DCIT(CENTRAL CIRCLE)-3(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. JUICY INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS AVAADA VENTURES PVT. LTD.), MUMBAI

depreciation and amortization expenses,\nother expenses etc. offered the total income of Rs.72,11,640/- to\ntax.\n\n4. Further, the AO during the course of assessment proceedings\nfound that the Assessee has received amount of Rs.\n37,37,00,000/- in total from issuing shares on premium, to the\nfollowing parties: \n\ni.\nNimbus dealers Pvt. Ltd.\nRs.18

DCIT CIR 3(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. TULIP HOTELS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dcit Cir 3(3)(2) Vs. M/S. Tulip Hotels Pvt.Ltd., R.No.609, 6Th Floor Chandermukhi Building Aayakar Bhavan (Basement), Behind The M.K.Road, Oberoi Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaact9446Q Appellant) .. Respondent)

68,890/-. The assessee's assessment was completed u/s. 143 (3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') dated 15.03.2014, assessing an income of 2 M/s.Tulip Hotels Pvt.Ltd., Rs.61,16,28,856/-. The A.O. while completing the assessment made the following additions:- 1. Disallowance u/s.14A of the Act of Rs. 11,31,075/- 2. Non-acceptance of the assessee

ITO 19(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. MEENAKSHI N SHAH, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit 5(2)(2) Meridian Chem Bond Mumbai Purchase Ltd., बनाम/ 903 Raheja Centre, Free Vs. Press Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. Aaacr1789G

depreciation in respect of the building of coal fire boiler, the reassessment was held to be valid. In the case of Convergys Customer Management v. Asst. DIT, (2013) 357 ITR 177 (Del), where there being prima facie material in the possession of the Assessing Officer to form a tentative belief that section 9(1)(i) held attracted, said reason

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. K K VENTURA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands\ndismissed

section 68.\nThe assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).\nComments: The Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the said addition\nstating that the assessee had proved the identity and\ncreditworthiness of the lender therefore the loan cannot be\ntermed as bogus. However, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate\nthe fact that the lender had received the said amount

SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

68,27,62,750/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the statutory notices were duly served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer (AO) concluded the assessment by making a disallowance of Rs. 3,72,00,210/- under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source on payment made to M/s Rewa Infrastructure

DCIT-13(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S.SHUBHAM MOTIWALA & JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bledcit – 13(2)(2) V. M/S. Shubham Motiwala & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Shop No. 5, Unity Heights, Chincholi Jn, 1St Floor, Room No. 146 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Sv Road, Malad, Mumbai – 400064 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aahcs1597A

section 14A and Rule 8D of I.T. Rules to disallow the expenditure under Rule 8D(2) of ₹.4,480/-, 8D(2)(ii) of ₹.35631/- and 8D(2)(iii) of ₹.16069/- and he disallowed the 14A disallowance as determined above under normal provisions as well as under MAT calculations. 7. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and filed

UB OSTAN (INDIA) P. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO 1(3)(4), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ub Ostan (India) Private Limited, Income-Tax Officer-1(3)-4, Sahyadri Sadan, Tilak Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Pune-411-030. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aabcu 2815 K Appellant Respondent

68 which in fact was duly supported by the documentary n fact was duly supported by the documentary evidence and underwent the tests of Identity, Creditworthiness, evidence and underwent the tests of Identity, Creditworthiness, evidence and underwent the tests of Identity, Creditworthiness, and Genuineness successfully. and Genuineness successfully. 3. Without prejudice to Ground No. 2, On the facts

DCIT 6(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. EDESK SERVICES LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7113/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Dcit 6(2)(2) M/S. Edesk Services Ltd. R.No. 563, Aayakar Bhavan, 6-A, Lalwani Indl. Estate M.K Road, Churchgate, 14, G.D. Ambekar Road, V. Mumbai 400020 Wadala, Mumbai 400031 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcb5087H

depreciation on these tangible and intangible assets so acquired in the coming years including year under consideration and hence it is vital that genuineness of the transaction is required to be proved as is required under Section 68

ASST CIT 6 (2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S CHIRIPAL POLY FILMS LTD., MUMBAI

Section 68 of the Act in respect of share capital and premium received by the Assessee 4 CO No.152/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) during the relevant previous year, and (b) disallowance of INR 29,57,924/- being depreciation

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. 9X MEDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

depreciation of ₹ 315,453,321/– is allowed, the book profit would be, subject to taxation under section 115JB of the act is Rs Nil. Even if all the 24 issues with respect to book profit computation were held against assessee, the Income U/s 115JB would be Nil. Therefore we set-aside the issue back to the file of the learned

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. 9X MEDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

depreciation of ₹ 315,453,321/– is allowed, the book profit would be, subject to taxation under section 115JB of the act is Rs Nil. Even if all the 24 issues with respect to book profit computation were held against assessee, the Income U/s 115JB would be Nil. Therefore we set-aside the issue back to the file of the learned

9X MEDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT RG 11(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

depreciation of ₹ 315,453,321/– is allowed, the book profit would be, subject to taxation under section 115JB of the act is Rs Nil. Even if all the 24 issues with respect to book profit computation were held against assessee, the Income U/s 115JB would be Nil. Therefore we set-aside the issue back to the file of the learned

9X MEDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 16(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

depreciation of ₹ 315,453,321/– is allowed, the book profit would be, subject to taxation under section 115JB of the act is Rs Nil. Even if all the 24 issues with respect to book profit computation were held against assessee, the Income U/s 115JB would be Nil. Therefore we set-aside the issue back to the file of the learned

JYOTI AJIT KULKARNI,PUNE vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(3), MUMBAI

68,953/- disallowed by AO without taking into consideration\nthe fact that the agreement entered into by the assessee with these parties is 'silent'\non the quantum of 'remuneration' to be paid to these said parties and there is\nneither clarification regarding the roles and responsibilities of the said parties nor\nany clarity on the rate of commission paid

HEMANT M SHAH HUF,MUMBAI vs. I.T.O. WARD 19(1) (5), MUMBAI , MUMBAI

depreciation separately where appellant is opting for presumptive tax u/s.44AD and hence not applicable to the facts of case.\ng) Thomas Eapen (ITA No. 451/Coch/2019).\nIn this case, addition under section 69A was upheld because the ITAT held that appellant has not incurred expenses to the extent of 92% of gross receipts. In our case, the facts are entirely different

MIRAGE CERAMICS PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 12(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Mirage Ceramics Private Limited The Assistant Commissioner Of 7Th Floor, D Wing, Trade Income Tax World 12(3)(2) Senapati Bapat Marg , Aykar Bhavan Vs. Kamla Mill Compound, M K Road Mumbai -400 013 Mumbai 20 Pan Aaecm2513R (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafd0295J

depreciation. The learned CIT– A held that the provisions of section 72 provides about setting off of brought forward business losses against business income only and since the addition under section 68

DY CIT 15(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S LEENA POOWER TECH ENGINEERS P LTD., NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Us Is A Private Limited Company Stated To Be Engaged In The Business As 'Investment Company' In Column 10, Page 1, Of The Impugned Assessment Order. Its Assessment Under Section 143(3)

section 68, with respect to the share application monies received by an assessee. 8. It would thus appear that the learned counsel for the assessee is not really right in approaching on the basis as if the onus is on the Assessing Officer to prove the alleged money laundering racket – an onus that may perhaps be relevant only when

RAJDHANI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED (SINCE DISHA INFIN CONSULTANTS PVT LTD) ,MUMBAI vs. ASST.CIT CIRCLE 5(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

section 44AB, and that he has been assessed to income tax for several decades. The assessee also emphasized that no adverse evidence, no statement, and no material suggesting accommodation entries or introduction of unaccounted money had been brought on record. 7. The assessee’s stand before the Assessing Officer was that once the identity of the creditor, the genuineness