14 M/s Greatship (India) Ltd. v. ACIT, 5(1)(1) Court

398 ITR 645High Court#16206 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153Section 153(2)Section 153(4)

Issues it is cited on

transfer pricing adjustmentdispute resolution panelfinal assessment orderdraft assessment orderincome from other sourcestransfersection 143section 14section 143(3)indiatotal incomebusiness

Judgments citing 14 M/s Greatship (India) Ltd. v. ACIT, 5(1)(1) Court

GANESAN KANNAN,THOOTHUKUDI vs. ITI, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD, THOOTHUKUDI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 698/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 698/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Gandhi, Addl. CIT
Section 144C(1)Section 144C(8)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…order which is according to the directions of the learned dispute resolution panel. The above provisions also contained the separate time limits and it has its own timelines which binds the revenue as well as the assessee. The honourable Madras High Court in 398 ITR 645 (2017) CIT vs. Sanmina SCI India private limited in para number 7 has held that provisions of section 144C is a self-contained code in itself. Thus, the provisions contained therein only determine the timelines of the passing of such order and not as provided u/s 153 of the Act. 4.8) The Department submits that as the provisions of section 144C i…

ZENSAR TECHNOLOGIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 8870/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआअसं.8870/मुं/2010 (िन.व. 2006-07) M/S. Zensar Technologies Ltd., Magnet House, 2Nd Floor, N.M.Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacf- 0742- K ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Dcit-2(3), 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar- CIT DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14A

…iction while passing the final assessment order in making adjustment which was not subject matter before the DRP. To support his submissions the ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs. Sanmina SCI India Pvt. Ltd., 398 ITR 645 (Madras). 8 (II) PCIT VS. Woco Motherson Advanced Rubber Technologies Ltd., Tax Appeal No.129 of 2017 decided on 20/06/2017 by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court. 5.4 The ld. Counsel for the assessee further pointed that the Assessing Officer erred in adjusting unabsorbed depreciation of non-eligible undertaking against the income of undertaking eligib…

M/S GREATSHIP (INDIA) LTD ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMM.OF INCOME TAX 5(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2422/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Greatship (India) Vs. Assistant Commissioner Ltd., C/O, Kalyaniwalla Of Income Tax -5(1)(1) Mistry Llp, Esplanade Room No. 568, Aayakar House, 29, Hazarimal Bhavan, M.K. Road, Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcg8542K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: M.M. Golvala &For Respondent: Asif Karmali
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 928Section 92C

…such adjustment can be made in the final assessment order by the AO. In this regard, the ld. Counsel has also referred decision of Hon’ble High P a g e | 14 M/s Greatship (India) Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 5(1)(1) Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sanmina SCI India (P) Ltd. (398 ITR 645) Madras HC) and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Woco Motherson Advances Rubber Technologies Ltd. (406 ITR 375) (Gujarat HC) and Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Appollo Tyres Ltd. Vs. CIT (255 ITR 273) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. HCL Comnet System & Services Ltd. (305 ITR 409) (SC). 16. Hear…

M/S PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 2298/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2020AY 2011-2012

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Pricewaterhouse Coopers Private Limited……...............................……………………......Appellant Block-Ep, Plot –Y14 Salt Lake City Sector-V Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan : Aabcp 9181 H] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata……..........................…....Appellant Appearances By: Shri Kanchun Kaushal, A/R & Shri Bikash Kr. Jain, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Vijay Shankar, Cit, D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 25Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 29Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 144C(13)

…wn timelines which binds the revenue as well as the assessee. The honourable Madras timelines which binds the revenue as well as the assessee. The honourable Madras timelines which binds the revenue as well as the assessee. The honourable Madras High Court in 398 ITR 645 (2017) CIT vs Sanmina SCI India private limited in High Court in 398 ITR 645 (2017) CIT vs Sanmina SCI India private limited in High Court in 398 ITR 645 (2017) CIT vs Sanmina SCI India private limited in para number 7 has held that it is a self para number 7 has held that it is a self-contained code in itself. Thus, the contained code in itself.…

RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1763/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…order which is according to the directions of the learned dispute resolution panel. The above provisions also contained the separate time limits and it has its own timelines which binds the revenue as well as the assessee. The honourable Madras High Court in 398 ITR 645 (2017) CIT vs Sanmina SCI India private limited in para number 7 has held that it is a self-contained code in itself. Thus , the provisions contained therein only determine the timelines of the passing of such order and not as provided u/s 153 of the act. Thus this argument of the assessee deserves to be rejected. 13. Further according to the pro…

M/S RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…order which is according to the directions of the learned dispute resolution panel. The above provisions also contained the separate time limits and it has its own timelines which binds the revenue as well as the assessee. The honourable Madras High Court in 398 ITR 645 (2017) CIT vs Sanmina SCI India private limited in para number 7 has held that it is a self-contained code in itself. Thus , the provisions contained therein only determine the timelines of the passing of such order and not as provided u/s 153 of the act. Thus this argument of the assessee deserves to be rejected. 13. Further according to the pro…