TATA MOTORS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT LTU 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Price (loss) Index Factor Rs. Rs. TML Holdings Pic Lid - Preference 1 shares 20,48,999 8,36,19,21,837 785/532 11,27,85,37,185 9,15,76,21,933 (2,12,09,15,252) TML Holdings Pte Lid - Preference 2 shares 5,00,000 2,43,18,62,500 785/582

DCIT ,CC- 8(4), MUMBAI vs. ASHOK R. RUIA (HUF), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

transfer of any capital asset from the assessee to MAPL. That is the normal conclusion available on reading the chronology of events in the present case. In order to make a case of capital gains tax, the Assessing Officer is cutting the chain of events into two parts; one part upto 31-3-1999 and the other part after

MEENA HASMUKH SAVLA,MATUNGA MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is\nallowed

69D though he has stated to apply tax rate as\nper section 115BBE.\n\n8. 6. 4. If the inference is drawn that ld. AO has made a\ndisallowance of claim of exemption by the assessee u/s 10(38),\nthen, first and foremost, his statement of applying the rate of\n60% under section 115BBE does not hold good. Further

POOJA MARKETING,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT- 31 , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Us, The Core Issues To Be Decided Are As Under:-

69D of the Act. In a subsequent Circular No. 11/2019 dated 19.6.2019, the CBDT further provided a clarification that an assessee is entitled to claim set-off of loss against income determined u/s. 115BBE of the Act till the Asst Year 2016-17. (xiv) The ld AR further submitted that Section 112 of the Act which was inserted

M/S. TATA INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ITO 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Accoutant Member & Shri Sanjay Gargtata Industries Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bombay House,24,Homi 2 (3) (3), Room No.555, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi 400 001 Karve Road, Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaact 4058 L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By Shri Dinesh Vyas, Ar Respondent By Shri Alok Johri, Dr Date Of Hearing 22-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20-07-2016

69D of the Act are deemed income where entire sum is treated as income without following /applying matching principle (ix) Sec. 14A though included in the Chapter IV of the Act i.e computation of total income but it is having heading as “expenditure incurred in relation to income not includable in total income”. It is therefore to understand the heading

BHANDARI GOLD AND JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIT (APPEAL), NFAC - DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bledcit – 6(1)(2) V. M/S. Bandari Gold & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., 407, Bussaudyog Bhavan Room No. 538B, 5Th Floor Tokersi, Jivraj Road, Sewree Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400015 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcb1291J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BBE are reproduced hereunder: 115BBE. (1) Where the total income ofan assessee,- (a) includes any income referred to in section 68, section 69, section 69A,section 69B, section 69C or section 69D and reflected in the return of income furnished under section 139; or (b) determined by the Assessing Officer includes any income referred to in section 68, section

CY. CIT 6(1) (2) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. BHANDARI GOLD & JEWELLERS PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bledcit – 6(1)(2) V. M/S. Bandari Gold & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., 407, Bussaudyog Bhavan Room No. 538B, 5Th Floor Tokersi, Jivraj Road, Sewree Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400015 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcb1291J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BBE are reproduced hereunder: 115BBE. (1) Where the total income ofan assessee,- (a) includes any income referred to in section 68, section 69, section 69A,section 69B, section 69C or section 69D and reflected in the return of income furnished under section 139; or (b) determined by the Assessing Officer includes any income referred to in section 68, section

LAYER EXPORTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI vs. LAYER EXPORTS P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

LAYER EXPORTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

ACIT CEN CIR 21, MUMBAI vs. LAYER EXPORTS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

LAYER EXPORTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

ACIT CEN CIR 21, MUMBAI vs. LAYER EXPORTS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

LAYER EXPORTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

LAYER EXPORTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

LAYER EXPORTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI vs. LAYER EXPORTS P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

LAYER EXPORTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been

ACIT CEN CIR 24 & 26, MUMBAI vs. LAYER EXPORTS P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and that of the assessee are decided as indicated above against each issue

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri B. R. Baskaran, Am

price was agreed at Rs. 2,37,52,2001- @ Rs. 12,6471- per sq. ft. (built up area). It was also agreed that parking space shall be provided at the time of possession. I further state that agreement for the said flat was executed on 10.10.2008 for total consideration at Rs. 2,37,52,2001-. Details of payments have been