ITAT Mumbai held In the case of ITO vs. M/s. Superline Construction P. Ltd. that the assessee had duly discharged the burden of proof, onus of proof and explained the source of share capital and advances received by established the identity
DCIT VS. Maharashtra State Electricity Board (ITAT MUMBAI) The assessee was entitled to get subsidy @3% from the state government. As per the agreement with WB it was decided that it would get higher subsidy i.e. 4.5 %.
In the case of M/s A.V. Industries vs ACIT, Mumbai Tribunal held that when the assessee shows from the record that the necessary enquiries were made by the AO and the AO had applied his mind and the view adopted by him was one of the possible views
Hema Hiren Dand vs. JCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Merely because the assessee liquidates its investment within a short span of time, which had given better overall earning to the assessee, would not lead to the conclusion that the assessee had no intention to keep on the funds as investor in equity shares
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of Greaves Cotton Ltd. vs. ITO that under the transfer pricing regulations, a comparability analysis is a comparison of a controlled transaction with uncontrolled transaction
ITAT Mumbai held in Reliance gems & Jewels ltd Vs DCIT that the revenue expenditure would be allowed as an expense after the setting up of the business before the commencement of the business. The expense incurred on recruitment of employees gave indication that the business had been set up
ITAT Mumbai held in M/s Hiranandani Builders Vs ITO that the followings receipts were also eligible for deduction u/s 80IA considering the same to be profits from undertakings: 1.Interest on IT refund 2.Other Interest 3. FDR Interest 4. Tender fees
Issue- The Assessing Officer has denied the exemption under section 11/12 to the assessee on the ground that the objects of the assessee Trust have been amended after the grant of Registration under section 12A of the Act without getting itself re-registered
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of M/s. Golden Tobacco Limited (Formerly GTC Industries Limited) vs. The JCIT that the law does not give powers to the AO to reopen an assessment carried out u/s 143(3) after the expiry of four years unless the AO is able to demonstrate that there was failure on the part of the assessee in disclosure of material facts.
ITAT Mumbai held In the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Employees Stock Option Trust vs. ADCIT that the attributes available in the transaction of the assesee trust are unlike that of a trader and are more like that of an investor.
