ISLAND STAR MALL DEVELOPES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

250 of the Act. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common, identical and interlinked, hence they are clubbed, heard and a consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up ITA No. 2246/Mum/2023, A.Y 2012-13 as lead case and the facts narrated. The Assessee has raised the fallowing grounds of appeal

ISLAND STAR MALL DEVELOPES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

250 of the Act. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common, identical and interlinked, hence they are clubbed, heard and a consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up ITA No. 2246/Mum/2023, A.Y 2012-13 as lead case and the facts narrated. The Assessee has raised the fallowing grounds of appeal

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S ISLAND STAR MALL DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

250 of the Act. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common, identical and interlinked, hence they are clubbed, heard and a consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up ITA No. 2246/Mum/2023, A.Y 2012-13 as lead case and the facts narrated. The Assessee has raised the fallowing grounds of appeal

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S ISLAND STAR MALL DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

250 of the Act. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common, identical and interlinked, hence they are clubbed, heard and a consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up ITA No. 2246/Mum/2023, A.Y 2012-13 as lead case and the facts narrated. The Assessee has raised the fallowing grounds of appeal

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S ISLAND STAR MALL DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

250 of the Act. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common, identical and interlinked, hence they are clubbed, heard and a consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up ITA No. 2246/Mum/2023, A.Y 2012-13 as lead case and the facts narrated. The Assessee has raised the fallowing grounds of appeal

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANAI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

house property made in the order were in respect of the items and issues that were settled in the original assessment and therefore were not the subject matter of the special assessment u/s 153A c) your appellant prays that the addition of ₹ 227,625/– be deleted from the total income of the assessee as assessed by the learned

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. CY CIT-CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

house property made in the order were in respect of the items and issues that were settled in the original assessment and therefore were not the subject matter of the special assessment u/s 153A c) your appellant prays that the addition of ₹ 227,625/– be deleted from the total income of the assessee as assessed by the learned

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANAI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

house property made in the order were in respect of the items and issues that were settled in the original assessment and therefore were not the subject matter of the special assessment u/s 153A c) your appellant prays that the addition of ₹ 227,625/– be deleted from the total income of the assessee as assessed by the learned

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

house property made in the order were in respect of the items and issues that were settled in the original assessment and therefore were not the subject matter of the special assessment u/s 153A c) your appellant prays that the addition of ₹ 227,625/– be deleted from the total income of the assessee as assessed by the learned

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

house property made in the order were in respect of the items and issues that were settled in the original assessment and therefore were not the subject matter of the special assessment u/s 153A c) your appellant prays that the addition of ₹ 227,625/– be deleted from the total income of the assessee as assessed by the learned

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

house property made in the order were in respect of the items and issues that were settled in the original assessment and therefore were not the subject matter of the special assessment u/s 153A c) your appellant prays that the addition of ₹ 227,625/– be deleted from the total income of the assessee as assessed by the learned

ISLAND STAR MALL DEVELOPES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(3)(1), MUMBAI

Section 24\nDeduction u/s 24(a) @ 30% NVA (Standard deduction)\nDeduction u/s\nborrowed\n24(b) on account of interest on\nAmount\nXXXX\nXXXX\nXXXX\nXXXX\nXXXX\nIncome from house property\nXXXX\n11. The Ld.AR explained that the revenue authorities has\naccepted the method of offering of rental income for the\nA.Y.2016-17 to A.Y.2021-22, where the assessee has offered\nrental income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S ISLAND STAR MALL DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the\nappeal filed by the revenue is dismissed\n35

House Property' and common area maintenance charges under 'Income from Business'. Deductions would be allowed accordingly. The Tribunal also addressed grounds related to brought forward book losses, interest expenses, and set-off of interest income on fixed deposits.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "Sec 250

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ISLAND STAR MALL DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LTD, MUMBAI

house property' and common area maintenance charges under 'Income from business'. The AO was directed to allow deductions incurred wholly and exclusively for earning income. The appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "Sec. 250