Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 2 of about 2,049 results (0.131 seconds)

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

Rajesh R. Karnani, Mumbai Vs. Asst. Cit 12(1)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Sanjay Arora, A. M.: 1. This is a set of three Appeals by the Assessee directed against the Orders by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Mumbai ('CIT(A)' for short), dismissing the assessee's appeals contesting its assessments u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) for three consecutive assessment years (A.Ys.), being AY 2006-07 to 2008-09. The appeals raising common issues, were heard together, and are accordingly being disposed of vide a common, consolidated order. 2. The first issue, raised per ground no. 1 for all the years, is the disallowance of unverifiable cash expenses at 25% of such expenses. The assessee, a Custom House Agent (CHA), providing clearing and forwarding services to his clients, was found during the course of the assessment proceedings to have claimed expenses in cash, i.e., apart from those supported by third party vouchers, per self-made vouchers (at Rs.43,26,193/-). Being, thus, unsubstantiated by evidence, the Revenue, relyin...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

Presterss Wire Industries and Another Vs. Acit-12(1), Mumbai and Anoth ...

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

D. Karunakara Rao, AM: 1. There are four appeals under consideration. Out of four appeals, there are cross appeals for the AY 2007-2008. ITA No. 8418/M/2010 (2007-2008) and ITA No.6312/M/2011 (AY 2008-2009) are filed by the Revenue and ITA No.6005/M/2011 (AY 2008-2009) and CO No.138/M/2012 (AY 2007-2008) are filed by the assessee. Since, the identical issues are involved in all these four appeals, therefore, for the sake of convenience, they are clubbed, heard combinedly and disposed of in this consolidated order. Appeal wise and ground wise adjudication is given in the following paragraphs. 2. Firstly we shall take-up the Revenue appeal filed on 3.12.2010 vide ITA No.8418/M/2010 for the AY 2007-2008 against the order of the CIT (A)-23, Mumbai dated 7.9.2010. In this appeal, Revenue raised the following grounds which read as under: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) erred in directing the AO to allow deduction u/s 80IB of Rs. 8,50,23,349/- in resp...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

Mahindra Lifespace Developers Vs. Asst. Cit, Circle 6(3)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Sanjay Arora, A. M.: 1. These are cross Appeals, i.e., by the Assessee and the Revenue, arising out of the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai ('CIT(A)' for short) dated 30.11.2010, partly allowing the assessee's appeal contesting its assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2007-08 vide order dated 03.12.2009. 2. We may take up the assessee's appeal first, i.e., in the order the two appeals were heard by us. The principal issue arising in the assessee's appeal, projected per its first three grounds, is the head of income under which the hire charges on the operation of a commercial complex, being at Rs.452.32 lacs for the current year, is to be assessed, i.e., either as 'income from house property' or as 'business income'. Explaining the assessee's case, the ld. Authorized Representative (AR), the assessee's counsel, would submit that the issue is covered in the assessee's favour by the decision b...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

Malti R. Bhatia, Mumbai Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1 ...

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The cross appeals for the assessment year 2005 -06 are directed against the impugned order dated 11th January 2010, cross appeals for the assessment year 2006-07, are directed against the impugned order dated 12th February 2010 and cross appeals for the assessment year 2007-08, are directed against the impugned order dated 2nd November 2010, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) -XXVII, Mumbai, for the quantum of assessment passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"). 2. Since the facts, circumstances and the grounds raised by the rival parties in all these cross appeals being common, therefore, as a matter of convenience, these were heard together and are being disposed of Mrs. Malti Rahul Bhatia by way of this consolidated order. However, in order to understand the implications, we first proceed to dispose of the cross appeals for the assessment year 2005-06, narrating the facts as they appear in Revenue's appeal in ITA no.2823/Mum./2010, t...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

Worldwide Media P. Ltd, Mumbai Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Mumb ...

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The appeal preferred by the Revenue for the assessment year 2005-06 is against the impugned order dated 19th May 2009, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XXI, Mumbai, the cross appeals for the assessment year 2006-07 are against the impugned order dated 25th August 2009, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XIII and XIV, Mumbai, cross appeals for the assessment year 2007-08 are against the impugned order 8th February 2011, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-II, Mumbai. The assessee also preferred cross objection, which is arising out of the Revenue's appeal for the assessment year 2005-06. 2. Since the facts and circumstances as well as most of the grounds raised by the either party in their respective appeals and cross objection for all the assessment years under consideration being identical and common, therefore, as a matter of convenience thereof, these were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. 3. We now proceed ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

Givaudan Flavours India P.Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(3)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The present appeals have been preferred by the Revenue challenging the impugned separate orders dated 22nd September 2014, for the assessment year 2002-03 and order dated 22nd December 2012, for the assessment year 2004-05, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-II, Mumbai. The assessee has also raised cross objections which are arising out of the aforesaid appeals preferred by the Revenue. 2. Since the grounds raised by Revenue in its appeals and the grounds raised by the assessee in its cross objections for both the years under appeal are common, therefore, as a matter of convenience, these were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. We first proceed to dispose of the appeals preferred by the Revenue, vide which, following grounds have been raised:- Grounds raised in the assessment year 2002-03 "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to allow dedu...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

The Acit, Cir 4(2) M/S. Harinagar Sugar Mills. Mumbai-. Ltd Vs. World ...

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

DR. S.T.M. Pavalan, JM: 1. This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Ld.CIT(A) -8, Mumbai dated 23.11.2011 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Ground No. 1 relates to the decision of the Ld.CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of deduction of capital subsidy from WDV of Plant and Machinery and the disallowance of proportionate depreciation. 2.1. Briefly stated, the assessee, a company during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, received a subsidy of Rs.4,11,43,000/- under "Bihar Incentive Package, 2006" for undertaking expansion of the capacity ITA No. 772/Mum/2012 from 8500 TCD to 10000TCD. The said scheme was formulated by the Government of Bihar to promote the establishment of new units and for expansion of capacity of existing units. According to the said scheme, 10% subsidy on fixed capital investment (Machinery and Equipments) subject to maximum subsidy upto to Rs. 10 crores was granted in case of ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

Presstress Wire Indsutries Vs. Department of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

D. Karunakara Rao, AM: 1. There are four appeals under consideration. Out of four appeals, there are cross appeals for the AY 2007-2008. ITA No. 8418/M/2010 (2007-2008) and ITA No.6312/M/2011 (AY 2008-2009) are filed by the Revenue and ITA No.6005/M/2011(AY 2008-2009) and CO No.138/M/2012 (AY 2007-2008) are filed by the assessee. Since, the identical issues are involved in all these four appeals, therefore, for the sake of convenience, they are clubbed, heard combinedly and disposed of in this consolidated order. Appeal wise and ground wise adjudication is given in the following paragraphs. 2. Firstly we shall take-up the Revenue appeal filed on 3.12.2010 vide ITA No.8418/M/2010 for the AY 2007-2008 against the order of the CIT (A)-23, Mumbai dated 7.9.2010. In this appeal, Revenue raised the following grounds which read as under: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) erred in directing the AO to allow deduction u/s 80IB of Rs. 8,50,23,349/- in respe...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

M/S. Yash Developers, Mumbai Vs. Department of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

B.R. Mittal, JM. 1. The department has filed these two appeals for assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 against orders of ld. CIT(A) dated 22.11.2010 and dated 16.3.2012 respectively on the following grounds : Grounds of appeal taken by department in this appeal are as under : "1. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the deduction under section 80lB to the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the total commercial space of the assessee's project is 6.12% of the built up area whereas as per clause (d) of the section 80IB(10), inserted w.e.f. 1.4.2005, the maximum commercial space in a project is allowed up to 5% of the built up areas only; 2 I.T.A.No.809/Mum/2011 2. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the deduction under section 80lB to the assessee relying on the judgment of special bench in the case of Brahma and Associates reported in 119 ITD 255, ignoring that ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2014 (TRI)

Underwater Services Co. Vs. Asst. Cit-12 (3)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Sanjay Arora, A. M.: 1. This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Mumbai ('CIT(A)' for short) dated 30.07.2012, dismissing the assessee's appeal contesting its assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2009-10 vide order dated 21.11.2011. 2. The only issue arising in the instant appeal is the confirmation of the disallowance in the sum of Rs.86.40 lacs u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the first appellate authority. The facts in brief are that the assessee is a company engaged in providing under-water services, such as diving; towing; salvaging; underwater marine repairs and maintenance. For the purpose of its operations it hired charter vessels from its sister concern, M/s. Samson Maritime Ltd. (SML), claiming the charter expenses for the year at Rs.441.37 lacs. The same is liable for tax deduction u/s.194-I of the Act. The payee, SML, applied to the Revenue in ...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //