ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

TDS)- 2(1), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the case of the assessee

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

TDS)- 2(1), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the case of the assessee

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

TDS)- 2(1), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the case of the assessee

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2 (1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

TDS)- 2(1), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the case of the assessee

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

TDS)- 2(1), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the case of the assessee

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

TDS)- 2(1), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the case of the assessee

ROYAL TWINKLE STAR CLUB P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

TDS)- 2(1), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the case of the assessee

M/S MUMBADEVI VEYHICLES,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 41(4)(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarm/S. Mumbadevi Ito Ward 41(4)(2), Veyhicles Room No. 854B, 8Th Shop No. 18, Suyash Vs. Floor, Kautilya Shopping Centre, Nnp, A. Bhavan, Bkc, K. Vaidya Marg, Goregaon Bandra (East), (E), Mumbai-400 065 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaofm0851F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Dinkle Hariya & Ms. Sruti Kalyanikar, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026

TDS credits and financial transactions reflected in Form 26AS, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings. Notice under section 148 of the Act was issued

KOYANA NAGRI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LTD, MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1- K, KALYAN

Bench: Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19 Koyana Nagri Sahakari Dcit, Circle-1 Patsanstha Ltd. Mohan Plaza, Shivaji Nagar, Near Wayale Nagar, Chintamani Ganesh Vs. Kalyan- 421301. Mandir, Ambernath (E.)-421501 Pan: Aabak7477P Appellant : Respondent

reassessment proceedings is bad in law. Koyana Nagri Sahakari Patsanstha Ltd.; A. Y.2018-19 2. The Ld CIT(A) NFAC failed to appreciate that the JAO reopened the assessment on different issues ie Cash deposit in bank and TDS

HUSSEIN ABBAS ARSIWALA ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)- 32 , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

reassessment proceedings, when the assessing officer called for information from it. It was also submitted that the TDS deduction was reflected

JET SPEED REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 32(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

reassessment.  The loan was repaid up by the assessee during FY 2015-16 with the interest, after deducting TDS thereon

M/S. JET SPEED REALTORS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 32 (1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

reassessment.  The loan was repaid up by the assessee during FY 2015-16 with the interest, after deducting TDS thereon

JET SPEED REALTORS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 32 (1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

reassessment.  The loan was repaid up by the assessee during FY 2015-16 with the interest, after deducting TDS thereon

ACIT-24(1), MUMBAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. RAJ CLEARING AGENCY, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember Acit – 24(1), Raj Clearing Agency, Vs. Room.No.601, 6Th Floor, 303/D Wing, Piramal Chambers, Jayant Apartment, Lalbaug, Parel, Sahar Cargocomplex, Mumbai – 400012. Andheri(East), Mumbai-40099. Pan/Gir No. Aaifr0443E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

TDS provision, i.e. nature of the services rendered by M/s. Capricorn Logistics Pvt. Ltd remained unexplained in the reassessment proceedings

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS. was issued to the Appellant by\nthe Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department ['FAO"] [See Point 7...\npages 47 to 50 of the paperbook). The reasons were the same as given\nin paragraph (b) above and concluded as such in the order under Section\n148A(d) of the Act.\nb. The Appellant made detailed submission during the reassessment

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. FUTURA TRAVELS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

TDS compliance done by the assessee. Thus, no new material had come on record nor any new information was received to justify initiating the impugned reassessment

VINAY PARMANAND HARIANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm Ito International Taxation, Vinay Parmanand Hariani Ward 2(2)(1), C/O. Chaturvedi Piyush & Co. Room No.1725, 17Th Floor, 3-D1, Court Chambers, Air India Building, Vs. New Marine Lines, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabph4179A Assessee By : Shri Piyush Chaturvedi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Anil Sant, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2024

reassessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act. 3. The L.d. AO/DRP failed to apricate that the refund along with interest due to the assessee, being the excess of TDS

UMASHANKER R PALIWAL,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-22(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleumashanker R Paliwal, Vs. Acit, 22(2) Shop No. 2, Uday Piramal Chembers, Darshan, Tps Iii, Lalbaug, Roadno.11,Santacruz(E) Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400055. Pan/Gir No. : Aadpp0557G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Aditya Maheshwari.Ar Respondent By : Ms. Jayashree Thakur.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(1) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

TDS was deducted. Therefore, the AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. Further the assessee was provided reasons for reassessment