DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), MUMBAI vs. VIRAJ PROFILES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) noted that the assessee had not charged any commission for extending such guarantees. He was of the opinion that the transaction was an international transaction that required benchmarking, and accordingly determined the arm’s length commission at 1.5%. assessee’s income for the respective years. 6. In the first appellate stage, the learned CIT(A) examined

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), , MUMBAI vs. M/S VIRAJ PROFILES PRIVATE LIMITED, , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) noted that the\nassessee had not charged any commission for extending such\nguarantees. He was of the opinion that the transaction was an\ninternational transaction that required benchmarking, and\naccordingly determined the arm's length commission at 1.5%.\nBased on such adjustment, additions were made to the\nassessee's income for the respective assessment years

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), , MUMBAI vs. VIRAJ PROFILES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) noted that the\nassessee had not charged any commission for extending such\nguarantees. He was of the opinion that the transaction was an\ninternational transaction that required benchmarking, and\naccordingly determined the arm's length commission at 1.5%.\n\n4\nITA No. 871/Mum/2025 and others\nViraj Profiles Private Limited\n\nBased on such adjustment, additions were

TANISHQ BUILDERS,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT CC 2(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

price, I decided to prepare these bogus charts/chits to demonstrate that the sale of flats are at Rs.27,500/- per sq ft. I confirm that except five flats sold through me as above, I am not involved in sale of any other flats. Various facts were repeatedly put and explained to the Authorized Officers but applying pressure tactics, they forced

ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. TANISHQ BUILDERS, MUMBAI

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

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

price, I decided to prepare these bogus charts/chits to demonstrate that the sale of flats are at Rs.27,500/- per sq ft. I confirm that except five flats sold through me as above, I am not involved in sale of any other flats. Various facts were repeatedly put and explained to the Authorized Officers but applying pressure tactics, they forced

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S BHISMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to ₹42,79,483/- made by the Assessing Officer, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and settled position of law." 3. Brief facts of the case show that :- i. Assessee is a domestic company engaged in the business of manufacturing of coca, chocolates and super confectioneries. ii. Search under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. BHISMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to ₹42,79,483/- made by the Assessing Officer, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and settled position of law." 3. Brief facts of the case show that :- i. Assessee is a domestic company engaged in the business of manufacturing of coca, chocolates and super confectioneries. ii. Search under

BHISHMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to ₹42,79,483/- made by the Assessing Officer, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and settled position of law." 3. Brief facts of the case show that :- i. Assessee is a domestic company engaged in the business of manufacturing of coca, chocolates and super confectioneries. ii. Search under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S BHISMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to ₹42,79,483/- made by the Assessing Officer, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and settled position of law." 3. Brief facts of the case show that :- i. Assessee is a domestic company engaged in the business of manufacturing of coca, chocolates and super confectioneries. ii. Search under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S BHISMA AGRO FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result ITA number 2376/M/2023 filed by the learned AO for assessment year 2021 – 22 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to ₹42,79,483/- made by the Assessing Officer, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and settled position of law." 3. Brief facts of the case show that :- i. Assessee is a domestic company engaged in the business of manufacturing of coca, chocolates and super confectioneries. ii. Search under

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

transfer of undertakings in a tax demerger must be in the form of issuance of shares by the resulting company to the shareholders of the demerged company. The resulting company is not allowed to discharge the purchase consideration through payment of cash. E. Explanation 3 and 7A to Section 43(1) and sixth proviso of Section 32(1) invoked

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

transfer of undertakings in a tax demerger must be in the form of issuance of shares by the resulting company to the shareholders of the demerged company. The resulting company is not allowed to discharge the purchase consideration through payment of cash. E. Explanation 3 and 7A to Section 43(1) and sixth proviso of Section 32(1) invoked

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

transfer of undertakings in a tax demerger must be in the form of issuance of shares by the resulting company to the shareholders of the demerged company. The resulting company is not allowed to discharge the purchase consideration through payment of cash. E. Explanation 3 and 7A to Section 43(1) and sixth proviso of Section 32(1) invoked

MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SMARTCHEM TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE -8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

transfer of undertakings in a tax demerger must be in the form of issuance of shares by the resulting company to the shareholders of the demerged company. The resulting company is not allowed to discharge the purchase consideration through payment of cash. E. Explanation 3 and 7A to Section 43(1) and sixth proviso of Section 32(1) invoked

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

transfer of undertakings in a\ntax demerger must be in the form of issuance of shares by\nthe resulting company to the shareholders of the demerged\ncompany. The resulting company is not allowed to\ndischarge the purchase consideration through payment of\ncash.\nE. Explanation 3 and 7A to Section 43(1) and sixth\nproviso of Section 32(1) invoked

MAHADHAN AGRITECH LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SMARTCHEM TECHNOLOGIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

transfer of undertakings in a\ntax demerger must be in the form of issuance of shares by\nthe resulting company to the shareholders of the demerged\ncompany. The resulting company is not allowed to\ndischarge the purchase consideration through payment of\ncash.\nE. Explanation 3 and 7A to Section 43(1) and sixth\nproviso of Section 32(1) invoked

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. SARVAPRIYA LEASING PVT. LTD. , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue bearing ITA No 3108/Mum/2023 is dismissed

section 69A of the Act & Rs.1,42,09,910/- u/s 69C of the Act on the ground that assessee had received cash over and above the agreement value on sale of flats and brokerage paid in cash respectively. The Ld. AO observed that assessee has failed to explain the contents on loose papers or produce documentary evidence of payment

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI., MUMBAI vs. SARVAPRIYA LEASING PVT. LTD. , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue bearing ITA No 3108/Mum/2023 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Account Member & Shri Anikesh Banerjeedeputy Commissioner Of Vs Saarrthi Reality & Infra Llp, 2Nd Floor, Geetai Sankul, Paud Road, Income-Tax, Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai Kothrud, Pune, Pin-411037 Room No. 1928, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Pan: Acmfs8187L Mumbai-400021 Appellant Respondent - A.Y. 2019-20 - A.Y. 2018-19

section 69A of the Act & Rs.1,42,09,910/- u/s 69C of the Act on the ground that assessee had received cash over and above the agreement value on sale of flats and brokerage paid in cash 15 ITA 3106,3108 & 3109/Mum /2023 Saarrthi Reality and Infra LLP & Others respectively. The Ld. AO observed that assessee has failed to explain