RAJENDRA KUMAR MUNDRA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Girish Agrawalrajendra Kumar Mundra Vs. Ito, Ward 24(3)(1) (Huf) Piramal Chamber C-28, Ameya Bldg, Behind Lalbaug, Mumbai – Ymca Dn Nagar Andheri (W) 400012. 400053. Pan/Gir No.Aadh6828J (Applicant) (Respondent)

capital gains/ loss made therein and the Ld.AO having considered the details, took a conclusive view, reassessment proceedings which are initiated u/s 147 by way of reconsideration of the material already available at the time of original assessment proceedings, would amount to change of opinion. In this regard, while passing the impugned order, Learned CIT(A) relied on decisions

ITO 41(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. DEEPIKA ANIL AGARWAL, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands\ndismissed

u/s 147 of the Act\n\"Information has been received from\nInvestigation Wing of the Income tax\nDepartment that large scale,\nmanipulation had been done in the\nmarket price of shares of SPLASH\nMEDIA by a group of persons acting as\na syndicate in order to provide entries\nof tax exempt long term capital gains to\nthe assessee (beneficiary). According

MEENA HASMUKH SAVLA,MATUNGA MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is\nallowed

147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 and notice under section 148 was issued on 22/07/2022.\n\n2.4 Thereafter, various notices under section 143(2) and 142[1] was issued on the Appellant, in response to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer, the appellant had furnish the complete details and evidence including contract note for purchase and sale of shares

PREETI CHIRANIA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 28(2)(4), NAVI MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy Svs. Ito, Ward – 28(2)(4) Preeti Chirania 309, 3Rd Floor, Tower No. Flat No.3, 1St Floor, 6, Vashi Rly Stn., Mangesh Santa Durga Commercial Complex, Chs, Sector – 17, Nerul Vashi Navi Mumbai – 400 (E), Navi Mumbai – 400 703. 706. Pan/Gir No. Akbpc0636M (Applicant) (Respondent)

u/s 10(38) for long term capital gains. “Section 10(38), read with sections 68 and 69, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Capital gains Income arising from transfer of long long term securities (Illustrations) - Assessment year 2014-15 Assessee filed its return for relevant year - Subsequently, pursuant to a survey assessee filed revised return and claimed exemption in respect

BHAVANA LALIT JAIN,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-15(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shriraj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

reassessment order under section 143 (3) read with section 147 of the act on 29/12/2017 determining total income of the assessee at Rs. 25,461,230/–. 12. Assessee aggrieved with the same, preferred the appeal before the learned CIT (A) challenging the reopening of the assessment as well as the additions on the merits of the case, the learned

ANJU CHIRANIA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalanju Chirania, Vs. Ito, Ward –4(1)(3), 301, Sona Chambers, Room No. 637, 507/509, Jss Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Chira Bazar, Marine Lines, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Afcpc9073Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

long-term capital gain on transfer of shares, which was based on generic findings of investigation wing, without there being any specific finding against the bonafide investment and sale by the appellant through online platform of recognized stock exchange through the SEBI registered stock broker. 5. On the facts and the circumstances of the case

NITESH RAJHANS SINGH,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER -26(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy S

147 of IT Act, 1961: The assesse has. filed return of income declaring total income at Rs. 9,39,760/-. The Learned Assessing Officer in an order u/s. 143(3) assessed The total income at Rs. 2,57,62,760/-. The Learned Assessing Officer has made following additions disallowances: a) Undisclosed Income u/s 68. Addition of sales proceeds of share

SHAILY PRINCE GOYAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-27(3)(1), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee Shri Yogesh Popatlal Thakkar in ITA No

Reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act are bad in law as the due process of law is riot followed.\" The assessee's case was reopened under section 148 of the Act due to earning of capital gain amount of Rs.2,54,98,050/- during the impugned assessment year. After the verification, the addition was confirmed under section

SHANNO MOHAMMED YUSUF WARSI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-25(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

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

147 of the Act. 2.1 During reassessment proceedings the Assessing Officer asked During reassessment proceedings the Assessing Officer asked During reassessment proceedings the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to justify sale consideration of ₹2,30,01, the assessee to justify sale consideration of 01,500/-received as genuine. The Assessing on sale of shares of on sale of shares

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 proceedings should have been initiated u/s 153C of the Act whereas according to the Ld. DR the proceedings have been the Act whereas according to the Ld. DR the proceedings have been the Act whereas according to the Ld. DR the proceedings have been validly initiated u/s 147 of the Act. validly initiated u/s 147

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

reassessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee has claimed an exemption of long-term capital gains of Rs.8,18,51,632, on the sale of shares of Comfort Intech Ltd and Splash Media under section 10(38) of the Act. Since the quantum of huge long-term capital gains was found suspicious, the assessee was asked to show cause

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

reassessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee has claimed an exemption of long-term capital gains of Rs.8,18,51,632, on the sale of shares of Comfort Intech Ltd and Splash Media under section 10(38) of the Act. Since the quantum of huge long-term capital gains was found suspicious, the assessee was asked to show cause

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

reassessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee has claimed an exemption of long-term capital gains of Rs.8,18,51,632, on the sale of shares of Comfort Intech Ltd and Splash Media under section 10(38) of the Act. Since the quantum of huge long-term capital gains was found suspicious, the assessee was asked to show cause

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

reassessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee has claimed an exemption of long-term capital gains of Rs.8,18,51,632, on the sale of shares of Comfort Intech Ltd and Splash Media under section 10(38) of the Act. Since the quantum of huge long-term capital gains was found suspicious, the assessee was asked to show cause

TARUNA KATARIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry () Assessment Year: 2005-06 Mrs. Taruna Kataria, The Ito-19(2)(2), 404, Bule Heaven, Nehru Lalbaug, Mumbai-400012. Vs. Road, Santacruz (E), Mumbai-400055. Pan No. Acgpk 7391 G Appellant Respondent

147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act was co 19/12/2011. The Assessing Officer observed 19/12/2011. The Assessing Officer observed the long term capital the long term capital gain shown by the assessee on transfer of shares of the script gain shown by the assessee on transfer of shares of the script gain shown by the assessee on transfer of shares

HASMUKHBHAI B. PATEL HUF ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

reassessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee has claimed an exemption of long-term capital gains of Rs.8,18,51,632, on the sale of shares of Comfort Intech Ltd and Splash Media under section 10(38) of the Act. Since the quantum of huge long-term capital gains was found suspicious, the assessee was asked to show cause

M/S USHA VINOD PAREKH (LR OF LATE SHRI VINODKUMAR SHESHMAL PAREKH) ,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-22(1) (ERSTWHILE THE ASSTT. CIT, CIRCLE-21(3), MUMBAI

147 of the Act. In appeal preferred against the above Assessment Order, the CIT(A) 5. agreed with the Assessing Officer and confirmed the addition on merits vide order, dated 13/01/2023. The CIT(A) also rejected the jurisdictional challenge to initiation proceedings by holding that the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated. Being aggrieved, the Legal Representative of the Assessee

M/S WF ASIAN SMALLER COMPANIES FUND LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 4(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.459/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) M/S. Wf Asian Smaller बिधम/ Acit, Circle-4(3)(2) Companies Fund Ltd Room No. 1611, 16Th Vs. C/O Ankul Goyal, Azb & Floor, Air India Building, Partners A8, Sector-4, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Noida 201301. 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacw5648R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Deepak Chopra/Ankul Goyal Revenue By: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ao Dated 19.01.2023 U/S 147 R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Pursuant To The Direction Issued By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) For Ay. 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Legal Issue Challenging The Action Of The Ao To Have Reopened The Original-Scrutiny-Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act, After Four (4) Years [From The End Of The Relevant Assessment Year] Without Satisfying The Additional Condition Precedent As Prescribed In The Proviso To Section 147(1) Of The Act. Since The Assessee Has Raised The Legal Issue Assailing The Jurisdiction Of Ao To Have Issued Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, Proposing Re-Opening Of The Original Assessment [Framed Under Scrutiny Under Section 143(3) Of The Act], We Will Adjudicate It First. For Appreciating The Legal Issue, Let Us

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections