VODAFONE INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

D. Proof regarding the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the source of funds for the said shareholders. The assessee had furnished various documentary evidences to substantiate the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the right shareholders and also furnished detailed legal submission as to why no circumstances exists to attract provisions of section 68 of the Act. However, the learned

SYNTENSIA NETWORK SECURITY INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 11(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm M/S. Syntensia Network Security Vs. Ito 11(2)(4) India Pvt. Ltd., Churchgate, 506, Laxmi Mall Laxmi Industrial Mumbai - 400020 Estate New Link Road, Andheri (W) Mumbai - 400053 Pan/Gir No.Aalcs1143G Appellant) Respondent) ..

d) The amount brought in has been duly introduced in the books regularly maintained in India and an intimation of such introduction is given to the (TO within two months of the migrant's arrival." 11. In support of the contention that above addition is not justified, reliance was also placed on the following judicial pronouncements

ACIT - 4(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. PROGRESSIVE SHARE BROKERS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit-4(2)(1), M/S Progressive Share Room No.642, 6Th Floor, Brokers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, B, 1St Floor, Fort Chambers, Vs. M. K. Road, Homi Modi Cross Street, Mumbai-400020 Off. Hamam Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aaacp6712H

68,428 on BSE membership rights and of Rs. 2,61,528 on NSE membership rights be directed to be allowed. 5. We have gone through the order February 28, 2014 of the Income- tax Appellate Tribunal in the own case of the assessee for the assessment year 2008-09. We notice that the Tribunal has allowed the similar claim

ACIT CIRCLE-22(1), MUMBAI vs. RAHEJA LEGACY TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 68 with respect to the loans falling under this category is that the lender had miniscule income which did not match with the loans given by the lender to the appellant. However, the fact remains that the said lenders have at least filed their returns of income and they are the assessees before the revenue. What

RAHEJA LEGENCY TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR-22(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 68 with respect to the loans falling under this category is that the lender had miniscule income which did not match with the loans given by the lender to the appellant. However, the fact remains that the said lenders have at least filed their returns of income and they are the assessees before the revenue. What

THE TATA POWER CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO RG 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA No

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3078/Mum/2009 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2002-03) The Tata Power Co. Ltd, The Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Corporate Center, Block ‘B, Income Tax- Circle V. 5 Th Floor, 2(3),Aayakar Bhavan, 34, Sant Tukaram Road, Maharshi Karve Road, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 009. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact0054A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

D E R PER RAMIT KOCHAR, Accountant Member This appeal, filed by the assessee company, being ITA No. 3078/Mum/2009, is directed against the appellate order dated 27-2-2009 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- XXX, Mumbai (hereinafter called “the CIT(A)” ), for the assessment year 2002-03, the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A) arising from

M/S RENUKAMATA MULTI STATE CO-OP. URBAN CREDITN SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSTT. CIT, CC-4(4), MUMBAI

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

D” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND\nSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA no.1725/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2016-17)\nITA no.1726/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2017-18)\nShri Renukamata Multi-State Co-operative\nUrban Credit Society Ltd., 335/2AB\nBehind Pushpak Hotel, Pipe Line Road\nSavedi, Ahmednagar 414 003\nPAN – AADAS7782D\nAppellant\nv/s\nAsstt. Commissioner

M/S RENUKAMATA MULTI STATE CO-OP. URBAN CREDITN SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSTT. CIT, CC-4(4), MUMBAI

D” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND\nSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER\n\nITA no.1725/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2016-17)\n\nITA no.1726/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2017-18)\n\nShri Renukamata Multi-State Co-operative\nUrban Credit Society Ltd., 335/2AB\nBehind Pushpak Hotel, Pipe Line Road\nSavedi, Ahmednagar 414 003\nPAN – AADAS7782D\nAppellant\nv/s

JCIT (OSD), CC-4(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE COOPERATIVE URBAN CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., AHAMEDNAGAR

D” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND\nSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA no.1725/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2016-17)\nITA no.1726/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2017-18)\nShri Renukamata Multi-State Co-operative\nUrban Credit Society Ltd., 335/2AB\nBehind Pushpak Hotel, Pipe Line Road\nSavedi, Ahmednagar 414 003\nPAN – AADAS7782D\nITA no.1727/Mum./2023\n(Assessment

SHRI RENUKAMATA MULTI-STATE CO-OPERATIVE URBAN SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI

D” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND\nSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA no.1725/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2016-17)\nITA no.1726/Mum./2023\n(Assessment Year : 2017-18)\nShri Renukamata Multi-State Co-operative\nUrban Credit Society Ltd., 335/2AB\nBehind Pushpak Hotel, Pipe Line Road\nSavedi, Ahmednagar 414 003\nPAN – AADAS7782D\nITA no.1727/Mum./2023\n(Assessment

FOREVER FLOURISHING FIN & INV. PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

d. not appreciating that no addition can be made u/s 68 of dition can be made u/s 68 of the Act in respect of share capital if the identities of the the Act in respect of share capital if the identities of the the Act in respect of share capital if the identities of the share applicants were established

FOREVER FLOURISHING FIN. & INV. PVT. LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (CC)-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

d. not appreciating that no addition can be made u/s 68 of dition can be made u/s 68 of the Act in respect of share capital if the identities of the the Act in respect of share capital if the identities of the the Act in respect of share capital if the identities of the share applicants were established

NAV CONSEC P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri. Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3258/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Nav Consec Pvt Ltd बिधम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(2)(3) Mumbai. Vs. C/O Sanjay Shah, 108, 1St Floor Sujata Niketan, Rani Sati Marg Malad East, Mumbai-400097 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcn1435A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Anil Surana, Ca (Written Submission) Assessee By: Dr Mahesh Akhade, Cit Dr

17. Further the Ld.AR also submitted that the Assessing Officer’s action of adding the sum share premium under section 68 of the Act could not have been done for the assessment year under consideration, i.e. A.Y.2011-12 because the Proviso to section 68 of the Act was introduced with effect from 01/04/2013 and would not apply

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

d) TDS deducted and paid on Consultancy receipts. (e) Service tax has been paid on Consultancy receipts. (f) Clients have confirmed the transactions before investigation authority. established i.e. (i) identity of the creditor, (ii) credit worthiness of the creditor and (iii) genuineness of the transactions more particularly when nothing was found to be false in these documents. Considering the vortex

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

d) TDS deducted and paid on Consultancy receipts. (e) Service tax has been paid on Consultancy receipts. (f) Clients have confirmed the transactions before investigation authority. established i.e. (i) identity of the creditor, (ii) credit worthiness of the creditor and (iii) genuineness of the transactions more particularly when nothing was found to be false in these documents. Considering the vortex

IDHASOFT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Idhasoft Ltd. Dcit-15(2)(1), 3, Narayan Building, Room No.357, 3Rd Floor बनाम/ 23 L. N. Road, Dadar East, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400014 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aabci6090G Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-15(2)(1), M/S Idhasoft Ltd. Room No.357, 3Rd Floor 3, Narayan Building, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 23 L. N. Road, Dadar East, Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400014 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aabci6090G

d. OPG Metals & Finsec Ltd. v. CIT, (2013) 358 ITR 144 (Del). 2.15. In the case of Venus Industrial Corporation v. Asst. CIT, (1999) 236 ITR 742, 746 (P & H) [Where initiation was started within four years for re-examining the deduction under section 80HHC, was held to be wrongly allowed in the original assessment. Identically, in the case

JM FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) 4(3), MUMBAI

Accordingly dismissed. However, in view of our findings given above, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. J.M. Financial Services The Joint Commissioner Of Ltd., Income-Tax (Osd)-4(3), (Formerly Jm Financial Room No.635, Services Pvt. Ltd.), Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 7Th Floor, Cnergy, M.K. Road, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025 Pan: Aaacj5977A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10

68, 428/- on BSE membership rights and of Rs.2,61,528/- on NSE membership rights be directed to be allowed. 5. We have gone through the order 28.2.2014 of the ITAT in the own case of the assessee for AY 2008-09. We notice that the Tribunal has allowed the similar claim of the assessee for depreciation

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S SUCHIR CHEMICALS PVT LTD, MUMBAI.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit –Central Circle – 2(2) V. M/S. Suchir Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building (Amalgamated Company – Manan Pharma Pvt Ltd. W.E.F 01.04.2013) Room No. 806, 8Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Shiv Ashish M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri Prade, Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaccm7533K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Pooja Rander & Shri Rushabh Mehta Department By : Shri Manoj Sinha

5. Being aggrieved by the above assessment orders, the respondent-asses sees in all the six appeals carried the above issue in appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). By six distinct orders all dated March 15, 2016 (one in respect of each respondent-assessee) held that section 28(iv) of the Act would have

ACIT CIR-6(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. SHRI MOHIT DEEPAK KAMBOJ, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alckp2213G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: The appeal in ITA No.6384/Mum/2018 filed by the Revenue is against the order dated 03.08.2018 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai (hereinafter “CIT(A)”) in relation to the order dated 21.03.2013 passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2012-13 Mohit Deepak