ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

153A of the IT Act in the case of completed assessment if no Act in the case of completed assessment if no Act in the case of completed assessment if no undisclosed income undisclosed income undisclosed income was determinable from the was determinable from the was determinable from the material found as a result of search. material found

GOVIND AGARWAL. HUF,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 32, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4531,4566,876,877,878/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2006-07, 2007-08, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2005-06) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Manidevi Agarwal, 720, A- 1, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakpa 4962 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4528/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Shri Govind Agarwal, 701, A-1, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adopa 4038 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.873,874/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05) Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai Vs. Shri Govind Agarwal(Huf), 720/A-5, Lok Bharti Chs Ltd., Marol Maroshi Road, Marol, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aiepa 3109 A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) 876,828,4566,4547,218/11 &957/13&Co203.13

68 and disallowance of Rs. 1,01,300 under section 14A, are beyond the scope of section 153A

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

68, the burden can be said to have shifted to the Revenue to prove ingenuity of such transactions.” 16. In view of the above, the contention of ld. AR was that the addition made on merit has also no legs to stand. 17. On other hand, ld. DR contended that as per scheme of Section 153A

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

68, the burden can be said to have shifted to the Revenue to prove ingenuity of such transactions.” 16. In view of the above, the contention of ld. AR was that the addition made on merit has also no legs to stand. 17. On other hand, ld. DR contended that as per scheme of Section 153A

BERMACO ENERGY SYSTEMS LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

68, the burden can be said to have shifted to the Revenue to prove ingenuity of such transactions.” 16. In view of the above, the contention of ld. AR was that the addition made on merit has also no legs to stand. 17. On other hand, ld. DR contended that as per scheme of Section 153A

M/S.GEETANJALI SPACE PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY. CIT CC-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2010-11

68 of the Act by framing assessment under section 143(3) read with section 153A vide order dated

SHRI MOHAN THAKUR,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CENT. CIR. 8(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7413 /Mum/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09) बनधम/ Shri Mohan Thakur Acit, Central Circle-8(4) 6Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, 4, Flora Vila, 35, St. Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai- Andrews Road, Bandra 400020. (W), Mumbai-400050. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaapt2966N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Durga Dutt/ Akhtar H. Ansari (Dr) Assessee By: Dr. K. Shivaram सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 30.10.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-50, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2008- 09. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Validity Of Notice U/S 148 Where The Proceedings U/S 153C Had Already Been Initiated Which Were Dropped & Immediately The Reassessment Proceedings Had Been Initiated Without Any Fresh Material On Record & Hence Reopening Is Void- Ab - Initio Merit : Addition Of Rs.237.00.000/- Based On Entries In Diary Of Third Person: 2. No Addition Can Be Made Based On Entries Found In The Books In Third Party'S Premises Since No Search U/S 132 Had Taken Place On The Assessee & Hence S.132(4A) Would Not Be Applicable To The Present Facts Of The Case. In View Of The Same The Entire Addition May Be Deleted.

section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income tax Act. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all the above grounds of appeal.” 4. The brief facts of the case are that the case of the Assessee was reopened by issuance of notice dated 31.03.2014 u/s 148 of the I. T. Act, after recording

SURENDRA GARG HUF ,MUMBAI vs. ITO- 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

153A", "Section 153C", "Section 148", "Section 132", "Section 132A", "Section 131" ], "issues": "1. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Act were valid, or if Section 153C should have been invoked.\n2. Whether the addition of sale proceeds of shares as unexplained cash credit under Section 68

RAMESH SUMERMAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 36, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarसर्वश्री सक्तिक्िि डे, न्याययक सदस्य एवुं रािेश कुमार, ऱेखा सदस्य आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.414/Mum/2010 (यनधावरण र्र्व / Assessment Years : 2001-02) Shri Ramesh Sumermal Shah, बनाम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 220, Commerce House, Circle 36, Vs. 140 N M Road, Fort, 11/43, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400023 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aagps9863H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. अऩीराथी की ओय से/Appellant By : Shri Nishit Gandhi प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Prawin Kumar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing :28.4.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of Pronouncement :28 .11.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumarthis Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against Order Dated 13/11/2009 Of Ld. Cit(Appeals)-41 Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2001-02 Passed Against The Assessment Framed By The Ao U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Called The Act). 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case He Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.2,25,00,000/- Made By The Ao On Disbelieving Gift Received By The Appellant”

68 of the Act while framing the assessment u/s 143(3) read with section 153A of the Act vide

ANIL MAHAVIR GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 45, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg.

153A, per contra, even the routine additions are done in these assessments. 12. We have heard the parties and their divergent stands on the legal issue and the validity of the instant assessment/reassessment with the routine additions u/s 68 and section

ACIT CC-45, MUMBAI vs. ANIL M. GUPTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg.

153A, per contra, even the routine additions are done in these assessments. 12. We have heard the parties and their divergent stands on the legal issue and the validity of the instant assessment/reassessment with the routine additions u/s 68 and section

ACIT, CC- 2(1), MUMBAI vs. GOLDMEDAL ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Acit, Central Circle-2(1), M/S Goldmedal Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, No. 7 G.K. Temple Street, Chickpet Vs. 8Th Floor, M.K. Road, Cross Bengaluru, Mumbai-400020. Karnataka-560 053 Pan No. Aaccg 9397 F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kardam, Cit- Dr : Assessee By None Date Of Hearing : 27/10/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2022

153A is bad in mitted that the assessment made u/s. 153A is bad in law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search and the assessment is not abated. Learned

ACIT, CC- 2(1), MUMBAI vs. GOLDMEDAL ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Acit, Central Circle-2(1), M/S Goldmedal Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, No. 7 G.K. Temple Street, Chickpet Vs. 8Th Floor, M.K. Road, Cross Bengaluru, Mumbai-400020. Karnataka-560 053 Pan No. Aaccg 9397 F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kardam, Cit- Dr : Assessee By None Date Of Hearing : 27/10/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2022

153A is bad in mitted that the assessment made u/s. 153A is bad in law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search and the assessment is not abated. Learned

ACIT, CC- 2(1), MUMBAI vs. GOLDMEDAL ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., KARNATAKA

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Acit, Central Circle-2(1), M/S Goldmedal Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, No. 7 G.K. Temple Street, Chickpet Vs. 8Th Floor, M.K. Road, Cross Bengaluru, Mumbai-400020. Karnataka-560 053 Pan No. Aaccg 9397 F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kardam, Cit- Dr : Assessee By None Date Of Hearing : 27/10/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2022

153A is bad in mitted that the assessment made u/s. 153A is bad in law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search and the assessment is not abated. Learned

ACIT, CC- 2(1), MUMBAI vs. GOLDMEDAL ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., KARNATAKA

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Acit, Central Circle-2(1), M/S Goldmedal Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, No. 7 G.K. Temple Street, Chickpet Vs. 8Th Floor, M.K. Road, Cross Bengaluru, Mumbai-400020. Karnataka-560 053 Pan No. Aaccg 9397 F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kardam, Cit- Dr : Assessee By None Date Of Hearing : 27/10/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2022

153A is bad in mitted that the assessment made u/s. 153A is bad in law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search and the assessment is not abated. Learned

ACIT. -CC- 2(1), MUMBAI vs. GOLDMEDAL ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., KARNATAKA

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Acit, Central Circle-2(1), M/S Goldmedal Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, No. 7 G.K. Temple Street, Chickpet Vs. 8Th Floor, M.K. Road, Cross Bengaluru, Mumbai-400020. Karnataka-560 053 Pan No. Aaccg 9397 F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kardam, Cit- Dr : Assessee By None Date Of Hearing : 27/10/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2022

153A is bad in mitted that the assessment made u/s. 153A is bad in law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search and the assessment is not abated. Learned

ACIT, CC- 2(1), MUMBAI vs. GOLDMEDAL ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., KARNATAKA

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Acit, Central Circle-2(1), M/S Goldmedal Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, No. 7 G.K. Temple Street, Chickpet Vs. 8Th Floor, M.K. Road, Cross Bengaluru, Mumbai-400020. Karnataka-560 053 Pan No. Aaccg 9397 F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kardam, Cit- Dr : Assessee By None Date Of Hearing : 27/10/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2022

153A is bad in mitted that the assessment made u/s. 153A is bad in law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search law as there is no incriminating material found in the course of search and the assessment is not abated. Learned

PRATYAKSHA PROPERTIES P.LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

section 153A for which assessments shall be made for each of six assessment years separately - Held, yes - Whether no addition can be made in respect of unabated assessments which have become final if no incriminating material is found during search - Held, yes [Paras 28, 29 & 30][In favour of assessee] a) Latest decision of Hon. Enterprises vs. ACIT 383/Del/2013

PRATYAKSHA PROPERTIES P.LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 47, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

section 153A for which assessments shall be made for each of six assessment years separately - Held, yes - Whether no addition can be made in respect of unabated assessments which have become final if no incriminating material is found during search - Held, yes [Paras 28, 29 & 30][In favour of assessee] a) Latest decision of Hon. Enterprises vs. ACIT 383/Del/2013