MAHALAXMI CONSTRUCTION CO,MUMBAI vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC , BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

68,630/-, the tax was computed at maximum marginal rate and surcharge was calculated at an applicable rate of 25%, i.e., applicable on the slab rate of income declared by the assessee. However, the CPC has computed surcharge @37%, thus, resulting into excess demand. 4. Admittedly, this issue now stands covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Special Bench

MAHALAXMI CONSTRUCTION CO,BHAYANDAR WEST vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BANGELURU, BANGELURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

68,630/-, the tax was computed at maximum marginal rate and surcharge was calculated at an applicable rate of 25%, i.e., applicable on the slab rate of income declared by the assessee. However, the CPC has computed surcharge @37%, thus, resulting into excess demand. 4. Admittedly, this issue now stands covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Special Bench

PARAB MARATHA SAMAJ,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1821/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Parab Maratha Samaj, Nfac, Delhi बिधम/ 10, 5Th Floor Mahohar Bldg, Priti Kanha, Chitable Path, Vs. Dadar(W), Mumbai-400 028 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaatp4197P (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Dinesh Shah, Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Neeta Jeph, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01.09.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 09.05.2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) For Ay 2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

68,200 Other Income Rs 79.505 Total Receipts as per I & E Rs. 1,73,709 5 I.T.A. No. 1821/Mum/2022 Parab Maratha Samaj b) Interest income credited to three corpus funds- - Education Fund Rs 52,698 - Health Fund Rs 53,459 - General Fund Rs 42,428 Total Rs 1,48,585 c) Total Income (a+b) Gross receipts

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

section 167B r.w.s. 86 of the Act. A further without prejudice submission is that the company has substantial own funds by way of capital reserves aggregating Rs. 12,936 lacs which is more than 5.50 times of the balance in such JV / partnership firm. The sale proceeds of the appellant are deposited in the cash credit account

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

section 167B r.w.s. 86 of the Act. A further without prejudice submission is that the company has substantial own funds by way of capital reserves aggregating Rs. 12,936 lacs which is more than 5.50 times of the balance in such JV / partnership firm. The sale proceeds of the appellant are deposited in the cash credit account

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

section 167B r.w.s. 86 of the Act. A further without prejudice submission is that the company has substantial own funds by way of capital reserves aggregating Rs. 12,936 lacs which is more than 5.50 times of the balance in such JV / partnership firm. The sale proceeds of the appellant are deposited in the cash credit account

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

section 167B r.w.s. 86 of the Act. A further without prejudice submission is that the company has substantial own funds by way of capital reserves aggregating Rs. 12,936 lacs which is more than 5.50 times of the balance in such JV / partnership firm. The sale proceeds of the appellant are deposited in the cash credit account

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the Assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated herein above

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja

section 167B r.w.s. 86 of the Act. A further without prejudice submission is that the company has substantial own funds by way of capital reserves aggregating Rs. 12,936 lacs which is more than 5.50 times of the balance in such JV / partnership firm. The sale proceeds of the appellant are deposited in the cash credit account

SHREE JAIN SWETAMBER DEHARSHAR UPSHRAYA TRUST,THANE vs. ASST CIT PALGHAR CIRCLE, PALGHAR, PALGHAR

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K.Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12 Shree Jain Swetamber Acit, Palghar Circle, Deharshar Upshraya Trust Palghar बनाम/ C/O. Anoopchandji Karnava, T Vs. Main Road, Dahanu Town Dahanu Road, Dist: Thane ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaets4024L

167B(1) or u/s 164(2), and the objects of the setting up of the trust is for public trust, therefore the provisions of section 164(2) of the Act are applicable and the assessee income shall be taxed at normal rates instead of maximum marginal rates, vide appellate orders dated 21-10-2015. 6. Aggrieved by the appellate

CHANDRAPRABHU SWETAMBER JAIN MANDIR UPSHRAYA,DHANU vs. ASST CIT PALGHAR CIRCLE, PALGHAR, PALGHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

167B(1) or u/s 164(2), and the objects of the setting up of the trust is for public trust, therefore the provisions of section 164(2) of the Act are applicable and the assessee income shall be taxed at normal rates instead of maximum marginal rates, vide appellate orders dated 21-10-2015. 6. Aggrieved by the appellate

ASST CIT CEN CIR 25, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed, whereas cross objection of the assessee is allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

section 80lA. As the assessee being directly under contract to the concern for the work done and also directly dealing with the Government on whose behalf the assessee are doing the work, they can be & CO No.9/15 considered as main contractors alongwith PEC and are not simply sub contractors vie-a-vis the work undertaken by them. As such