ASST.CIT-32(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NANUBHAI N DESAI, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

unexplained cash credit u/s 68. It is to be noted that the books of account of the appellant are audited and the requisite information as account of the appellant are audited and the requisite information as account of the appellant are audited and the requisite information as certified by an accountant is filed in the audit report in form

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. NANUBHAI N DESAI, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

unexplained cash credit u/s 68. It is to be noted that the books of account of the appellant are audited and the requisite information as account of the appellant are audited and the requisite information as account of the appellant are audited and the requisite information as certified by an accountant is filed in the audit report in form

SHANNO MOHAMMED YUSUF WARSI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-25(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated for furnishing the Act. Penalty

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUM vs. DCIT, CC-2(2), , MUM

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty has not been levied therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being being premature at this stage, the grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the we take

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUM vs. DCIT, CC-2(2),, MUM

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty has not been levied therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being being premature at this stage, the grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the we take

DCIT, CC-2(2), , MUM vs. SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH, MUM

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty has not been levied therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being being premature at this stage, the grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the we take

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC- 2(2), , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty has not been levied therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being being premature at this stage, the grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the we take

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-2(2),, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty has not been levied therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being being premature at this stage, the grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the we take

DCIT, CC-2(2),, MUM vs. SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty has not been levied therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being being premature at this stage, the grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the we take

SHRI NARENDRA S SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CEN CIR-(2), , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

penalty has not been levied therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act therefore proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being being premature at this stage, the grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. grounds raised is dismissed as infructuous. 6. Now, we take up the appeal of the we take

DCIT CC-7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAN INDUSTRIES (I) LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the both the appeal of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

unexplained cash credit. 4. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the submission of On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the submission of On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the submission of the assessee calling for his comment but despite three reminders no the assessee calling for his comment but despite three reminders

DCIT CC 7(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S MAN INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, both the both the appeal of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

unexplained cash credit. 4. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the submission of On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the submission of On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the submission of the assessee calling for his comment but despite three reminders no the assessee calling for his comment but despite three reminders

SMT. HARSH A NITIN THAKKAR,RAIGAD vs. THE DCIT CENT. CIR -3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

unexplained cash credits and charged to tax u/s 68 as the income of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Alternatively, this amount is also chargeable to tax as the undisclosed income or income from undisclosed sources of the assessee for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Penalty proceedings u/s 271

NISHA YOGESH THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

unexplained cash credits and charged to tax u/s 68 as the income of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Alternatively, this amount is also chargeable to tax as the undisclosed income or income from undisclosed sources of the assessee for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Penalty proceedings u/s 271

SMT HARHSA NITIN THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CITI CENT. CIR -3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

unexplained cash credits and charged to tax u/s 68 as the income of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Alternatively, this amount is also chargeable to tax as the undisclosed income or income from undisclosed sources of the assessee for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Penalty proceedings u/s 271

SHRI NITIN POPATLAL THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DY.CITI CENT. CIR -3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

unexplained cash credits and charged to tax u/s 68 as the income of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Alternatively, this amount is also chargeable to tax as the undisclosed income or income from undisclosed sources of the assessee for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Penalty proceedings u/s 271

SHRI YOGESH P. THAKKAR,PANVEL vs. THE DCIT , CC-3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

unexplained cash credits and charged to tax u/s 68 as the income of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Alternatively, this amount is also chargeable to tax as the undisclosed income or income from undisclosed sources of the assessee for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Penalty proceedings u/s 271

SHRI NITIN POPATLAL THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CENT.CIR-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

unexplained cash credits and charged to tax u/s 68 as the income of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Alternatively, this amount is also chargeable to tax as the undisclosed income or income from undisclosed sources of the assessee for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Penalty proceedings u/s 271

DINESHCHANDRA D. CHHAJED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

unexplained cash credits and charged to tax u/s 68 as the income of the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Alternatively, this amount is also chargeable to tax as the undisclosed income or income from undisclosed sources of the assessee for the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2014-2015. Penalty proceedings u/s 271