MACROTECH DEVELOPRS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

search and seizure u/s 132 was conducted on 10-2- 2001 pursuant to which the assessment order for the block period from 1-4-1989 to 10-2-2000 was passed on 28-02-2002 at a total undisclosed income of Rs. 85,00,000/-. The tax was charged as prescribed in section 113 of the Act. Subsequently, a proviso

MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LTD.(SUCCESSOR TO BELLISSIMO CROWN BUILDMART PVT LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

search and seizure u/s 132 was conducted on 10-2- 2001 pursuant to which the assessment order for the block period from 1-4-1989 to 10-2-2000 was passed on 28-02-2002 at a total undisclosed income of Rs. 85,00,000/-. The tax was charged as prescribed in section 113 of the Act. Subsequently, a proviso

TATA MOTORS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.631/मुं/2013 (िन.व. 2008-09) Tata Motors Limited Bombay House, 24,Homi Mody Street, Hutama Chowk, Mumbai – 400001. Pan: Aaact-2727-Q ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle -2(3), Mumbai. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr.Advocate With Shri Nikhil Tiwari,Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Vatsala Jha, Cit-Dr & Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/11/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 05/02/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

Transfer Pricing Officer” means a Joint Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner authorized 9 by the Board to perform all or any of the functions of an Assessing Officer specified in sections 92C and 92D in respect of any person or class of persons. ” The contention of the assessee is that since, Additional Commissioner is not mentioned in Explanation

DAM CAPITAL ADVISORS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-4(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

transfer pricing adjustment of Rs. 10 Crore or more in an earlier assessment year and such adjustment has been upheld by the judicial authorities or is pending in appeal; and (c) where search and seizure

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

transfer any financial expenses to Krishna Lok and further the administrative and other expenses which include salary, bonus other perquisites, employees welfare and the rates and taxes, general expenses, news paper and periodicals, legal and professional expenses, postage & telephone charges, power fuel and water charges, printing & stationery, vehicle 35 M/s Salasar Developers ITA No.4511 TO 4513/Mum/2014 repair & maintenance expenses

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

transfer any financial expenses to Krishna Lok and further the administrative and other expenses which include salary, bonus other perquisites, employees welfare and the rates and taxes, general expenses, news paper and periodicals, legal and professional expenses, postage & telephone charges, power fuel and water charges, printing & stationery, vehicle 35 M/s Salasar Developers ITA No.4511 TO 4513/Mum/2014 repair & maintenance expenses

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

transfer any financial expenses to Krishna Lok and further the administrative and other expenses which include salary, bonus other perquisites, employees welfare and the rates and taxes, general expenses, news paper and periodicals, legal and professional expenses, postage & telephone charges, power fuel and water charges, printing & stationery, vehicle 35 M/s Salasar Developers ITA No.4511 TO 4513/Mum/2014 repair & maintenance expenses

DBS BANK LTD INDIA BRANCHES (NOW AMALGAMATED WITH DBS BANK INDIA LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT)-MUMBAI-2, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm)

transfer pricing adjustment of Rs. 1O Crore or more in an earlier assessment year and such adjustment has been upheld by the judicial authorities or is pending in appeal; and (c) where search and seizure

DCIT, CIR-14(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. EKTA EVEGLADE HOMES PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground raised by the revenue is allowed

Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

transfer pricing for the A.Y. 2013-14 and thereby reducing the WIP in the absence of incriminating materials found in the search, without appreciating the settled legal principle that assessment can be case of unabated assessments. b. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in rejecting the additional ground raised

DCIT-14(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. EKTA EVERGLADE HOMES PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground raised by the revenue is allowed

transfer pricing for the A.Y. 2013-14 and thereby reducing the WIP in the absence of incriminating materials found in the search, without appreciating the settled legal principle that assessment can be done only on the basis of incriminating materials found during the course of search in case of unabated assessments.\nb. That on the facts and circumstances

MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SMARTECHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD ) ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-50, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mahadhan Agritech Ltd. (Formerly Cit(A)-50, Dcit Cen. 8(1), Known As Smartchem Technologies 656, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ltd.), Mumbai-400021. Survey No. 93, Sai Hira, Mundhwa, Pune-411036. Pan No. Aacca 5046 P Appellant Respondent

seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 15.11.2018 on was carried out on 15.11.2018 on the assessee along with other the assessee along with other entities forming part of ‘Deepak Fertilizers Group’. Consequently, a ’. Consequently, a notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 01.01.2020. In respons 3A of the Act was issued

DCIT-14(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. EKTA EVERGLADE HOMES PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground raised by the revenue is allowed

transfer pricing for the A.Y.\n2013-14 and thereby reducing the WIP in the absence of incriminating materials found\nin the search, without appreciating the settled legal principle that assessment can be\ndone only on the basis of incriminating materials found during the course of search in\ncase of unabated assessments.\nb. That on the facts and circumstances

MACLEODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , CC- 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for A

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

transfer of material at lower prices. 3. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in initiating penalty proceedings in a case which 3. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in initiating penalty proceedings in a case which has been highly litigated.” has been highly litigated.” 4. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee company Briefly stated, facts

DCIT , CC- 2(4), MUMBAI vs. MACELODS PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue for A

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

transfer of material at lower prices. 3. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in initiating penalty proceedings in a case which 3. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in initiating penalty proceedings in a case which has been highly litigated.” has been highly litigated.” 4. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee company Briefly stated, facts

ACIT 2(3) (1) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. THAKKAR APNA GHAR NIRMAN PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

search and seizure action in the case of respondentassessee and its group companies, no material whatsoever was seized and found indicating payment of on-money consideration at the time of purchase of the lands. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the following decisions: i) Pr.CIT vs. Umesh Ishrani (2019) 108 taxmann.com 437 (Bom) ) CIT vs. Atam Valves

ACIT 2(3) (1) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. THAKKAR HOUSING DEVELOPEMENT PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

search and seizure action in the case of respondentassessee and its group companies, no material whatsoever was seized and found indicating payment of on-money consideration at the time of purchase of the lands. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the following decisions: i) Pr.CIT vs. Umesh Ishrani (2019) 108 taxmann.com 437 (Bom) ) CIT vs. Atam Valves

ACIT 2(3) (1) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. THAKKAR APANA GHAR PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

search and seizure action in the case of respondentassessee and its group companies, no material whatsoever was seized and found indicating payment of on-money consideration at the time of purchase of the lands. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the following decisions: i) Pr.CIT vs. Umesh Ishrani (2019) 108 taxmann.com 437 (Bom) ) CIT vs. Atam Valves

ACIT 2(3) (1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. THAKKR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

search and seizure action in the case of respondentassessee and its group companies, no material whatsoever was seized and found indicating payment of on-money consideration at the time of purchase of the lands. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the following decisions: i) Pr.CIT vs. Umesh Ishrani (2019) 108 taxmann.com 437 (Bom) ) CIT vs. Atam Valves