DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

survey proceedings u/s 133A of the Act from Shri Kirit kumar D Suba and Shri N K Sodhani who stated that the donations were returned back to the Group in cash, which though were subsequently retracted by them. The Assessing Officer has completed the assessment by treating the donations as bogus denying exemption u/s

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

survey proceedings u/s 133A of the Act from Shri Kirit kumar D Suba and Shri N K Sodhani who stated that the donations were returned back to the Group in cash, which though were subsequently retracted by them. The Assessing Officer has completed the assessment by treating the donations as bogus denying exemption u/s

AXTRON TEX-CHEM (INDIA) PRIVTAE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

survey action u/s 133A of the Act was also carried out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search Axtron Tex-Chem (India) Pvt. Ltd. Axtron

AXTRON TEX-CHEM (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

survey action u/s 133A of the Act was also carried out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search Axtron Tex-Chem (India) Pvt. Ltd. Axtron

AXTRON TEX -CHEM (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

survey action u/s 133A of the Act was also carried out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search out in the case of the assessee. During the course of the search Axtron Tex-Chem (India) Pvt. Ltd. Axtron

D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

133A of the Act was carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the survey proceedings various documents including diaries and data survey proceedings various documents including diaries and data survey proceedings various documents including diaries

D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

133A of the Act was carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the survey proceedings various documents including diaries and data survey proceedings various documents including diaries and data survey proceedings various documents including diaries

D G LAND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

133A of the Act was carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the carried out on 17.12.2016 at business premises of assessee. In the survey proceedings various documents including diaries and data survey proceedings various documents including diaries and data survey proceedings various documents including diaries

SWASTIK REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 15(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

surveyed on 07/07/2008 i.e. prior to start of repayment of loan to Moxdiam in September 2008 and secondly as per the assessment order passed in the case of the assessee by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 26.11.2009, the first notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 06.08.2008 commencing scrutiny proceedings

SWASTIK REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T.15(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

surveyed on 07/07/2008 i.e. prior to start of repayment of loan to Moxdiam in September 2008 and secondly as per the assessment order passed in the case of the assessee by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 26.11.2009, the first notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 06.08.2008 commencing scrutiny proceedings

M/S K R CONSTRUCTION ,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT CENTRAL-3, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathak.R.Construction Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Basement, Hinal Residency Income Tax-Central-3 19Th Floor Datta Mandir Road Dahanukar Wadi Air India Building Kandivali(W) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 021

reassessment proceedings, which is clearly evident from the fact that the assessment has been reopened for the purpose of verification of suppression of turnover on the basis of findings of survey proceedings initiated against the assessee u/s 133A

FOREVER FLOURISHING FIN & INV. PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

133A of the Act on 21.11.2013. During survey action it was observed that 21.11.2013. During survey action it was observed that 21.11.2013. During survey action it was observed that assessee issued shares at huge premium to various issued shares at huge premium to various share applicant issued shares at huge premium to various companies. The Investigation Wing

FOREVER FLOURISHING FIN. & INV. PVT. LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (CC)-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

133A of the Act on 21.11.2013. During survey action it was observed that 21.11.2013. During survey action it was observed that 21.11.2013. During survey action it was observed that assessee issued shares at huge premium to various issued shares at huge premium to various share applicant issued shares at huge premium to various companies. The Investigation Wing

ACIT, CIR-1(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. CHERYL ADVISORY PVT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment after the period of 4 years and hence the reopening the period of 4 years and hence the reopening of the assessment is bad in law and ab initio void. This ground is of the assessment is bad in law and ab initio void. This ground is of the assessment is bad in law and ab initio void. This

SHINE STAR IMPEX P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR (42), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

survey, without having any proof at all, cannot be the basis for addition or even for that matter, bringing into assessment any amount without supporting evidence. In connection with the above judicial pronouncements it is clear that the statement recorded u/s. 133A of the Act cannot be taken on oath and therefore it cannot be said to have an evidentiary

SHINE STAR IMPEX P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR (42), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

survey, without having any proof at all, cannot be the basis for addition or even for that matter, bringing into assessment any amount without supporting evidence. In connection with the above judicial pronouncements it is clear that the statement recorded u/s. 133A of the Act cannot be taken on oath and therefore it cannot be said to have an evidentiary

SUNSHINE IMPORT & EXPORTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR (42), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

survey, without having any proof at all, cannot be the basis for addition or even for that matter, bringing into assessment any amount without supporting evidence. In connection with the above judicial pronouncements it is clear that the statement recorded u/s. 133A of the Act cannot be taken on oath and therefore it cannot be said to have an evidentiary

MANTOR CAPITAL LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

133A and a confession statement has, no doubt been taken admitting income of Rs.11.45 Crores towards Share Capital receipts. However, the confession statement alone cannot be the basis and the Assessing Officer should have gathered enough materials to substantiate that the subscribers are not genuine or the money received are not properly explained. In the case of the assesse, during