ACIT v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority

SHIVAJI S DESAI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(3)4, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessment order is quashed and the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthy: A.Y : 2009-10 Shivaji S. Desai Vs. Income Tax Officer – 22(3)(4), Sagar Darshan Chs, Tower No. 2, Mumbai. (Respondent) Flat No. 1001, 10Th Floor, Sector-18, Nerul (W), Navi Mumbai. (Appellant) Pan : Affpd3240K Appellant By : Shri Prakash Pandit Respondent By : Shri Abhijeet Chaudhary & Shri Mehul Jain Date Of Hearing : 17/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/09/2022

…2016) 47 CCH 0603 Asr Trib; iii) Chandra Agencies vs Income Tax Officer, 89 ITD Page 1 ; iv) CIT vs Kishan Chand, 328 ITR 173 (P&H); v) Travancore Diagnostics P. Ltd. vs ACIT, 390 ITR 167 (Ker); and, vi) ACIT vs Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, 379 ITR 14 (All). 5. Per contra, Shri Abhijeet Chaudhary & Shri Mehul Jain representing the Department vehemently defended the contents of the Affidavit filed by the Assessing Officer. The ld. DR submitted that effort was made to serve the assessee on the address, i.e. Shop no. 3/4, Plot No. C-10, Shiv Parvati, Sector- 10, Nerul (W), Navi Mumbai. The notice…

MUKAND LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Blem/S. Mukund Limited V. Dy. Cit-3(2)(1) Aayakar Bhavan Bajaj Bhavan, 3Rd Floor M.K. Road 226 Nariman Point New Marine Lines Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aaacm5008R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kirit Kamdar Department By : Shri Ajay K. Ojha

…ted submits that there is no direction in the order sheet for issue of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. Learned Counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of ACIT v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority [379 ITR 14] submits that it is mandatory requirement for initiation of assessment proceedings to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act and in the absence of issue of notice u/s.143(2) the assessment made u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 is invalid and void ab-initio. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT v. Geno Pharmaceuti…

SAKUN GEMS,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

…see submits that there is no direction in the order sheet for issue of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. Learned Counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of ACIT v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority [379 ITR 14] submits that it is mandatory requirement for initiation of assessment proceedings to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act and in the absence of issue of notice u/s.143(2) the assessment made u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 is invalid and void ab-initio. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT v. Geno Pharmaceuti…

SAKUN GEMS,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

…see submits that there is no direction in the order sheet for issue of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. Learned Counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of ACIT v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority [379 ITR 14] submits that it is mandatory requirement for initiation of assessment proceedings to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act and in the absence of issue of notice u/s.143(2) the assessment made u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 is invalid and void ab-initio. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT v. Geno Pharmaceuti…

SHUMBHLAXMI DYETEX P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 3(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Ld. Cit(A). Thus Assessee Request To Raise This Legal Point As Additional Ground.

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFOREHON’BLE SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM& HON’BLE SH.RAMIT KOCHAR, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3256/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ACIT Cen Cir 3(3) ShubhlaxmiDyetex Pvt. R. No. 401, Aayakar Ltd. Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 401/A, Oberoi Chambers, बिधम/ New Link Road, Opp- Vs. SAB TV office, Andheri(W), Mumbai-400 053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AADCS3613D (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant Ms. HemaKataria,AR : by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 27.06.2019 Date of Hea…

RAMESH SALECHA HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO 14(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

…see submits that there is no direction in the order sheet for issue of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. Learned Counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of ACIT v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority [379 ITR 14] submits that it is mandatory requirement for initiation of assessment proceedings to issue notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act and in the absence of issue of notice u/s.143(2) the assessment made u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 is invalid and void ab-initio. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT v. Geno Pharmaceuti…