1. Rajinder Nath Vs. CIT, 120 ITR 14(SC) 2. CIT v. Homi Mehta & Sons Pvt Ltd.

A.C..I.T. CIRCLE-41(4)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI AWADHNARAYAN LAXMINARAYAN SINGH, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

…nal authority cannot give a direction which goes to the extent of conferring upon the AO if he is not lawfully seized of jurisdiction. Section 150 (2) of the Act reads as under • The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rakesh N. Dutt v. Asstt. CIT [2009] 311 ITR 247 has held that :- “once section 150 of the Act is not applicable to the case of the assessee, the reopening of the assessment beyond the period of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year would be time barred.” IV. ISSUE OF NOTICE WAS TIME BARRED The Ld. AO based on tribunals order dated 19.04.2018 had issued notice under section 148…

JAIPRAKASH L. SINGH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 31(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands\nallowed

…may be, was made by reason of any other\nprovision limiting the time within which any action for\nassessment, reassessment or recomputation may be taken.\nRELIANCE PLACED ON:-\n• The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of\nRakesh N. Dutt v.Asstt. CIT [2009] 311 ITR 247\nhas held that (Legal PB Pg. No. 9-12) :-\n“once section 150 of the Act is not applicable to\nthe case of the assessee, the reopening of the\nassessment beyond the period of six years from\nthe end of the relevant assessment year would be\ntime barred.\"\nIV. ISSUE OF NOTICE WAS TIME BARRED\nThe Ld. AO based on tribunals order dated 19.04.2018 ha…

THE JOINT LESSEES OF INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,,MUMBAI vs. ITO 20 (2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the assessee appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Joint Lessees Of Vs. Ito – 20(2)(1), Industrial Estate, Piramal Chambers, 1St Floor, Estate Bldg Ii Floor,Lalbaug, Lalbaug Industrial Mumbai – 400012 Estate, Dr B.A. Road, Mumbai – 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaaj7202Q Appellant .. Respondent Ito – 20(2)(1) Vs. The Joint Lessees Of Piramal Chambers, Industrial Estate, Ii Floor,Lalbaug, 1St Floor, Estate Bldg Mumbai – 400012 Lalbaug Industrial Estate, Dr B.A.Road, Mumbai – 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaaj7202Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant /Respondent By Shri G.P Mehta.Ar : Respondent/Appellant By Shri T. Shankar.Dr : Date Of Hearing 11.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

…le on record. The Ld.AR explained the facts with voluminous information in paper book and relied on the judicial decisions as under: 1. Rajinder Nath Vs. CIT, 120 ITR 14(SC) 2. CIT Vs Homi Mehta & Sons Pvt Ltd 137 ITR 213(Bom). 3. Rakesh Dutt Vs. ACIT & Ors, 311 ITR 247 (Bom). ITA No. 2797 & 3203/Mum/2016 The Joint Lessees of Industrial Estate, Mumbai. 4. Lotus Investment Ltd. V GYWagh ACIT &Ors,288 ITR 459(Bom). 5..AB Parikh V. ITO 203 ITR 186 (Guj.) 14. We considering the facts, information and interpretation on the provisions of law, find reasonableness in the submissions of the Ld.AR duly supported with jud…