THE AZAD NAGAR, COOPERATIVE HOUSING, SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

147, which subsequently became subject matter of revisions in the impugned revisions order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s 263, the assessee had filed an appeal against the 21 Co.Op. Housing Societies aforesaid assessment order before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) wherein following grounds were taken: “(1) The Learned Assessing officer erred in taking the cost of acquisition

SUVARNA NAGAR CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

147, which subsequently became subject matter of revisions in the impugned revisions order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s 263, the assessee had filed an appeal against the 21 Co.Op. Housing Societies aforesaid assessment order before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) wherein following grounds were taken: “(1) The Learned Assessing officer erred in taking the cost of acquisition

VALLABHNAGAR OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

147, which subsequently became subject matter of revisions in the impugned revisions order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s 263, the assessee had filed an appeal against the 21 Co.Op. Housing Societies aforesaid assessment order before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) wherein following grounds were taken: “(1) The Learned Assessing officer erred in taking the cost of acquisition

THE NAVYUG CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

147, which subsequently became subject matter of revisions in the impugned revisions order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s 263, the assessee had filed an appeal against the 21 Co.Op. Housing Societies aforesaid assessment order before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) wherein following grounds were taken: “(1) The Learned Assessing officer erred in taking the cost of acquisition

JAI HIND CO OP HSG SOC LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

147, which subsequently became subject matter of revisions in the impugned revisions order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s 263, the assessee had filed an appeal against the 21 Co.Op. Housing Societies aforesaid assessment order before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) wherein following grounds were taken: “(1) The Learned Assessing officer erred in taking the cost of acquisition

VITHALNAGAR CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

147, which subsequently became subject matter of revisions in the impugned revisions order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s 263, the assessee had filed an appeal against the 21 Co.Op. Housing Societies aforesaid assessment order before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) wherein following grounds were taken: “(1) The Learned Assessing officer erred in taking the cost of acquisition

DAMJI J GALA,KHANDILKAR ROAD vs. ITO 19(1)(4), TARDEO ROAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly\nallowed

u/s. 147 of the I.T. Act for the above assessment\nyear.\nIn this respect, please note that your case was reopened on the\nbasis of information received from the Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax-\n14(2), Mumbai.\nClause (a) of Explanation 2 to Section 147 of the Income-tax Act\nclearly states that 'where a return of income

PANKAJ SURECH RACH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INT TAX WARD 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

50C of the Act. After recording the reasons for re-opening and after obtaining necessary approval from appropriate authorities, assessment was re-opened vide issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act on 01/05/2021. 5. Honoring the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal vs. UOI in Civil Appeal No. 3005/2022 vide order dt. 04/05/2022

ACIT -7(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAZAGON DOCK SHIPBUILDERS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2005-06 Assistant Commissioner Of Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Income Tax-7(1)(1), Ltd. Mumbai Mazdock House, Dockyard Vs. Road, Mazagon, Mumbai – 400010 (Pan: Aaacm8029) (Appellant) (Respondent)

u/s 143(3). As a result, it is held that the re-assessment proceedings in the present case are not valid and the reassessment proceedings are quashed. Since, the reassessment proceedings have been quashed, the other grounds are not adjudicated. 5. As a result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 7. Contentions of the Revenue by way of this

ACIT - 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. RISHABH DIAMOND PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross\nObjection by the assessee is partly allowed

u/s 147 of the Act have not been\nsatisfied.\n3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) erred in not holding the impugned assessment order as void ab initio\nas the order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer dated 19.12.2016 does not\nbear any Document Identification Number

R.P. SUVARNA,MUMBAI vs. CIT (33), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2006-07 Mr. R. P. Suvarna, Ito-18(3)(3), No.15, Rajanigandha Apts. Mumbai बनाम/ T.H. Kataria Marg, Mahim, Vs. Mumbai-400016 "नधा"रती / Assessee राज"व / Revenue P.A. No.Anbps3240G

50C of the Act on the basis of valuation made by the stamp duty authorities. 2.2. I have considered the submissions of ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the original assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 07/04/2008 computing the income at Rs.97,200/-. During original assessment

ITO 17 (2)(4), MUMBAI vs. NEUMEC BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

50C of the Act. III On the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the transfer of development right to the JV as a business transaction though the assessee by its own submission before the AO considered itself in the business of development rights. IV On the facts & circumstances of the case

ADARSH DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 22(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

reassessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B determining the total income at ₹71,83,357. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.AO, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 4. The Ld.CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order holding that in view of the provisions of section 50C

SHRI AJAYKUMAR SATRAPAL SINGH,MUMBAI vs. CIT -IT-4, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Kuldip Singh (Jm)

reassessment was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue within the meaning of section 263 of the Act. (3) On the facts & circumstances it is humbly prayed that the impugned revision order u/s. 263 of the Act may be quashed & oblige. 2 3. Brief facts of the case leading to the issue of notice u/s. 263 as noted

MIDDLE INCOME GROUP CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(2)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

147 be annulled. (2) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO. 1, GROUND NO. 2: DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE ACT ISSUED WITHOUT SIGNATURE OF THE ISSUING AUTHORITY WOULD VITIATE THE ENTIRE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS: On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of AO in issuing the demand notice u/s

ALRAMEEZ CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE , MUMBAI

In the result grounds of appeal raised by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S Alrameez Construction Pvt. Ltd. 707/708, 7Th Floor, Jms Business Centre Behram Baug, Oshiwara Link Road, Jogeshwari West, Mumbai-400 080 Pan: Aafca8078A ...... Appellant Vs. Cit/Nfac Delhi ..... Respondent

u/s 43CA r.w.s. 56 (2) (x) i.e. deeming sections. For ready reference we are reproducing herein below the provisions of section 270A as under:- [Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income. 270A. (1) The Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner may, during the course of any proceedings under this Act, direct that

VINAY ARUN JOSHI,THANE vs. PCIT CENTRAL MUMBAI-1, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment. The\ndecision of the Co-ordinate Bench in case of Vikas Gupta (Supra) lays\ndown a similar proposition and supports the case of the assessee.\n\n14. In light of aforesaid discussion and in the entirety of facts and\ncircumstances of the case, we find that there is no legal and justifiable\nbasis for the Ld.PCIT to invoke

DCIT-CC-5(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHRI NITAN CHHATWAL , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

147 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on this issue by observing and holding as under: 4.5. I have considered the facts on record and submissions carefully. Reasons were recorded and notice u/s 148 was issued after taking approval of the prescribed authority. The reasons recorded for re-opening were supplied