJI MISTRY, MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the Revenue are dismissed and the\ntwo Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

reassessment or recomputation,\nas the case may be.]\n(2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to\nthe provisions of section 151.)\n\n13\nITA Nos.3674/Mum/2025 and ors.\nShapoorji Pallonji Mistry\nAYs 2015-16 and 2016-17\n7.1.\nFinance Act, 2021 amended re-assessment related provisions w.e.f.\n01.04.2021. These amended provisions

ITO(IT)-3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHAPOORJI PALLONJI MISTRY, MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the Revenue are dismissed and the\ntwo Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

reassessment or recomputation,\nas the case may be.]\n\n(2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to\nthe provisions of section 151.)\n\n13\nITA Nos.3674/Mum/2025 and ors.\nShapoorji Pallonji Mistry\nAYs 2015-16 and 2016-17\n\n7.1.\nFinance Act, 2021 amended re-assessment related provisions w.e.f.\n01.04.2021. These

SHAILESH ASALRAJ JAIN,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI 20, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2018-19

reassessment cannot be examined in proceedings arising from section 263 is devoid of merit. It is well- proceedings arising from section 263 is devoid of merit. proceedings arising from section 263 is devoid of merit. settled that a jurisdictional defect strikes at the foundation of settled that a jurisdictional defect strikes at the foundation of settled that a jurisdictional defect

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

46,103-1,42,22,628) as net the amount credited out 1,42,22,628) as net the amount credited out 1,42,22,628) as net the amount credited out of Rs. 14,22,26,284 of lease rental receipts. Thus, 14,22,26,284 of lease rental receipts. Thus, the TDS amount is the TDS amount

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

46,103-1,42,22,628) as net the amount credited out 1,42,22,628) as net the amount credited out 1,42,22,628) as net the amount credited out of Rs. 14,22,26,284 of lease rental receipts. Thus, 14,22,26,284 of lease rental receipts. Thus, the TDS amount is the TDS amount

DEVANAND AMARNATH PARKAR,JOGESHWARI EAST, MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 41(4)(1), KAUTILYA BHAWAN, BKC, BANDRA EAST

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be.]\n(2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the\nprovisions of section 151.)\n7.1. Finance Act, 2021 amended re-assessment related provisions w.e.f.\n01.04.2021. These amended provisions made a significant change in the way re-\nassessment proceedings are initiated and the limitation

PRAFUL ARJUN RANE ,MUMBAI vs. ITO INT TAX WARD-4(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be.] (2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.) 7.1. Finance Act, 2021 amended re-assessment related provisions w.e.f. 01.04.2021. These amended provisions made a significant change in the way re-assessment proceedings are initiated and the limitation period

SUDESH DHANRAJ MURPANA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 23(3)(1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Sudesh Dhanraj Murpana Income Tax Officer – 23(3) (1) (Huf) Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Grant 401 Somdhan Bldg, Perry Road, Cross Road Bandra (West), Vs. Mumbai - 400007 Mumbai 400050

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be.] (2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.) 8.1 Finance Act, 2021 amended re-assessment related provisions w.e.f. 01.04.2021. These amended provisions made a significant change in the way re-assessment proceedings are 10 Sudesh Dhanraj Murpana

MOHAMEDALI SHABANALI BADAMI,MUMBAI vs. ITO 25(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be.] (2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.) 5.1. Finance Act, 2021 amended re-assessment related provisions w.e.f. 01.04.2021. These amended provisions made a significant change in the way re-assessment proceedings are initiated and the limitation period

BHUSHAN VASANT PARELKAR,MUMBAI vs. WARD 41(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Bhushan Vasant Parelkar Income Tax Officer, A-204 Saikripa, Navghar Ward 41(2)(1), Road, Mulund East S.O, Vs Mumbai Mumbai - 400081 (Pan: Akdpp6556D) Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Shri Dharan Gandhi, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1079866363(1), Dated 22.08.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Ito, Ward-41(2)(1),, U/S. 147 Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 31.05.2023 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: “The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ld. Ao Of Reopening The Assessment U/S 147 Although The Reopening Is Time Barred & Hence Bad In Law. Bhushan Vasant Parelkar Ay 2013-14

reassessment or recomputation, as the case may be.] (2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.) 6.1. Finance Act, 2021 amended re-assessment related provisions w.e.f. 01.04.2021. These amended provisions made a significant change in the way re-assessment proceedings are initiated and the limitation period

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

46 taxmann.com 457 observed as under :- Head Note : So far as the question as to the processing of return under section 143(1) vis-à-vis assessment made under section 143(3) is concerned, it may further be observed that after processing of return under section 143(1) the same can be assessed under section 143(3) by issue

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

46 taxmann.com 457 observed as under :- Head Note : So far as the question as to the processing of return under section 143(1) vis-à-vis assessment made under section 143(3) is concerned, it may further be observed that after processing of return under section 143(1) the same can be assessed under section 143(3) by issue

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

46 taxmann.com 457 observed as under :- Head Note : So far as the question as to the processing of return under section 143(1) vis-à-vis assessment made under section 143(3) is concerned, it may further be observed that after processing of return under section 143(1) the same can be assessed under section 143(3) by issue

MR NILESH BHARANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 612/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

46. For sake of ready reference, the prevalent section 153C of the Act w.e.f. 01/06/2015 at the time of issue of the notice u/s 148 of the Act on 28/03/2018, read as under: Assessment of income of any other person. 54 I.T.A. No. 612/Mum/2020 Mr. Nilesh Bharani 153C. (1)Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section

ITO WARD-4(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S ASHIK WOLLEN MILLS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal of revenue is allowed in terms indicated here

reassessment of the assessment year 1994-95, but when faced with the order of the BIFR exempting operation of section 41(1) of the Act, proceedings were dropped. Thereafter, for the same amount of waiver under the same order he made additions in the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1993-94, only on the basis of book