44 ITR 529 (SC); CIT v. Mohanlal Ranchhodas

BHARAT SOLANKI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

…igh Court upheld additions where transactions\nlacked transparency, reinforcing the principle that apparent\ndeficiencies in evidence must be considered in light of\nsurrounding corroborative circumstances.\n\n10.14 In the case of CIT vs Kalpetta Estates Ltd, 211 ITR 635, 78\nТахтап 265, the Hon'ble Kerala HC held as under:\n\n4. What the Bench did was to affirm that the principles of res\njudicata will not apply to income-tax proceedings. Nevertheless,\nthe Tribunal may place reliance on an earlier decision to support\nits conclusion. It could not, therefore, be said that the decision in\nthe assessee's case bef…

BHARAT SOLANKI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

…High Court upheld additions where transactions\nlacked transparency, reinforcing the principle that apparent\ndeficiencies in evidence must be considered in light of\nsurrounding corroborative circumstances.\n10.14 In the case of CIT vs Kalpetta Estates Ltd, 211 ITR 635, 78\nТахтап 265, the Hon'ble Kerala HC held as under:\n4. What the Bench did was to affirm that the principles of res\njudicata will not apply to income-tax proceedings. Nevertheless,\nthe Tribunal may place reliance on an earlier decision to support\nits conclusion. It could not, therefore, be said that the decision in\nthe assessee's case befor…

BHARAT SOLANKI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

…High Court upheld additions where transactions\nlacked transparency, reinforcing the principle that apparent\ndeficiencies in evidence must be considered in light of\nsurrounding corroborative circumstances.\n10.14 In the case of CIT vs Kalpetta Estates Ltd, 211 ITR 635, 78\nТахтап 265, the Hon'ble Kerala HC held as under:\n4. What the Bench did was to affirm that the principles of res\njudicata will not apply to income-tax proceedings. Nevertheless,\nthe Tribunal may place reliance on an earlier decision to support\nits conclusion. It could not, therefore, be said that the decision in\nthe assessee's case befor…

GOLDMAN SACHS (INDIA) SECURITIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the AO stands dismissed

…also be rejected,that the Tribunal order of Temasek(supra)relied upon by the FAA pertained to AY.2007-08 and 2008-09,that same should not be applied to the year under consideration.He placed reliance on the Kerala High Court decision of Kalpetta Estates Ltd.(211 ITR 635)to say that res-judicata did not apply to income-tax proceedings. The AR argued that the issue is directly covered by the order of the Tribunal delivered in the case of Temasek(ITA/7761Mum/2015-AY.2010-11),that ICRA's comparability to companies engaged in Investment Advisory was no longer res-integra,that it had been re-confirmed by the ITAT in t…

AGM INDIA ADVISORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the AO stands dismissed

…also be rejected,that the Tribunal order of Temasek(supra)relied upon by the FAA pertained to AY.2007-08 and 2008-09,that same should not be applied to the year under consideration.He placed reliance on the Kerala High Court decision of Kalpetta Estates Ltd.(211 ITR 635)to say that res-judicata did not apply to income-tax proceedings. The AR argued that the issue is directly covered by the order of the Tribunal delivered in the case of Temasek(ITA/7761Mum/2015-AY.2010-11),that ICRA's comparability to companies engaged in Investment Advisory was no longer res-integra,that it had been re-confirmed by the ITAT in t…

FIL CAPITAL ADVISORS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…ed, these decisions pertained to different assessment years and principles of res judicata does not apply to the income–tax proceedings. For such proposition, he relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in CIT v/s Kalpetta Estates Ltd, [1995] 211 ITR 635 (Ker.). 23. In the rejoinder, the learned Sr. Counsel submitted, the issue is covered by various decisions of the Tribunal in case of the same comparable. As far as applicability of the principle of res judicata and the decision relied upon by the learned Departmental Representative, learned Sr. Counsel submitted, unless new material is placed o…

AGM INDIA ADVISORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/4757/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Agm India Advisors Private Limited Dcit,10-(1),Aayakar Bhavan,M.K. Road, The Grand Hyatt Complex Mumbai-20. Vs. Suite F-11, Santacruz (E).,Mumbai-55. Pan: Aafcm 3354 D आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/4801/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit,14(1)(1),460, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Agm India Advisors Private Limited. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 055. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri N.K. Chand Appellant By: Shri Nishant Thakkar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27.04.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 18.05.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act)

…to consideration, then on same logic, Motilal Oswal should also be included in the list as it had also shown the income from consultancy and so also in other cases also. " The reference made by the DR to the Kerala High Court decision of Kalpetta Estates Ltd.[211 ITR 635] to say that res judicata does not apply to income-tax proceedings is not relevant in the said proceedings as there are no new material placed on records by the DR with regards to the change in functional profile of ICRA or Temasek Holdings Advisors (India) Private Limited. After considering the same arguments the Tribunal had held,as stated earl…

TEMASEK HOLDINGS ADVISORS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 14(3)91), MUMBAI

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

…e Court in the case of New Jahanghir Valal Mills Co. Ltd. vs CIT, reported in [1963] 49 ITR 137 which has been followed in several decisions. He further relied upon a decision of Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. Kalpetta Estates Ltd, reported in [1995] 211 ITR 635 for the proposition that, if a fresh look is necessitated on the existing facts on a closer and more intelligent analysis then a different view can be taken. Thus, here in this case, the comparables chosen by the TPO or his reasons for the exclusion of the comparables chosen by the assessee needs to be examined afresh based on the information and…

J.P. MORGAN SERVICES INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (OSD) 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 J.P. Morgan Services P. Ltd., Dcit (Osd)-8(1) Technopolis Knowledge Park, Mumbai- बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, Mahakali Caves Vs. Road, Chakala Junction, Andheri(E) Mumba-400093 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aabcd0503B

…gn exchange into the country as stipulated u/s 10A(iii) of the Act. He also relied upon the judgment of Distributors (Baroda) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India wherein it was held that mistakes need not be perpetuated. Further reliance was placed on the judgment of 211 ITR 635 for the proposition that intelligent analysis can be made always. 5.2. In reply, Ld. Counsel vehemently opposed these arguments and contended that Ld. CIT-DR has not appreciated the position of law correctly. Reliance has been placed on sub-section (4) of section 10A of the Act contending that this sub-section provides the mechanism to work out…

J.P . MORGAN SERVICES INDIA P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (OSD) 8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 J.P. Morgan Services P. Ltd., Dcit (Osd)-8(1) Technopolis Knowledge Park, Mumbai- बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, Mahakali Caves Vs. Road, Chakala Junction, Andheri(E) Mumba-400093 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aabcd0503B

…gn exchange into the country as stipulated u/s 10A(iii) of the Act. He also relied upon the judgment of Distributors (Baroda) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India wherein it was held that mistakes need not be perpetuated. Further reliance was placed on the judgment of 211 ITR 635 for the proposition that intelligent analysis can be made always. 5.2. In reply, Ld. Counsel vehemently opposed these arguments and contended that Ld. CIT-DR has not appreciated the position of law correctly. Reliance has been placed on sub-section (4) of section 10A of the Act contending that this sub-section provides the mechanism to work out…