BALAJI UNIVERSAL TRADELINK P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Sanjay Arora

11A) [***] (12) [***] [(13) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), relating to searches and seizure shall apply, so far as may be, to searches and seizure under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A).] (14) The Board may make rules in relation to any search or seizure under this section ; in particular

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

11A) [***] (12) [***] [(13) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), relating to searches and seizure shall apply, so far as may be, to searches and seizure under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A).] (14) The Board may make rules in relation to any search or seizure under this section ; in particular

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

11A) [***] (12) [***] [(13) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), relating to searches and seizure shall apply, so far as may be, to searches and seizure under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A).] (14) The Board may make rules in relation to any search or seizure under this section ; in particular

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

11A) [***] (12) [***] [(13) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), relating to searches and seizure shall apply, so far as may be, to searches and seizure under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A).] (14) The Board may make rules in relation to any search or seizure under this section ; in particular

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

ACIT-2(2)(1), MMUMBAI vs. M/S. JICS LOGISTIC LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year the appeal of the revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 &

1 and Annexure-A2, were annexed to the audit report. to the audit report. The Annexure:A-1 represented 1 represented working of depreciation as per Act working of depreciation as per Act on the WDV of M/c Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior to conversion Jhawar Ice and Cold Storage prior

NOVARTIS INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI

Appeal stand partly allowed

11A. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that the insurance claim has no element of export turnover and that consequently it must sustain a reduction of ninety per cent under Expln. (baa). Now it is necessary to note that Expln. (baa) in terms does not refer to export turnover. Sub-section (1) of section 80HHC contemplates

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(2) proceeding and was treated as such by the assessee preclude it from urging lack of jurisdiction." (emphasis supplied) (3) There is no interplay of section 127 as held in para 8, in the following words- "8. As far as the section 127 goes, we are of the opinion that having regard to the findings

ILLIES ENGINEERING INDIA PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13

68,60,644/- and the AO issued show cause notice for levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act 1961 and the assessee submitted as mentioned earlier in paragraphs. AO's observations are mentioned in earlier paragraph 4.2 and hence are not repeated here-. In nutshell, AO considered and examined assessee's reply in facts

HARISONS STEEL LIMITED,WADA THANE vs. DY CIT 12(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944" On perusal of the Annexure A has been perused and it is found that the amount of bogus CENVAT Credit availed by the assessee during the FY 2010-11 amounts to Rs.17,90,28,759/ On perusal of the above information received, it is found out that the amount of income chargeable

HARISONS STEEL LTD,WADA THANE vs. DCIT 12(2)(2) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide ITA No

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944" On perusal of the Annexure A has been perused and it is found that the amount of bogus CENVAT Credit availed by the assessee during the FY 2010-11 amounts to Rs.17,90,28,759/ On perusal of the above information received, it is found out that the amount of income chargeable

DCIT-CC-2(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. TRIDENT MARBLES PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the R the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment evenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Ita Nos. 994 & 995/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Dcit Central Circle-2(3), M/S Trident Marbles Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Near Laxmi Narayan Temple, Vs. Pratishtha Bhavan (Annexe), Airport Side Service Road, Vile M.K. Road, Churchgate, Parle (E), Mumbai-400099. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaact 4634 J Appellant Respondent

section 133(6) of the Act were duly served on ct were duly served on the unsecured loan parties the unsecured loan parties, but still he had relied on the report of on the report of the investigation wing that those parties were not found by the gation wing that those parties were not found by the gation wing