MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

20A) and insertion of explanation to section 10(20) enumerating only local authorities contemplated by section 10(20), assessee, an authority constituted under a state legislation for plant development of industrial area and promotion of industry cannot claim benefit of exemption under those provisions. The nature, constitution and activities of MMRDA is almost exactly the same

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

20A) and insertion of explanation to section 10(20) enumerating only local authorities contemplated by section 10(20), assessee, an authority constituted under a state legislation for plant development of industrial area and promotion of industry cannot claim benefit of exemption under those provisions. The nature, constitution and activities of MMRDA is almost exactly the same

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

20A) and insertion of explanation to section 10(20) enumerating only local authorities contemplated by section 10(20), assessee, an authority constituted under a state legislation for plant development of industrial area and promotion of industry cannot claim benefit of exemption under those provisions. The nature, constitution and activities of MMRDA is almost exactly the same

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

20A) and insertion of explanation to section 10(20) enumerating only local authorities contemplated by section 10(20), assessee, an authority constituted under a state legislation for plant development of industrial area and promotion of industry cannot claim benefit of exemption under those provisions. The nature, constitution and activities of MMRDA is almost exactly the same

MUMBAI METROPLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

20A) and insertion of explanation to section 10(20) enumerating only local authorities contemplated by section 10(20), assessee, an authority constituted under a state legislation for plant development of industrial area and promotion of industry cannot claim benefit of exemption under those provisions. The nature, constitution and activities of MMRDA is almost exactly the same

LIVA HEALTHCARE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 904/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) The Assistant Commissioner Liva Healthcare Limited बनाम/ Of Income Tax, Circle 6(3), Shivsagar Estate, V. Room No. 522, 5 Th Floor, ‘A’ Block, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Dr. Annie Basant Road Mumbai-400020 Worli, Mumbai-400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafw0040N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

C State or Part thereof, but does not include any Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom or any Order in Council, rule or other instrument made under such Act..” Similarly under Constitution of India the word ‘law’ in context of fundamental rights is defined under Article 13(3)(a) whereby it is defined as under: “Article

ACIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI vs. LIVA HEALTHCARE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 904/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) The Assistant Commissioner Liva Healthcare Limited बनाम/ Of Income Tax, Circle 6(3), Shivsagar Estate, V. Room No. 522, 5 Th Floor, ‘A’ Block, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Dr. Annie Basant Road Mumbai-400020 Worli, Mumbai-400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafw0040N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

C State or Part thereof, but does not include any Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom or any Order in Council, rule or other instrument made under such Act..” Similarly under Constitution of India the word ‘law’ in context of fundamental rights is defined under Article 13(3)(a) whereby it is defined as under: “Article

ARISTO PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stand dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

20A read with Section 33(m) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, these regulations do not govern or have any concern with the facilities, infrastructure or running of the Hospitals and secondly, that the Ethics Committee of the MCI acting under the Regulations had no jurisdiction to pass any direction or judgment on the infrastructure of any hospital

SHRI KASHINATH TAPURIAH,KOLKATTA vs. DY.CIT.C.C.2, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty appeals for all the seven years under reference are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am Sr. Appellant Respondent A.Ys.

20A, 21, 22 of the order in HAK(supra)). It has, however, set aside the matter to the A.O. toward determining certain aspects of the transaction. The addition toward payment for services (to PA) was deleted for want of any evidence as to payment, with that on record, rather, suggesting otherwise. There is no such corroborative material in the case

KASHINATH TAPURIAH,KOLKATTA vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2, MUMBAI

In the result, the penalty appeals for all the seven years under reference are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am Sr. Appellant Respondent A.Ys.

20A, 21, 22 of the order in HAK(supra)). It has, however, set aside the matter to the A.O. toward determining certain aspects of the transaction. The addition toward payment for services (to PA) was deleted for want of any evidence as to payment, with that on record, rather, suggesting otherwise. There is no such corroborative material in the case

MAHARASHTRA HOUSING & AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं. 894/मुं/2018 ("न. व. 2012-13) आअसं. 895/मुं/2018 ("न. व. 2014-15) Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority, Office Of Finance Controller, Mhada Griha Nirman Bhavan, 4Th Floor,. Kala Nagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051 Pan:Aaajm0344H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit (Exemption) -2(1), Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Mumbai 400 012. अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Nishant Thakkar ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Purushottam Tripuri सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2020 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/11/2020

20A) of section 10 of the Act from the statute by the Finance Act, 2007 w.e.f. 01/04/2003, the assessee ceased to be eligible for exemption under the aforesaid provision. Therefore, the assessee applied for registration under section 12A of the Act as charitable institution. The registration under section 12A of the Act was granted to the assessee

MAHARASHTRA HOUSING & AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarआअसं. 894/मुं/2018 ("न. व. 2012-13) आअसं. 895/मुं/2018 ("न. व. 2014-15) Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority, Office Of Finance Controller, Mhada Griha Nirman Bhavan, 4Th Floor,. Kala Nagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051 Pan:Aaajm0344H ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit (Exemption) -2(1), Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Mumbai 400 012. अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Nishant Thakkar ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Purushottam Tripuri सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2020 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/11/2020

20A) of section 10 of the Act from the statute by the Finance Act, 2007 w.e.f. 01/04/2003, the assessee ceased to be eligible for exemption under the aforesaid provision. Therefore, the assessee applied for registration under section 12A of the Act as charitable institution. The registration under section 12A of the Act was granted to the assessee

HASSAN ALI KHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am Sr. No.

20A. Grounds 1 and 2 are common to that for A.Y. 2001-02 and, accordingly, stand disposed of vide paras 4 and 5 of this order respectively. Paras 5 through 9 of the assessment order, we may add, contain detailed discussion on the provision of due and adequate opportunity to the assessee. Ground 3 is general in nature, warranting

S.B. ENTERPRISES,THANE vs. ITO WD 3(3), THANE

Bench: Sh. R. C. Sharma, Am & Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6749/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

C. SHARMA, AM & SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6749/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/s S. B. Enterprises ITO WD 3(3) 103, Marotroji Bhavna, Dr. R. No. 8, B Wing, 6th बिधम/ Moose Rd, Talopali, floor, Ashar IT Park R. Vs. Thane(W)-400602 DNo. 16Z Wable Indl Estate, Thane(W)- 400604 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ABJFS9590F