DCIT- CIRCLE- 1, THANE vs. DARSHAN ENTERPRISES , THANE

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.462 /Mum/2019 & I.T.A.No.463/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Darshan Enterprises Circle-1,6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, 2Nd Floor, Rosa Vista, Vs. B Wing Wagle Industrial Estate Ghodbunder Road, Thane- 400604 Opp. Suraj Water Park, Thane(West) 400615 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8612N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Tulsian Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Nashik Dated 5-11-2018 For Ay 2010-11. [One I.E. Ita 462 Is Against The Quantum Deleted By Ld.Cit(A) & Ita 463 Is Against The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter “The Act”) Deleted By Ld.Cit(A)]. 2. First Of All We Will Take Up The Quantum Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Wherein The Revenue Challenges The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Deleted The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) Under Section 68 Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Partnership Firm Had Filed Return Of Income On 22.09.2010 Declaring Income Of Rs. Rs. 1,47,73,191/-. Later The Case For The Relevant Assessment Year Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Noted That

section 68 of the Act, the AO without even pointing out any infirmity in the documents 14 ITA. 462& 463/MUM/2019 AY 2010-11 M/s Darshan Enterprises filed by the assesse regarding the lenders who were regular income tax assessees, the AO has made high pitched assessment by just giving 24 hours notice to produce all the 127 parties

DCIT- CIRCLE- 1 , THANE vs. DARSHAN ENTERPRISES, THANE

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.462 /Mum/2019 & I.T.A.No.463/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Darshan Enterprises Circle-1,6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, 2Nd Floor, Rosa Vista, Vs. B Wing Wagle Industrial Estate Ghodbunder Road, Thane- 400604 Opp. Suraj Water Park, Thane(West) 400615 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8612N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Tulsian Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Nashik Dated 5-11-2018 For Ay 2010-11. [One I.E. Ita 462 Is Against The Quantum Deleted By Ld.Cit(A) & Ita 463 Is Against The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter “The Act”) Deleted By Ld.Cit(A)]. 2. First Of All We Will Take Up The Quantum Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Wherein The Revenue Challenges The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Deleted The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) Under Section 68 Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Partnership Firm Had Filed Return Of Income On 22.09.2010 Declaring Income Of Rs. Rs. 1,47,73,191/-. Later The Case For The Relevant Assessment Year Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Noted That

section 68 of the Act, the AO without even pointing out any infirmity in the documents 14 ITA. 462& 463/MUM/2019 AY 2010-11 M/s Darshan Enterprises filed by the assesse regarding the lenders who were regular income tax assessees, the AO has made high pitched assessment by just giving 24 hours notice to produce all the 127 parties

ITO-15(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S PRAVIR POLYMERS PVT LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-15(2)(4), M/S Pravir Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 360, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. 601/602, Delta, Central Avenue, Road, Marine Lines, Vs. Technology Street, Hiranandani Mumbai-400020. Garden Powai, Mumbai-400076. Pan No. Aaacp 4621 K Appellant Respondent

section 68 of the Act. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition. Aggrieved, the Revenue is by way of the appeal before the Tribunal whereas, the assessee has raised cross objections. 5. Before us, the assessee has filed paperbook into volumes containing pages 1-191 and 192 to 248

DCIT-CC-7(3), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. SHRI MAJNI KARAMSHI PATEL, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross objections of the assessee and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal, Accountat Member Dcit, Cc-7(3) Vs. Shri Manji Karamshi Room No. 655, Patel Aayakar Bhavan, Office No. 1, Patel M.K.Road, Bhavan-29, Vijaywadi, Mumbai.-400020. Dr. Nagindas N Shah Lane Chira Bazar, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpp0130D Appellant .. Respondent Co No. 45/Mum/2021 (A.Y: 2014-15) Shri Manji Karamshi Vs. Dcit, Cc-7(3) Patel Room No. 655, Aayakar Office No. 1, Patel Bhavan, Bhuvan-29, Vijaywadi, M.K .Road, Dr. Nagindas N Shah Mumbai-400002. Lane Chira Bazar, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpp0130D Appellant .. Respondent

68 on account of allegation of accommodation entry. Your Honour would appreciate that the Id. Assessing Officer has relied on the information given by the DGIT (Inv.) without appreciating that the same cannot be used against the appellant without providing statements wherein the alleged party has stated that he has provided accommodation entry to the appellant and therefore such statements

UDAYAN GROVER,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE(NFAC), DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

section 10(38) of the Act:-  Copy of share allotment  Copies of sale bills  Copy of bank statement  Copy of demat account  Copy of contract notes Page No. 24 Udayan Grover xx. At the Bombay Stock Exchange, the price of the shares of M/s Greencrest Financial Services Limited had continuously been in the range of Rs. 9 - 248

ITO-33(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S URVI REALTORS, MUMBAI

248 4. The Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 133(6) of the Act to the above lenders. However, reply was received only from M/s Rajat Diamonds Exim Pvt. Ltd. The Assessee was asked to show cause as to why the unsecured loans should not be treated as unsecured cash credits in terms of Section 68

NITESH RAJHANS SINGH,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER -26(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy S

68. 4.10 The operator The appellant has denied the connection with the exit provider in the statement recorded u/s 131. The Learned Assessing officer has stated that statement of said operator recorded u/s 132(4) at the back of the assesse and no copies of his statement were given to the appellant. Further no incriminating document was found in respect

FAIYAZ YUNUS PATEL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 27(1)(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Faiyaz Yunus Patel, Ito-27(1)(4), Flat No. 602, Vmk Chs, Room No. 409, 4Th Floor, Tower Vs. Lbs Marg, Chirag Nagar, No. 6 Vashi Railway Station Ghatkopar (W), Commercial Complex Vashi, Mumbai-400086. Navi Mumbai-400703. Pan No. Akxpp 9040 L Appellant Respondent

section 68 of the Act is not justified. 3.1. The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) on the other hand tmental Representative (DR) on the other hand tmental Representative (DR) on the other hand relied on the order of the lower authorities. relied on the order of the lower authorities. 3.2. We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused

DHANRAJ MILLS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (OSD)-II CEN RG-7, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

section 68 of the Act, finance charges and interest income. Our attention was invited to various pages of the assessment order, specifically para-2 and 2.4. Reliance was placed upon the decision in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. vs. MANJUNATHA COTTON & GINNING FACTORY 359 ITR 565 (Karn.), COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. VIKAS PROMOTERS

VINOD L. GADHIYA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC5(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

68 of the Act, being the identity and genuineness of the transaction and the other aspect being credit worthiness is strictly not necessary, because the sum received towards sale of shares is neither a loan nor a credit. Therefore, the transaction is required to be tested under first two limbs, i.e. the identity and the genuineness of the transaction

NAVNIDHI STEEL AND ENGG CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2007-08

248 (Delhi). It may be noted above that under the first proviso to the newly substituted section 143(1), with effect from 1-6-1999, except as provided in the provision itself, the acknowledgement of the return shall be deemed to be an intimation under section 143(1) where (a) either no sum is payable by the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX vs. RACHANA SURESH CHOKHANI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

68 of the LT. Act, without appreciating the facts that, the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Manoj Jain (HUF) in ITA No.1782/KOL/2018, treated the penny stock transaction as income from other sources instead of LTCG/STCG, and the same was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court Calcutta (2024) 164 taxmann.com 133 (Calcutta), which has been confirmed

RAKESH SHANTILAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO-18(3)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

248/- as made by the AO under section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit as against the long

DEEPA PAMNANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 20(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm Ms. Deepa Pamnani Vs. The Income Tax Officer Pamnanai Hospital & Ward 20(1)(1) Research Center Piramal Chamber 33 Cf +6Qc , Railway Station Lal Baug Road, Prem Colony, Mandasur Mumbai 400012 Madhya Pradesh 458001 Pan Cstpp4472L (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Akepg6370P Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah Ca & Mr. Kapil Jain Ca Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2024 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Am:

68 of the income tax act, it loses the claim of exemption under section 54F also. For this proposition he referred to the decision of Naresh Sunderlal Chug V ITO [ 93 taxmann.com 485] and CIT V Sardarilal 251 ITR 864 {SC} stating that the learned CIT – A without issuing notice under section 251 of the income

DCIT CC 23, MUMBAI vs. RIKIN BAROT, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.6547/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04) The Asst. Cit Central Circle- Vs. Shri. Rikin Barot. 23, B-22,Ashirwad, Room No. 464, 4Th Floor, V.M.Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Marg, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai- 400020. Mumbai- 400049. "थायी लेखा सं/.जीआइआर सं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aenpb9147G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

68 of the act. The grounds taken by the revenue are, therefore rejected.” 7. In our considered view, the facts of the present case are identical to the facts of the aforesaid case. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the ITAT Kolkata, we hold that the impugned order does not suffer from any legal infirmity to interfere with. Accordingly

DCIT 9(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. FERN INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD, MUMBAI

section 68 of the act if the assessee fails to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of those parties. The appellant vide letter dated 09.01.2013, 14.01.2013, 23.01.2013 and 01.02.2013 submitted various evidences as regards shareholders and objected the proposed addition. In the opinion of the AO the appellant has not discharged the onus casted on it to prove

SARANGA ANIL AGGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 68. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the addition of interest income of 1,72,51,247 without appreciating the fact that the said interest income was reduced 3 Saranga Anil Aggarwal A.Y. 2018-19 from the corresponding interest expenditure and only

M/S SHAILESH JAIN HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19 (3)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S. Shailesh Jain Huf, Vs. Ito 19(3)(3), 2Nd Floor, 2405, Panchratna, Opera House, Matru Mandir Bldg., Mama Parmanand Marg, Grant Road, Charni Road, Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai-400 004 Pan/Gir No.Aaihs3182H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Smt. Kritika Rajendra Jain, Vs. Ito 19(3)(3), 2Nd Floor, 2405, Panchratna, Opera House, Matru Mandir Bldg., Mama Parmanand Marg, Grant Road, Charni Road, Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai-400 004 Pan/Gir No. Agspj9797K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

68 of the Act, being the identity and genuineness of the transaction and the other aspect being credit worthiness is strictly not necessary, because the sum received towards sale of shares is neither a loan nor a credit. Therefore, the transaction is required to be tested under first two limbs, i.e. the identity and the genuineness of the transaction