Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat mumbai Page 7 of about 2,049 results (0.174 seconds)

Jul 16 2008 (TRI)

Shri Nandlal M. Gandhi Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. Since there was a difference of opinion between the Ld. Members constituting "E" Bench of I.T.A.T., Mumbai in respect of the aforesaid appeal, I was nominated as Third Member by the Hon'ble President, I.T.A.T. Under Section 255(4) of I.T. Act, 1961. The question referred to me reads as under: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order Under Section 158BC made by the assessing officer is time barred within the meaning of Section 158BE of the Act? 2. The issue before the Tribunal was whether the block assessment order dated 30.9.1999 passed Under Section 158BC was barred by limitation in terms of Section 158BE of the Act. The admitted facts of the .case are that a search & seizure operation under warrant of authorization issued Under Section 132 was carried out at the residential premises of the assessee at 7.30 p.m. on 28.7.1997 and continued till 2.30 a.m. on 29.7.1997. During the said search, certain incriminating materials which, inter alia, included ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 08 2008 (TRI)

Jashan Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. ITA No. 790/Mum/06 is an appeal by the assessee white ITA No.644/Mum/06 is an appeal by the revenue. Both these appeals are directed against the order dated 21/11/2005 of learned CIT (A)-IV, Mumbai relating to A.Y. 2002-03.2. First, we shall take up for consideration the appeal by the assessee. Ground No. 3, 4 & 5 raised by the assessee is with regard to computation of deduction Under Section 80HHC after reducing deduction Under Section 80IA of the Act in view of the provisions of Section 801A(9) of the Act.8. The Assessing Officer determined the amount of deduction allowable to the assessee Under Section 80HHC at Rs. 86,11,472/-. The assessee was also entitled to claim deduction Under Section 80IA of the Act and this was determined by the Assessing Officer at a sum of Rs. 32,03,747/-. While computing total income, the assessing Officer reduced from the figure of deduction allowable Under Section 80HHC as determined by him the deduction that was allowed to the assessee Under Se...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 2008 (TRI)

Acit Vs. Bright Star Investment Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. These appeals are preferred by the Revenue on common ground that the CIT (A) has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to treat the profit on sale of shares under the head long term capital gain, where as the Assessing Officer had segregated the capital gain income as shown by the assessee in the return of income into business income and capital gain for the detailed reasons given by him in the assessment order.2. Since, these appeals were heard together, we prefer to adjudicate them by this consolidated order. Since the facts of both the appeals are on common, we take up the facts of the case in ITA. No.6374/Mum/2004 in order to understand the issue involved and also to adjudicate it.2.1. The facts in brief borne out from the Orders of the lower authorities in ITA. No. 6374/Mum/2004 are that the assessee in the return of income had shown long term capital gain on sale of shares of Rs. 4,85,30,780/- for which statement of working of long term capital gain was attached with the r...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 2008 (TRI)

Mahindra Holdings and Finance Vs. Dcit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. In the light of majority view, it is held that provisions of Section 67A of the I.T. Act can be invoked for computing total income of the assessee, as the word in the parenthesis in Section 67A of the I.T. Act qualifies the expression "association of persons or body of individuals" and not the member of such AOP or BOI. Accordingly, the assessee succeeds in this ground No. 3 in ITA No. 5319 of 2004....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 12 2008 (TRI)

Minnow Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal by the assessee for the Assessment year 2003-04 is directed against the order of CIT(A). The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: 1. The ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the assessment of Rs. 19857604/- in the hands of the appellant, which is opposed to the facts and circumstances and his order is contrary to established law. 2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant had the right to receive interest at 18 % per annum on the capital contributed. 3. Such a right is based on unstated and unspecified accounting practices and legal principles and is not sustainable as all accounting practices and legal principles are contrary thereto. 4. The ld. Assessing Officer has assessed Rs. 19857604/-under the head "Profit from Business" under Section 28(v) rws 5(1)(c) - since no business was carried on, the application of Section 28(v) does not arise. 5. Both under the Partnership Act and under Clauses 7 & 8 of the partnership deed, the interest is a charge in...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 2008 (TRI)

The Ito Vs. Lotia Court Co-op. Housing

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. This appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of CIT(A)-XX, Mumbai dated 02/05/2005 relating to Assessment Year 2003-04 and arises out of the assessment completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. The only issue raised by the Revenue in its appeal is against the computation of Capital Gains.3. Mr. Manish Mishra, Departmental Representative appeared for the Revenue and Mr. Prakash K. Jotwani, learned Counsel appeal for the assessee and put forward their contentions.4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Registered Society consisting of 11 members. The assessee society was entitled to receive certain TDR from the Municipal Corporation of Mumbai, as per which additional floors could be constructed on the existing building.The said right to receive TDR was assigned to a Builder by the members of the society for the purpose of repairing the said building. The assessee entered into an agreement with the developer wherein ...

Tag this Judgment!

May 30 2008 (TRI)

Mahindra Holdings and Finance Vs. Dcit and Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. As there was difference of opinion between the Members constituting the Bench, the hon'ble President, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has nominated me to express my opinion on the following point of difference: Whether provisions of Section 67A of the I.T. Act, 1961 can be invoked for computing total income of the assessee, who is a company, is a member of association of persons or body of individual, wherein the shares of the members are determinate and known? 2. The facts relevant to the question mentioned above, arc in short compass. The assessee was a member of an Association of Persons (AOP) namely, India Auto Ancillary Trust (IAAT). The said AOP declared loss for the year under consideration and the share of loss in the hands of the assessee was computed at Rs. 12,89,911/- being 7.69% of the total loss since the stake of the assessee in the AOP was 7.69%. The assessee claimed the set off for the above share of loss against the income computed under other heads. Such claim was m...

Tag this Judgment!

May 23 2008 (TRI)

Mrs. Mudra G. Nanavati Vs. the Dcit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. The assessee and revenue are in cross appeals against the order of ld. CIT(A) Cen VII, dated 26/11/03 passed for the block period starting from 1/4/90 and ending on 24/8/2000.2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the very outset pointed out that in Ground No. 1 assessee has pleaded that notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was not issued within 12-months from the date assessee has filed the return. Therefore, as per the proviso appended to Section 143(2) the A O is precluded to pass the impugned order under Section 158BC of the A O. The assessment order deserves to be declared as null and void and not sustainable in law. The Ld. Counsel for the assesses while taking us through the facts submitted that a search under Section 132 of the Act was conducted at the residential premises of the assessee on 24/8/2000. It was concluded on 3/10/2000. A notice under Section 158BC was issued on 1/2/01. This was served upon the assessee on 10/2/01. In response to the notice assessee has field...

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2008 (TRI)

income Tax Officer Vs. Issardas V. Talreja

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2008)117TTJ(Mum.)117

1. This is an appeal, filed by the Revenue, against the order of the learned CIT(A), Mumbai. dt. 16th Sept., 2003 for the asst. yr. 2001-02.2. In this appeal, the Revenue is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in deleting addition of Rs. 7 lakhs made by the AO under Section 68 of the Act.3. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee showed that he had received a gift of Rs. 7 lakhs from one Shri Vishambardas Daryani. The AO required the assessee to explain the same and also recorded his statement under Section 131 of the Act. The assessee filed the confirmatory letter of the donor, xerox copy of the passport of the donor, copy of the deed of gift and copy of the concerned bank to prove the genuineness of the transaction. The AO, based upon the statement of the donee, i.e., assessee inferred that it was not a case of genuine gift particularly when the assessee had himself agreed to offer the same as income. Accordingly, he added the same to the total income of the assessee....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 2008 (TRI)

The Marwar Textiles (Agency) Pvt. Vs. the Ito-5(2)(3)

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

1. Though various grounds have been raised by the assessee but the effective ground is one i.e., whether charges received by the assessee from different parties on account of user of the property owned by the assessee are assessable under the "income from house property" or under head "profits and gains from business or profession".2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee is the owner of an immovable property situated at Pedder Road, Mumbai. This property, as per the assessee, was initially used for the purpose of its business of textile. However, on discontinuance of the said business, the company decided to allow the use of the property to other persons along with facilities like telephone etc., as per resolution dated 15.12.1993.Subsequently, the said premises was allowed to be used by various companies of assessee's group w.e.f. 1.4.1994 at a fixed monthly charge provided in the agreement. The copy of agreement with West Coast Paper Mills Ltd., is placed on record. It is...

Tag this Judgment!


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