UTILITY SUPPLY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

56(2) (vii), any\nsum of money or any property in kind which is received without\nconsideration or for inadequate consideration (in excess of the\nprescribed limit of Rs. 50,000/-) by an individual or an HUF is\nchargeable to income tax in the hands of recipient under the head\n'income from other sources'. However, receipts from relatives

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ROMELL HOUSING LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, the Cross Objection by the assessee is allowed, while the\nRevenue's Appeal is dismissed

price\npaid or promised or part-paid and part-promised.\nSale how made—Such transfer, in the case of tangible immoveable property\nof the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, or in the case of a reversion\nor other intangible thing, can be made only by a registered instrument. In the\ncase of tangible immoveable property of a value

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, THANE, THANE vs. NAKUL MARKHEDKAR, THANE

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

price only for share capital of holding company. Therefore, this is a fit case where in substance over form is to be looked which clearly proves that the entire transaction is carried out to evade tax. Further, for the purpose of computation of tax liability section 56(2)(vii) (c) is invoked. Accordingly, the differential amount between total

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, THANE, THANE vs. NAKUL MARKHEDKAR, THANE

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

price only for share capital of holding company. Therefore, this is a fit case where in substance over form is to be looked which clearly proves that the entire transaction is carried out to evade tax. Further, for the purpose of computation of tax liability section 56(2)(vii) (c) is invoked. Accordingly, the differential amount between total

ACIT CIRCLE 22(1), MUMBAI vs. RAJENDRA NARPATMAL LODHA, MUMBAI

Appeal is dismissed

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

price should be considered as agreement for the purpose of section 56(2)(vii)(b) and that the proviso to the said section is applicable to assessee's case. Therefore before proceeding further we will look at the relevant the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) as extracted below – 56. Income from other sources. (1) **** (2) In particular

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) :

price of ₹ 60/- per share. Dish TV India Ltd is also a company forming part of Essel group of companies and it is engaged in the business of providing DTH services. Dish TV India Ltd is a company in which public are substantially interested and its shares are listed in the Bombay Stock Exchange and National Stock Exchange

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) :

price of ₹ 60/- per share. Dish TV India Ltd is also a company forming part of Essel group of companies and it is engaged in the business of providing DTH services. Dish TV India Ltd is a company in which public are substantially interested and its shares are listed in the Bombay Stock Exchange and National Stock Exchange

MR. BIPINCHANDRA SHANTILAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 23 (1) (6), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

vii) of the Act, the term “immovable property” has been defined to mean land or building or both. In our view, it will not cover the improvement of right which is already held by the assessee. Therefore, from the bare reading of the aforesaid provisions of the Act, it is discernible that receipt of immovable property for the purpose

DANISH SHEIKH,USA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER INTL TAX WARD 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 1034/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Danish Sheikh V/S. Ito International Tax, 18, Old Planters Road, बिाम Ward 4(2)(1) Beverly, Usa-999999 Kautilya Bhavan, 6Th Floor, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Fjxps3005Q Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Pradip Kapasi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr.

transfer of the jurisdiction. GROUND NO 10 REJECTION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE This ground is not pressed as the evidences furnished to the DRP were partially considered by DRP and importantly the evidences furnished before the DRP are not the Additional evidence within the meaning of the term under Rule 46A of the Income tax Rules which have limited application

VALUKKO INFRASTRUSTURE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 11(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 1034/Mum/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Danish Sheikh V/S. Ito International Tax, 18, Old Planters Road, बिाम Ward 4(2)(1) Beverly, Usa-999999 Kautilya Bhavan, 6Th Floor, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Fjxps3005Q Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Pradip Kapasi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr.

transfer of the jurisdiction. GROUND NO 10 REJECTION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE This ground is not pressed as the evidences furnished to the DRP were partially considered by DRP and importantly the evidences furnished before the DRP are not the Additional evidence within the meaning of the term under Rule 46A of the Income tax Rules which have limited application

ZENZI PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTIES PVT LTD.,MUMBAI CITY vs. CIT (TRANSFER PRICING)-4, MUMBAI CITY

In the result all the four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

56,15,453 sales science distributors GmbH 3 export Jinan 37,73,085 sales pharmaceutical company Ltd 4 import Jinan 42,08,526 purchases pharmaceutical company Ltd 011. The learned CIT noted that the case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the act and reference was made to the learned transfer pricing officer in terms of Para

ZENZI PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTIES PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CIT (TRANSFER PRICING)-4, MUMBAI

In the result all the four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

56,15,453 sales science distributors GmbH 3 export Jinan 37,73,085 sales pharmaceutical company Ltd 4 import Jinan 42,08,526 purchases pharmaceutical company Ltd 011. The learned CIT noted that the case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the act and reference was made to the learned transfer pricing officer in terms of Para

ZENZI PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTIES PVT LTD.,MUMBAI CITY vs. CIT (TRANSFER PRICING)-4, MUMBAI CITY

In the result all the four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

56,15,453 sales science distributors GmbH 3 export Jinan 37,73,085 sales pharmaceutical company Ltd 4 import Jinan 42,08,526 purchases pharmaceutical company Ltd 011. The learned CIT noted that the case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the act and reference was made to the learned transfer pricing officer in terms of Para

ZENZI PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTIES PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CIT (TRANSFER PRICING)-4, MUMBAI

In the result all the four appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

56,15,453 sales science distributors GmbH 3 export Jinan 37,73,085 sales pharmaceutical company Ltd 4 import Jinan 42,08,526 purchases pharmaceutical company Ltd 011. The learned CIT noted that the case was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the act and reference was made to the learned transfer pricing officer in terms of Para

ELVIS ZEPHERIN CRASTO ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INT TAX WARD 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleelvis Zepherin Crasto V. Income Tax Officer Gorai Village, Jui Pada International Taxation Gorai Essel World Road Ward – 2(1)(1) Borivali (W), Mumbai - 400091 Room No. 1724, 17Th Floor Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Asgpc6280N (Appellant) (Respondent)

prices and the Id. AO cannot tax the assessee by taking shelter of Section 50CA and Section 56(2) of the IT Act. The assessee was not having such a huge cash Rs.2,07,56,500 for investing in the said Land and question of evading tax does not arise. The assessee doing his job at Dubai

ACIT CIRCLE 4.3.1, MUMBAI vs. JUST DIAL LTD, MUMBAI

vii) and section\n115 JB of the Act, deal with different subject matter for the purpose of\ntaxation. Even though the term property is not defined in section 115 JB of\nthe Act, however in the Act, the terms “property” and “asset” have been used\ninterchangeably. Even the definition of the term \"capital asset\" in section

SMT. PINKI CHETAN SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/DY/ACIT, ITO-20(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

vii) in case of buyer the difference between sale price and circle rate would be determined to be the income of purchaser and taxed under head income from other sources. There is a deeming provision in the Income-tax Act under Section 56 (2)(x), which states that if the market value of a property is lower than the circle

SILGATE SOLUTIONS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: or at the time of hearing of the matter with the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal." 2. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of international call centre. The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2013-14 on 24.10.2013, declaring total income of Rs.92,36,060/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices were duly served on the assessee. During the assessment proceedings the AO noticed that there was change in the shareholding pattern of the assessee wherein the ass

section. 56(2)( vii) includes immovable property being land or building or both, shares and securities, jewellery, archaeological collection, drawings,paintings, sculpture or any work of art A. These are anti-abuse provisions which are currently applicable only if an individual or an HUF is the recipient. Therefore, transfer of shares of a company to a firm or a company

TPG GROWTH II MAKETS PTE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(1)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No. 4 raised by the Appellant is partly allowed

transfer pricing provisions were introduced by way of insertion of Section 92 to Section 92F in Chapter X of the Act containing special provisions relating to avoidance of tax in the year 2001. Section 92(1) of the Act provides that income arising from ‘International Transaction’ shall be computed having regard to the arm’s length price. Section