POOJA EQUIRESEARCH PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5941/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Pooja Equiresearch Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-8(2), B-101, Hari Darshan Bhogilal Mumbai Phadia Road, Kandivali (West) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaacp 6499 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle Hariya & Ms. Shruti Kalyanikar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Sr.Dr

68 of the Act being deemed income which was not recorded in books of accounts. Reliance is placed on decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court "Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan Vs. CIT[2001] 247 ITR 290/[2002] 120 Taxman 11 and decision on Hon'ble ITAT Chennai (ITA No 325/Mds./2015 dated 06.04.2016 DCIT Vs M/s Shree Karthik Papers

UMESH AMBIKAPRASAD MISHRA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 10(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per\nabove direction

sections": [ "68", "10(1)", "23(4)(b)", "143(3)", "271(C)", "234A", "234B", "234C" ], "issues": "Whether the agricultural income

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.

68 of the Act to the extent of Rs. 11.76/- crores after applying the Gross Profit rate of 6.5% on the sales of Rs. 430.94/- crores. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law learned CIT (Appeal) has erred in upholding the interest charged by the assessing officer under the provisions

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.

68 of the Act to the extent of Rs. 11.76/- crores after applying the Gross Profit rate of 6.5% on the sales of Rs. 430.94/- crores. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law learned CIT (Appeal) has erred in upholding the interest charged by the assessing officer under the provisions

LUXORA INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

section 234A, 234B and 234C of IT. Act 1961 is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 12. Any other ground shall be prayed at the time of hearing. 3. At the outset, it is noted that the delay 74 days in filing the appeal. Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the delay was owing to the Corona Virus pandemic. Hence

UMESH A MISHRA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 10(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per\nabove direction

sections": [ "68", "10(1)", "143(3)", "23(4)(b)", "271(C)", "234A", "234B", "234C" ], "issues": "1. Whether the addition

SANKPAL DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 25(1)(1) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am M/S Sankpal Developers Income Tax Officer, 101-104, Haripriya Apartment, Ward-25(1)(1) Sundervan Complex, 203, Kautilya Bhavan, Lokhandwala Cross Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Andheri (West), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 053 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abwfs4025Q Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Singh, Ar : Shri R.R. Makwana, Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing: 10.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2024

68 of the Act is unjustified and the same may be deleted. iv. The NFAC further failed to appreciate that the Ld. A.O. has made the addition relying on the statements of certain parties obtained during the search and seizure action carried out under section 132 of the Act on the said parties, without providing the appellant an opportunity

BAO VALUE FUND,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

68 of the Act were not applicable to the appellant. The appellant prays that such computation of tax liability was without any application of mind and should be deleted. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO had erred in levying surcharge 25% on the tax liability computed as per Section 115BBE

DEEPAK NOVOCHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

234A of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under section 153A for other block AYs 2013 3A for other block

DEEPAK NOVOCHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

234A of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under section 153A for other block AYs 2013 3A for other block

DEEPAK NOVOCHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

234A of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under section 153A for other block AYs 2013 3A for other block

DEEPAK NOVOCHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

234A of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under section 153A for other block AYs 2013 3A for other block

DEEPAK NOVOCHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Ita Nos. 2558 To 2562/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Deepak Novochem The Acit, Cc-8(1), Technologies Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Room No. Vs. 515, 5Th Floor, Citi Point, Boat 656, 6Th Floor, M.K. Road, Club Road, Pune City, Mumbai-400020. Pune-411 001. Pan No. Aaccd 5796 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. H.P. Mahajani Revenue By : Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 16/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2023

234A of the Act, without appreciating the fact that the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under the Appellant duly filed its return of income in response to notice under section 153A for other block AYs 2013 3A for other block

JITENDRA UDAYLAL JAIN,MAHARASHTRA vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 ITA. No. 4543/MUM/2023 (A.Y.: 2011-12) Jitendra udaylal Jain, Mumbai. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law the Ld. AO erred in rejecting the exemption of Rs. 3,72,49,578/- under section 10(38) of the Income

M/S BINI BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL RANGE 7(3), MUMBAI

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

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

section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Facts on record would reveal that the assessee being resident corporate assessee stated to be engaged as builders & developers was subjected to an assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 22/12/2017 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.207.60 Lacs after certain addition u/s 68

HUNTSMAN INVESTMENTS (NETHERLANDS),MUMBAI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(2)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

234A and section\n234B of the Act.\nGround No. 5: Erroneous mention of refund already issued of Rs. 19.75.190\n5.1.\nThe learned AO erred in considering that refund is already granted to the\nAppellant whereasEach one of the above grounds of appeal is without prejudice\nto the other.\"\n2.\nThe brief fact of the case is that the assessee

JAWAHARLAL GULABRAI TULSIANI,DELHI vs. ACIT, INT. TAX CIRCLE 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 234A and 234B of the I. T. Act 1961 of Rs. 10,49,19,107/-and Rs. 10,68

NARAINDAS GULABRAI TULSIANI,DELHI vs. ACIT, INT. TAX CIRCLE 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 234A and 234B of the I. T. Act 1961 of Rs. 10,49,19,107/-and Rs. 10,68