25FPS MEDIA PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO ,RANGE -6(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2798/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2012-13) Ito, Range-6(3)(1) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Room No.524, 5Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower 400020. Parel, Mumbai-400013. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3085/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिधम/ 25Fps Media Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Range-6(3)(1) 18Th Floor, Marathon Futurex, Room No.524, 5Th Floor, Vs. N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Parel, Mumbai-400013. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz2076J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala & Madhur Aggarwal Revenue By: Shri Achal Sharma (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm): The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2012-13. Ita. No.2798/Mum/2018 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.02.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -12, Mumbai Relevant To The A.Y.2012-13. 3085/M/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

viia) as already discussed earlier, the same was not chargeable to income tax in the hands of the recipient under the head Income from Other Sources under the provisions of section 56(1) also, in view of the legal position as explained in the Explanatory Notes to the provisions of the Finance Act, 2017 contained in Circular No. 2/2018

HUMUZA CONSULTANTS,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT-19, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Humuza Consultants Vs The Principal Commissioner Of 6Th Floor, Wokhardt Towers Income-Tax-19, Mumbai Bandra Kurla Complex Room No. 228, 2Nd Floor, Bandra East Matru Mandir Mumbai-400 01 Tardeo Road, Pan : Aahfh9240E Mumbai-400 007 Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Jd Mistry & Hiten Chande Respondent By Shri K.K. Mishra (Cit,Dr) Date Of Hearing 07-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement 07-01-2022 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi (Am):

56(2) (viia) of the act as those shares were of company in which public are substantially interested. 28. Further, with respect to the Explanation 2 to section 263 of the Act which has been inserted with effect from 01/06/2015 provides that any order passed by the assessing officer shall be deemed to be erroneous as insofar

CABLE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjeet Singhassessment Year: 2010-11

68 of the Act. The material furnished by the assessee during the course of reassessment proceedings was not properly scrutinized by the AO. Further, the CIT (A) and Tribunal decided the case without examining the information submitted before them by the assessee. In this context, it was held by the High Court that the CIT (A) and Tribunal ought

NERKA CHEMICALS P. LTD,GUJRAT vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Accountant Mamber & Shri Pawan Singh

68 of the Act. The material furnished by the assessee during the course of reassessment proceedings was not properly scrutinized by the AO. Further, the CIT (A) and Tribunal decided the case without examining the information submitted before them by the assessee. In this context, it was held by the High Court that the CIT (A) and Tribunal ought

ACIT - CIRCLE- 6(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. DIRECT MEDIA DISTRIBUTION VENTURES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue dismissed and appeal of the assessee is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.2715/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Direct Media Distribution Of Income Tax 6(2)(2), Ventures Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Mumbai 135, Continental Building, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Annie Besant Road, Worli, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 048 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aadcd1940Q (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

viia) so as to be held taxable under the head income of other source. This has been explained in the explanatory note at the time of insertion of clause (x) of the Section 56(2) by the P a g e | 48 ITA No. 2715/MUM/2018 & 3084/MUM/2018 Direct Media Distribution Ventures Pvt. Ltd,; A.Y. 2012-13 Finance Act, 2017, w.e.f

DIRECT MEDIA DISTRIBUTION VENTURES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO , RG-6(2)(3)(PRESENT IN CHARGE ACIR-RG-6(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue dismissed and appeal of the assessee is also dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.2715/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Direct Media Distribution Of Income Tax 6(2)(2), Ventures Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Mumbai 135, Continental Building, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Annie Besant Road, Worli, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 048 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aadcd1940Q (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

viia) so as to be held taxable under the head income of other source. This has been explained in the explanatory note at the time of insertion of clause (x) of the Section 56(2) by the P a g e | 48 ITA No. 2715/MUM/2018 & 3084/MUM/2018 Direct Media Distribution Ventures Pvt. Ltd,; A.Y. 2012-13 Finance Act, 2017, w.e.f

DY CIT. CIRCLE-1, THANE vs. M/S TRAVECOM GLOBAL P. LTD., BHAYANDER

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – Circle 1 V. M/S. Travecom Global Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 22, B-Wing B/607, Krishnakunj 6Th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park Salasar Brij Bhoomi Wagle Industrial Estate Bhayander (W)-401101 Thane (W)-400604 Pan: Aaect8729Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Aarti Vissanji Department By : Shri B.K. Bagchi

section 56(2) (viib) of the IT Act, 1961 needs to be deleted. Without prejudice to the above: 1. Provisions were never meant to be applied on genuine transactions There is another very important angle that here the shares have not been subscribed by any sister concern or closely related person, but by outside investors who have seen certain

DCIT 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. FINPROJECT INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4860/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13)

viia) of the Act and CBDT notification dated 29/11/2012. This provision however has no relevance in the present assessment year and as such needs no deliberation at this stage. 3 I.T.A. No.4860/Mum/2016 (iii) The assessee company's return of income filed for the current year as well as the preceding year shows consistent losses. In this scenario the valuation done

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

viia) of the Act does not have any credit balance as on 01/04/2015, we agree with the submissions of the assessee in claiming the deduction of the entire bad debt written off as an irrecoverable under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act. Accordingly, the impugned addition made by the AO on this issue is deleted. As a result

BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

viia) of the Act does not have any credit balance as on 01/04/2015, we agree with the submissions of the assessee in claiming the deduction of the entire bad debt written off as an irrecoverable under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act. Accordingly, the impugned addition made by the AO on this issue is deleted. As a result

KEVA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Keva Industries Pvt. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd 15(2)(1) Room No.480, 4Th Floor C/O. Sh Kelkar & Company Limited Aayakar Bhavan Lbs Marg, Mulund West Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 080 Pan/Gir No. Aafck6140B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

68 /US$ = Rs 2719.32 = Say Rs 2719 5.2. Based on the above, the ld AO proceeded to make an addition u/s 56(2)(viia) of the Act to the tune of Rs 107,40,00,000/- ( 400000 shares * (2719-34)) by treating the difference between the fair market value of the shares and the purchase price of the shares

DCIT 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. KDA ENTERPRISES P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

68 as under: - “47. Now, coming to the observation of the AO to the effect that a company being an artificial person cannot not make gift. Even the taxing statue has recognized that the gift can be given by a company. In this connection the relevant provisions of Gift Tax Act, 1958 (now repealed) provided as under: a) Section

DCIT 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. KDA ENTERPRISES P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

68 as under: - “47. Now, coming to the observation of the AO to the effect that a company being an artificial person cannot not make gift. Even the taxing statue has recognized that the gift can be given by a company. In this connection the relevant provisions of Gift Tax Act, 1958 (now repealed) provided as under: a) Section

EKTA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,VIRAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

68,52,014/- thereby wrongly treating the Appellant a Cooperative Bank instead of Cooperative Society and overlooking the fact that the deduction u/s Section 80P(2)(a)(i) was allowed in the previous years including AY 2017-18.\n2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned A.O. erred in denying deduction u/s Section

ITO WD 1(1), KALYAN vs. ABHIROOP TRADING P.LTD, BHIWANDI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3291/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बिाम/ Income-Tax Officer M/S Avdharna Trading Ward 1(1) Private Limited 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza A9/A10, V. Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada Addl. Kalyan-Bhiwandi, Kalyan(West) Industrial Area Kalyan-421302 Village:Kon Bhiwandi-421302 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaica8411G (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

68 of the 1961 Act wrt these unsecured loans and sundry creditors. It was also incumbent on the part of learned CIT(A) to have looked into applicability of provisions of Section 56(2)(viia

ITO WD 1(1), KALYAN vs. AVDHARNA TRADING P.LTD, BHIWANDI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3291/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बिाम/ Income-Tax Officer M/S Avdharna Trading Ward 1(1) Private Limited 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza A9/A10, V. Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada Addl. Kalyan-Bhiwandi, Kalyan(West) Industrial Area Kalyan-421302 Village:Kon Bhiwandi-421302 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaica8411G (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

68 of the 1961 Act wrt these unsecured loans and sundry creditors. It was also incumbent on the part of learned CIT(A) to have looked into applicability of provisions of Section 56(2)(viia

ITO WD 1(1), KALYAN vs. AGARSEN MERCATNILE TRADING P. LTD, BHIWANDI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3291/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बिाम/ Income-Tax Officer M/S Avdharna Trading Ward 1(1) Private Limited 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza A9/A10, V. Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada Addl. Kalyan-Bhiwandi, Kalyan(West) Industrial Area Kalyan-421302 Village:Kon Bhiwandi-421302 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaica8411G (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

68 of the 1961 Act wrt these unsecured loans and sundry creditors. It was also incumbent on the part of learned CIT(A) to have looked into applicability of provisions of Section 56(2)(viia

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. INDUSIND BANK LTD., MUMBAI

56 of the Act provides that\nincome by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income-tax\nunder the head \"Income from Other Sources\", if, the income is not\nchargeable to income-tax under the head \"Profits and Gains of Business\nand Profession\".\n3. The matter has been examined in light of the judicial decisions on this\nissue