ACIT v. Prakash I. Shah

115 ITD 167Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#2233 most cited

What is ACIT v. Prakash I. Shah authority for?

The department cannot improve upon the Assessing Officer's case by changing the basis of additions without issuing a show cause notice to the assessee.

51

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Prakash I. Shah · 115 ITD 167 · ITAT Mumbai · department cannot improve AO's case · change basis of addition · show cause notice · section 143(3) · assessment procedure · appellate authority powers

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153Section 270ASection 271AACSection 274Section 44AA

Issues it is cited on

section 253(2)section 44aasection 57(iii)colourable deviceintangible assetssection 57addition under section 68section 132(1)section 145(3)non-application of mindsection 274share application money

Judgments citing ACIT v. Prakash I. Shah

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Aam Services India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 553/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.553/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 1(1), Pune …. Vs. Aam Services India Pvt. Ltd., 401, Weikfield Info Park, Pune Nagar Road, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pune – 411014 Pan: Aaeca7428H

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri Pramod N. Jadhav
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 154Section 92C

…onceded before us that out of total losses of approximately Rs.62 lakhs, losses to the tune of about Rs.35 lakhs relate to earlier year and the balance losses relate to this year. The Mumbai Special Bench of Tribunal in the case of Prakash L. Shah reported in 115 ITD 167 (SB) had held that gain due to exchange rate difference in the year of receipt on account of earlier exports and allowance of deduction under section 80HHC of the Act in such later year was not sustainable. Following the simile, we hold that while computing PLI for the year under consideration, the loss arising on account of foreign exchange fluc…

Kamladevi S. Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 16(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1957/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Ravish Sood,Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1957/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Kamla Devi S. Doshi The Income Tax Officer Flat No. 410, Shreepati Castle, Ward 16(3)(1), बिधम/ 208/210, 10Thkhetwadi Main Road, Matru Mandir, Nana Chowk Vs. Mumbai 400004 Mumbai 400034 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Affpd7183M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv M. ShahFor Respondent: Shri. Vishwas Mundhe, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

…te proceedings. The ld. A.R in support of his aforesaid contention that the D.R. cannot go beyond the facts recorded in the assessment order, therein relied on the order of the ITAT, Mumbai ‘Special bench’ passed in the case of ACIT Vs. Prakash I. Shah (2008) 115 ITD 167, wherein the special bench had held that the departmental representative while arguing the case cannot transgress the limits demarcated by the A.O. in the assessment order. The ld. D.R further submitted that the ‘Contract notes’ filed by the assessee were absolutely bogus and tailor made. The ld. D.R thus in the backdrop of his aforesaid contenti…

Mckinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 14 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6648/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimckinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Ltd, Circle-16(2) 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, Vatika Business Park, New Delhi Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaccm2356G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Porus KakaFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 144CSection 92C

…McKinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Ltd V DCIT 6648/Del/2016 A Y 2012-13 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I-1”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER McKinsey Knowledge Centre India Pvt. Vs. DCIT, Ltd, Circle-16(2) 3rd Floor, Block-III, Vatika Business Park, New Delhi Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon PAN:AACCM2356G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Porus Kaka, Senior Advocate Shri Dinesh Chawla, Adv Revenue by: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing 19/04/2017 Date of pronouncement 11/05/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Mckinsey Kinowledge Centre India Pvt. Ltd, Gurgaon

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

ITA 499/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mckinsey Knowledge Centre Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, Circle-16(2), Vatika Business Park, New Delhi. Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccm2356G Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Mckinsey Knowledge Circle-16(2), Centre Pvt. Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, New Delhi. Vatika Business Park, Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccm2356G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate & Shri Divesh Chawla, Advocate Department By : Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit, Dr & Shri Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2016 Order Per R.S. Syal, Am: These Two Cross Appeals – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue - Are Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…s. If the foreign exchange gain/loss directly results from the trading items, we fail to appreciate as to how such foreign exchange fluctuation loss can be considered as non-operating. 66. The Special Bench of the Tribunal in ACIT Vs Prakash I. Shah (2008) 115 ITD 167 (Mum)(SB) has held that the gain due to fluctuations in the foreign exchange rate emanating from export is its integral part and cannot be differentiated from the export proceeds simply on the ground that the foreign currency rate has increased subsequent to sale but prior to realization. It went on to add that when goods are exported and inv…

Mckinsey Knowledge Centre Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 154/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mckinsey Knowledge Centre Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, Circle-16(2), Vatika Business Park, New Delhi. Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccm2356G Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Mckinsey Knowledge Circle-16(2), Centre Pvt. Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Block-Iii, New Delhi. Vatika Business Park, Sector-49, Sohna Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccm2356G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate & Shri Divesh Chawla, Advocate Department By : Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit, Dr & Shri Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2016 Order Per R.S. Syal, Am: These Two Cross Appeals – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue - Are Directed Against The Final Assessment Order Dated

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR &
Section 143(3)Section 144C

…s. If the foreign exchange gain/loss directly results from the trading items, we fail to appreciate as to how such foreign exchange fluctuation loss can be considered as non-operating. 66. The Special Bench of the Tribunal in ACIT Vs Prakash I. Shah (2008) 115 ITD 167 (Mum)(SB) has held that the gain due to fluctuations in the foreign exchange rate emanating from export is its integral part and cannot be differentiated from the export proceeds simply on the ground that the foreign currency rate has increased subsequent to sale but prior to realization. It went on to add that when goods are exported and inv…

ACIT 18(2), Mumbai vs. Keshav & Company, Mumbai

ITA 6276/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaita No. : 5639/Mum/2012 (Assessment Year: 2006-07) Vs Keshav & Company, Ito –Ward-22(1)(4), B-607, Arihant Bldg., 6Th Floor, Sudha Park, Vashi Railway Station, Behind Garodia Nagar, Vashi, Navi Mumbai Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai -400 077 Pan:Aacpk 1625 P ""यथ" (Respondent) अपीलाथ" (Appellant) Ito –Ward-22(1)(4), Vs Keshav & Company, Vashi, Navi Mumbai Mumbai -400 077 ""यथ" (Respondent) अपीलाथ" (Appellant) C.O. No. 273/Mum/2013 Arising Out Of Ita No.6276/Mum/2012, Ay-2006-07 Keshav & Company, Vs Ito –Ward-22(1)(4), Mumbai -400 077 Vashi, Navi Mumbai ""यथ" (Respondent) अपीलाथ" (Appellant) Assessee "ी राजन वोहरा : Shri Rajan Vohra Cross Objector By "ी बी पृसेठ Shri B Pruseth Revenue By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 13-07-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30-09-2016

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 45(4)

…the scope of assessment order and a new angle or 29 Keshav and Company ITA 5639/Mum/2014 ITA 6276/Mum/2014 CO No.273/Mum/2015 case cannot be roped in the proceedings before the Tribunal. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- (i) Prakash I Shah -115 ITD 167(Mum)(SB); (ii) Maersk Global Service Centre India Pvt Ltd - 133 ITD 543; (iii) Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. -122 TTJ 577 (Mum SB). On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that, this issue is directly related to the subject matter and in the additional ground the revenue is pleading that, alternatively, the amount in transaction should be treated as…

Keshav and Company, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 18(2), Mumbai

ITA 5639/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaita No. : 5639/Mum/2012 (Assessment Year: 2006-07) Vs Keshav & Company, Ito –Ward-22(1)(4), B-607, Arihant Bldg., 6Th Floor, Sudha Park, Vashi Railway Station, Behind Garodia Nagar, Vashi, Navi Mumbai Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai -400 077 Pan:Aacpk 1625 P ""यथ" (Respondent) अपीलाथ" (Appellant) Ito –Ward-22(1)(4), Vs Keshav & Company, Vashi, Navi Mumbai Mumbai -400 077 ""यथ" (Respondent) अपीलाथ" (Appellant) C.O. No. 273/Mum/2013 Arising Out Of Ita No.6276/Mum/2012, Ay-2006-07 Keshav & Company, Vs Ito –Ward-22(1)(4), Mumbai -400 077 Vashi, Navi Mumbai ""यथ" (Respondent) अपीलाथ" (Appellant) Assessee "ी राजन वोहरा : Shri Rajan Vohra Cross Objector By "ी बी पृसेठ Shri B Pruseth Revenue By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 13-07-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30-09-2016

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 45(4)

…the scope of assessment order and a new angle or 29 Keshav and Company ITA 5639/Mum/2014 ITA 6276/Mum/2014 CO No.273/Mum/2015 case cannot be roped in the proceedings before the Tribunal. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- (i) Prakash I Shah -115 ITD 167(Mum)(SB); (ii) Maersk Global Service Centre India Pvt Ltd - 133 ITD 543; (iii) Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. -122 TTJ 577 (Mum SB). On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that, this issue is directly related to the subject matter and in the additional ground the revenue is pleading that, alternatively, the amount in transaction should be treated as…

Sun Life India Service Centre Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

ITA 750/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri G. C. Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrenda Kumar, CIT DR
Section 140Section 92C

…terial has been placed on record by the ld. DR. If the foreign exchange gain/loss resulted from the trading items only, we fail to appreciate as to how it can be treated as non-operating. 33. The Special Bench of the Tribunal in ACIT Vs Prakash I. Shah (2008) 115 ITD 167 (Mum)(SB) has held that the gain due to fluctuations in the foreign exchange rate emanating from export proceeds simply on the ground that he foreign currency rate has increased subsequent to sale but prior to realization. It went on to add that when goods are exported and invoice is raised in currency of the country where such goods are sold and…

Prime Focus Ltd.., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. (Ods) C. RG. 7, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 8364/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amarjit Singhi.T.A. No.8364/M/2011 (Assessment Year: 2008-2009) C.O.233/M/2012 (Arising Out Of Ita No.8066/M/2011) (Ay 2008-09) Prime Focus Limited, फनाभ/ Dcit (Osd-1), 1S T Floor, Old Dubbing & Central Range, Aayakar Vs. Recording Studio Building, Bhavan, Marine Lines, Dadasaheb Phalke Chitra Mumbai – 400 020. Nagari,Filmcity Campus, Opposite Hotel Food Paradise, Filmcity, Goregaon (E), Mumbai – 400 065. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacp6811B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R.R. VoraFor Respondent: Shri M. Dayasagar, DR
Section 14ASection 234D

…tes creating a new case / issue by the Ld DR, which is not permissible as per the ratio laid down by the Special Bench in the case of Mahindra and Mahindra (122 TTJ 577), dated 9.4.2009 and also the decision of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Prakash L. Shah (115 ITD 167) dated 22nd August, 2008. In addition, Ld Counsel for the assessee relied on various other decisions to demonstrate that similar kind of expenses were allowed as revenue expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Act. The decisions in the case of Ashima syntax Ltd (100 ITD 247) and Secure Meters Limited (321 ITR 611) (Rajasthan High Court) are some of them. He…

Ameriprise India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7014/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Harpreet Singh, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Amrendra Kumar, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH ‘I’ NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 7014/Del./2014 Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ameriprise India Pvt. Ltd., vs. D.C.I.T., Circle – 1(1), Plot No. 14, Sector-18, New Delhi. Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon. [PAN: AAFCA3489B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Harpreet Singh, Advocate & Ms Ananya Kapoor, Advocate Respondent by : Sh. Amrendra Kumar, CIT/DR Date of hearing : 03.11.2015 Date of pronouncement : 19.01.2016 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member: This appeal, at the instance of assessee, emanates…

Sun Life India Service Centre Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1489/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 144C(13)

…ial has been placed on record by the ld. DR. If the foreign exchange gain/loss resulted from the trading items only, we fail to appreciate as to how it can be treated as non-operating. 33. The Special Bench of the Tribunal in ACIT Vs Prakash I. Shah (2008) 115 ITD 167 (Mum)(SB) has held that the gain due to fluctuations in the foreign exchange rate emanating from export is its integral part and cannot be differentiated from the export proceeds simply on the ground that the foreign currency rate has increased subsequent to sale but prior to realization. It went on to add that when goods are exported 36 and…