(1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT v. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd.

242 ITR 490High Court2000#2210 most cited

What is (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT v. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. authority for?

A valid order for revision under Section 263 requires the Commissioner to expressly find that the Assessing Officer's order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. An assessment order becomes erroneous if the Assessing Officer fails to conduct proper or meaningful inquiry.

52

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. · Section 263 · revision under Section 263 · erroneous and prejudicial to revenue · inadequate enquiry · lack of enquiry by AO · Commissioner revisionary powers · valid order Section 263 · short levy of tax · AO's failure to make addition

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 263Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 10Section 11

Issues it is cited on

prejudicial to interest of revenuerevision u/s 263faceless assessment schemeinadequate enquirymalabar industrialrevision under section 263lack of enquirysection 263(1)erroneous and prejudicialsection 119faceless assessmentcomplete scrutiny

Judgments citing (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT v. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd.

Nitson & Amitsu Private Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 160/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…CIT, the order should be written more elaborately.—Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 1 : (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC), Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 1975 CTR (Del) 61 : (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT vs. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 490 (Mad), CWT vs. Prithvi Raj & Co. (1991) 98 CTR (Del) 216 : (1993) 199 ITR 424 (Del) and J.P. Srivastava& Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 326 (All) relied on. (Paras 6 & 7) In the entire order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is obser…

Ravish Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 47/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…CIT, the order should be written more elaborately.—Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 1 : (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC), Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 1975 CTR (Del) 61 : (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT vs. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 490 (Mad), CWT vs. Prithvi Raj & Co. (1991) 98 CTR (Del) 216 : (1993) 199 ITR 424 (Del) and J.P. Srivastava& Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 326 (All) relied on. (Paras 6 & 7) In the entire order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is 27 I.…

Rachit Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 46/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…CIT, the order should be written more elaborately.—Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 1 : (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC), Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 1975 CTR (Del) 61 : (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT vs. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 490 (Mad), CWT vs. Prithvi Raj & Co. (1991) 98 CTR (Del) 216 : (1993) 199 ITR 424 (Del) and J.P. Srivastava& Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 326 (All) relied on. (Paras 6 & 7) In the entire order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is 27 I.…

Jaikishan Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 45/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…CIT, the order should be written more elaborately.—Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 1 : (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC), Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 1975 CTR (Del) 61 : (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT vs. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 490 (Mad), CWT vs. Prithvi Raj & Co. (1991) 98 CTR (Del) 216 : (1993) 199 ITR 424 (Del) and J.P. Srivastava& Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 326 (All) relied on. (Paras 6 & 7) In the entire order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is 27 I.…

Reeta Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 44/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…CIT, the order should be written more elaborately.—Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 1 : (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC), Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 1975 CTR (Del) 61 : (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT vs. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 490 (Mad), CWT vs. Prithvi Raj & Co. (1991) 98 CTR (Del) 216 : (1993) 199 ITR 424 (Del) and J.P. Srivastava& Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 326 (All) relied on. (Paras 6 & 7) In the entire order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is 27 I.…

Gopichand Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 43/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…CIT, the order should be written more elaborately.—Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 1 : (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC), Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 1975 CTR (Del) 61 : (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT vs. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 490 (Mad), CWT vs. Prithvi Raj & Co. (1991) 98 CTR (Del) 216 : (1993) 199 ITR 424 (Del) and J.P. Srivastava& Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 326 (All) relied on. (Paras 6 & 7) In the entire order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is 27 I.…

Pravesh Kumar Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 42/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…CIT, the order should be written more elaborately.—Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 1 : (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC), Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 1975 CTR (Del) 61 : (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT vs. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 490 (Mad), CWT vs. Prithvi Raj & Co. (1991) 98 CTR (Del) 216 : (1993) 199 ITR 424 (Del) and J.P. Srivastava& Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 326 (All) relied on. (Paras 6 & 7) In the entire order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is 27 I.…

Ritin Lakhmani, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT - 10, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 41/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…CIT, the order should be written more elaborately.—Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 1 : (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC), Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 1975 CTR (Del) 61 : (1975) 99 ITR 375 (Del), CIT vs. Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 490 (Mad), CWT vs. Prithvi Raj & Co. (1991) 98 CTR (Del) 216 : (1993) 199 ITR 424 (Del) and J.P. Srivastava& Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. vs. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 326 (All) relied on. (Paras 6 & 7) In the entire order emphasis laid by the CIT is that in respect of four issues mentioned by him, no queries were raised by the AO. On this premise, though it is 27 I.…

Kaushal Kishore Bihani, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-45(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 690/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “ए” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH VIRTUAL COURT “A” KOLKATA Before Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kaushal Kishore Bihani Income Tax Officer, बनाम 75, Dhandevi Khanna Road, Ward-45(1), 3, Govt. / Phool Bagan, Nr. India Gas V/s. Place (West), Kolkata-001 Office,Kolkata-700 054 [PAN No.ADHPB 6485 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri S.M.Surana, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 28-09-2020 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date…

Electronics Corporation of India Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 957/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri C.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 263Section 36(1)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Dy. Commissioner 674/Hyd/2016 2011-12 Electronics of Income Tax, Corporation of India Circle-2(2), Ltd., HYDERABAD HYDERABAD Asst. Commissioner 957/Hyd/2018 2011-12 [PAN: AAACE4809L] of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), HYDERABAD For Assessee : Shri C.Subramanyam, AR For Revenue : Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 02-03-2020 Date of Pronouncement : 22-07-2020 O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, A.M. : The assessee h…

Electronics Corporation of India Ltd., Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 674/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri C.Subramanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 263Section 36(1)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Dy. Commissioner 674/Hyd/2016 2011-12 Electronics of Income Tax, Corporation of India Circle-2(2), Ltd., HYDERABAD HYDERABAD Asst. Commissioner 957/Hyd/2018 2011-12 [PAN: AAACE4809L] of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), HYDERABAD For Assessee : Shri C.Subramanyam, AR For Revenue : Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 02-03-2020 Date of Pronouncement : 22-07-2020 O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, A.M. : The assessee h…

Pushpa Devi Sonthalia, Kolkata vs. Principal CIT, Kolkata - 2, Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 958/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A”, KOLKATA BEFORE SH. S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. A.L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2013-14] vs Pushpa Devi Sonthalia, Principal Commissiner of 4th Floor, Room No. 291, Income Tax, R. N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-2, Kolkata-700 001. Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, PAN- ALCPS 0321 F Kolkata-700 107. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. A.K. Tibrewal, FCA & Sh. Amit Agarwal, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Ram Bilash Meena, CIT. Date of Hearing 15.01.2020 Date of Pronouncement 10.06.2020 ORDER PER SH. S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This asse…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1764/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…5 Taxman 127 (SC), Shree 3. Manjunathesware Packing Products & Camphor Works vs CIT (1998) 231 ITR 53 (SC) 4. CIT Vs Harsh J Punjabi [2012] 27 Taxmann.com 175 (Delhi) /[2012] 345 ITR 451 (Delhi) 5. CIT V. Sheshasayee paper and Boards Ltd [2000] 108 Taxman 464/242 ITR 490 (Mad.) 6. Shankar Tradex Pvt Ltd Vs PCIT (ITA No. 2999/Del/2017) 4 2008- Regarding option Insufficient 1. Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd v. 09 money, it is to Query- CIT [2000] 109 Taxman 66/243 mention that Option Nature of ITR 83 (Supreme Court) Money is the annual receipt not 2. Adi. CIT v. Gee Vee premium received in examined Enterprises [1975] 9…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1763/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…5 Taxman 127 (SC), Shree 3. Manjunathesware Packing Products & Camphor Works vs CIT (1998) 231 ITR 53 (SC) 4. CIT Vs Harsh J Punjabi [2012] 27 Taxmann.com 175 (Delhi) /[2012] 345 ITR 451 (Delhi) 5. CIT V. Sheshasayee paper and Boards Ltd [2000] 108 Taxman 464/242 ITR 490 (Mad.) 6. Shankar Tradex Pvt Ltd Vs PCIT (ITA No. 2999/Del/2017) 4 2008- Regarding option Insufficient 1. Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd v. 09 money, it is to Query- CIT [2000] 109 Taxman 66/243 mention that Option Nature of ITR 83 (Supreme Court) Money is the annual receipt not 2. Adi. CIT v. Gee Vee premium received in examined Enterprises [1975] 9…

Mr. Pranjal Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT-2, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1357/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.H. Talati, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT-D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…without enquiry - Can it be revised - Failure of the Assessing Officer to make an enquiry before granting deduction would render the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue - C/T VS Seshasayee Paper & Boards Ltd. [2000J 108 Taxman 464/242 ITR 490 (Mad.). (ii) Where the Assessing Officer had accepted entry in the statement of accounted by the assessee showing certain income as agricultural income, without making any enquiry, the exercise of jurisdiction by the Commissioner u/s 263(1) would be justified- Ma/abar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs CIT [2000] 109 Taxman 66/243 ITR 89 (SC). Where the Asse…

Gumpro Drilling Fluids Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 15, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2868/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Gumpro Drilling Fluids Vs Pr. Cit-15, Private Limited, Room No.517, 5Th Floor, Opp. Karma Stambha, Aayakar Bhavan, Hazarat Compound, Lbs M. K. Road, Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400083 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aadcg2319N "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Ashok J. Patil राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri L.K.S. Dahiya Cit-Dr

Section 120Section 144ASection 263Section 35

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,जी,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “G”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी रिमत कोचर, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ramit Kochar, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2013-14 Gumpro Drilling Fluids vs Pr. CIT-15, Private Limited, Room No.517, 5th Floor, Opp. Karma Stambha, Aayakar Bhavan, Hazarat Compound, LBS M. K. Road, Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400083 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No.AADCG2319N "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Ashok J. Patil राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue b…

The J.K. Trust Bombay, Mumbai vs. CIT (E), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3769/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S The J. K. Trust Cit (Exemption) Bombay, R. No.617, 6Th Floor, बनाम/ New Hind House, Piramal Chambers, Vs. Narottam Morrjee Marg, Lalbaug, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400001

Section 11Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘जे’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s The J. K. Trust CIT (Exemption) Bombay, R. No.617, 6th Floor, बनाम/ New Hind House, Piramal Chambers, Vs. Narottam Morrjee Marg, Lalbaug, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400001 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No. AAATT0611L "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Rakesh Mohan राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri…

Maharashtra Airport Development, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 3, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3741/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Maharashtra Airport Pr. Cit-3, Development Company 612, 6Th Floor, बनाम/ Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 8Th Floor, World Trade M. K. Road, Centre, Tower No.1, Mumbai-400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aadcm9623M

Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘बी’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘B’ MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s Maharashtra Airport Pr. CIT-3, Development Company 612, 6th Floor, बनाम/ Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 8th Floor, World Trade M. K. Road, Centre, Tower No.1, Mumbai-400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No. AADCM9623M "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Salil Kapoor & Shri Sumit Lalchand…

Manoir Petro India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 1, Mumbai

ITA 2626/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010-11 Manoir Petro India Limited, Pr. Cit-1 602, B-Wing, Universal Room No.387, बनाम/ Business Park, Chandivali 3Rd Floor, Vs. Farm Road, Off Saki Vihar Aayakar Bhavan, Road, Andheri (East), M. K. Road, Mumbai-400072 Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aafcm5210J

Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘आई’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “I”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथ, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri JOGINDER SINGH, Judicial Member, and Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2010-11 Manoir Petro India Limited, Pr. CIT-1 602, B-Wing, Universal Room No.387, बनाम/ Business Park, Chandivali 3rd Floor, Vs. Farm Road, Off Saki Vihar Aayakar Bhavan, Road, Andheri (East), M. K. Road, Mumbai-400072 Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. AAFCM5210J 2 Manoir Petro India Limited ITA No.2626/Mum…

Saigal Sea Trade, Mumbai vs. CIT -18, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2511/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Saigal Sea Trade, Cit-18, J.V. House, 02Nd Floor, D.S. Piramal Chambers, बनाम/ Babrekar Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400028 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaafs6920K

Section 142(1)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,‘ई’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘E’ MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s Saigal Sea Trade, CIT-18, J.V. House, 02nd Floor, D.S. Piramal Chambers, बनाम/ Babrekar Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400028 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No. AAAFS6920K "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Jitendra Jain Shri Manjunatha Swamy-CIT राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by 07/05/2018 सुनवाई…