Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

394 ITR 733High Court2017#2753 most cited

What is Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

If reassessment proceedings are initiated for a specific issue, the Assessing Officer cannot make additions on other issues discovered during reassessment unless an addition is also made on the original issue for which the assessment was reopened. If the foundation for reopening fails (i.e., no addition on the original issue), the entire reassessment on other issues cannot be sustained.

43

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd. v. DCIT · Martech Peripherals · Section 147 · Section 148 · income escaping assessment · scope of reassessment · validity of reopening · original issue · other issues · foundation superstructure · no addition on original issue · reassessment quashed

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 234BSection 234D

Issues it is cited on

section 148(2)section 32(1)(iia)section 13(1)(c)(ii)clarificatory amendmentsection 140section 234dsection 13(1)(b)section 164(2)additional depreciationkelvinatorsection 13(1)(d)income escaping assessment

Judgments citing Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd. v. DCIT

ANNAKODIRAJ,TIRUNELVELI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly-allowed

ITA 4121/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 4121/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Annakodiraj, The Income Tax Officer, 93, Kankanankinaru, Vs. Ward 1, Balapathiraramapuram Po, Tirunelveli Vk Pudur Tk, Tirunelveli – 627 953. Pan: Bydpa 7546K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri J. Saravanan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Aroon Praasad, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per George George K: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 09.10.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2017-18. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Shri J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Aroon Praasad, Addl.CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…AO is precluded from making any other additions. In support of his submission, the Ld.AR relied on the following judgments of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court i. PVP Ventures Ltd., vs. ACIT, 65 taxmann.com 221 ii. Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd., vs. DCIT, 394 ITR 733 (Mad) :- 3 -: iii. Tractors & Farm Equipment Ltd., vs. ACIT, 409 ITR 369 (Mad) iv. Anand Cine Services (P) Ltd., vs. ACIT, 169 taxmann.com 236 3. The Ld.DR was duly heard. 4. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee in Ground No.4.1 (supra) has raised a pure legal issue which does not require examination…

SRI KRISHA TRADERS,SIVAGANGAI vs. DCIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-1,, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2223/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2223/Chny/2025 िनधा%रण वष% /Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Mr. N. Vijay Kumar, C.A *+For Respondent: Ms. Babitha, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 40A(3)

…ed hereunder: Sri Krishna Traders :- 5 -: 6. On the similar issue, the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Company Circle IV(1), Chennai [2017] 81 taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/[2017] 394 ITR 733 (Madras) has held as under: 20. The petitioner/assessee, however, challenges this action of the respondents/Revenue, on the ground that it was not permissible for the respondents/Revenue to tax the forfeited share application money, by taking recourse to provisions of Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Act, unless it assesses to tax that i…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALEM vs. GOVINDA RAJULU SRINIVASAN, SALEM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1245/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs.C. Yamuna, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 40A(3)

…n the case of Jet Airways (I) Ltd. reported in [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bombay HC), Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2011] 336 ITR 136 (Delhi) and the Hon’ble Madras High Court decision in the case of Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd. reported in [2017] 394 ITR 733 (Mad.) and in the case of Tractors & Farm Equipment Ltd. v. ACIT reported in [2018] 409 ITR 369 (Mad.) The Ld.CIT(A) while adjudicating the legal issue noted that the AO has reopened the assessment on account of sale of immovable property of ₹7,55,55,190/- and some other transactions pertaining to TDS deduction, but without making any additions…

SONIA KAPOOR,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-69(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4052/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshsonia Kapoor, Vs. Income Tax Officer, F-17, Arya Nagar, Ward-69(1), Cghs, Patparganj, New Delhi Delhi-110092 Pan: Akwpk6530H Assessee By : Shri Sanjiv Sapra, Ca Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Sapra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147

…Similar view was expressed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways Pvt. Ltd reported in 331 ITR 236 (Bom) and by Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Martech Peripherals P. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 394 ITR 733 (Mad). Respectfully following the same, I have no hesitation in quashing the reassessment proceedings framed for the assessment year 2017-18. Since the reassessment is quashed on this limited ground, the adjudication of other legal grounds and other grounds on merits becomes academic and they are Sonia Kapoor left open. Accordingly, the grounds…

MAHASAKTHI BIO ENERCON PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 467/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:467/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mahasakthi Bio Enercon Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Vs. Income Tax, No.64, Dr. Nanjappa Road, Central Circle -1, Coimbatore – 641 018. Coimbatore. [Pan:Aabci-0022-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. T. Banusekar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T.

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

…sment was effectively closed in favour of the assessee.  The ld.PCIT seeks to revise the assessment on issues unrelated to the reasons for which the reassessment was initiated. 29. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in Martech Peripherals Pvt. Ltd. v DCIT [(2017) 394 ITR 733 (Mad)] and Anand Cine Services (P) Ltd v ACIT [(2024) 169 taxmann.com 236 (Mad)] has categorically held that where reassessment is initiated for a specific issue and no addition is made on that issue, then any other issue noticed during reassessment cannot be independently assessed unless the original issue survives and is part of the reassessed…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COIMBATORE vs. KAMATCHIPURAM VELLINGIRI JAYARAMAN, COIMBATORE

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed, where as the Cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2777/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Ms. D.Komali Krishna, CITFor Respondent: Mr.Venkatswami, ITP &
Section 147Section 148

…ot require interference, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has rightly followed the judicial discipline in relying on the decision of jurisdictional High Court of Madras in the case of Martche Pherpipherals Pvt Ltd, Vs. DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 733 (Mad) and only thereafter she held the reopening as bad in law. C.O.No.27/Chny/2025 3.Though the decisions of other High Courts in the cases of Jet Airways and Ranbaxy Laboratories are cited, the Ld. CIT(A) ultimately relied on the jurisdictional High Courts decision's and therefore there is no legal infirmity in her decision. 4.The Ld. CIT(A) i…

MOORTHY,SALEM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, SALEM

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 490/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.T.S.Lakshmi VenkatramanFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र ,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस . आर . रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम& BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.490/Chny/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vs The Assistant Commissioner Shri Moorthy, #96/A1, NSP Gardens, Behind of Income Tax, Southgate Hotel, Circle-2, Seelanaickenpatty Bye Passm Salem. Salem-636 201. PAN : AILPM-6975-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr.T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCA "…

LAKHMI CHAND YADAV,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue

ITA 516/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 516/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Lakhmi Chand Yadav, Vs Income Tax Officer, Village Mirzapur Hardet Haveli Ward-1(4), Mujehri, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaepy4744P Assessee By : Sh. M. K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12, Arises Against The Order Of Cit(A), Faridabad Dated 28.11.2019 In Case No. 10339/2018-19 In Proceedings U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. M. K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr
Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260A

…notice of the High Court in the (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) (2011) 336 ITR 136 (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312 (SC) (2022) 138 taxmann.com 296 (Bombay) (2013) 355 ITR 172 (Guj.) (2012) 344 ITR 641 (Chattisgarh) (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) (2017) 394 ITR 733 (Mad) (2016) 387 ITR 416 (Del) (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) (2017) 291 CTR 272 (P&H) ITAT NO. 143 OF 2021 said decision. It is further submitted by Mr. Bagaria that in the reasons for reopening there was no allegation made against the assessee that they failed to fully and truly disclose all material particulars for the purpose of completion of the ass…

JASPREET SINGH SIDHU,CHANDIGARH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 335/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 335/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Jaspreet Singh Sidhu, Vs. The Pcit-1, बनाम Cr Building, Sector 17, H. No. 1656, Sector 33-D, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bykps6091L अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…Delhi) re Prosperous Buildcon (P.) Ltd.: 13. We agree with the view taken by the Tribunal on this score as well. This view is covered by the various judgments including the judgment rendered in Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. Dy CIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 73/394 ITR 733 (Mad) by one of us Le., Rajiv Shakdher, J, when sitting in the Madras High Court. The following observations being apposite are extracted hereafter: "20 The petitioner-assessee, however, challenges this action of the respondents-Revenue, on the ground that it was not permissible for the respondents- Revenue to tax the forfeited share application…

SURESHKUMAR JETHANAND RAWLANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 17(3)(4) , MUMBAI

ITA 1054/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R. &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246Section 4Section 5Section 56(2)(vii)Section 80

…notice of the High Court in the (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) (2011) 336 ITR 136 (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312 (SC) (2022) 138 taxmann.com 296 (Bombay) (2013) 355 ITR 172 (Guj.) (2012) 344 ITR 641 (Chattisgarh) (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) (2017) 394 ITR 733 (Mad) (2016) 387 ITR 416 (Del) (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) (2017) 291 CTR 272 (P&H) said decision. It is further submitted by Mr. Bagaria that in the reasons for reopening there was no allegation made against the assessee that they failed to fully and truly disclose all material particulars for the purpose of completion of the assessment and therefore…

SURESHKUMAR JETHANAND RAWLANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 17(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1053/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil R. Padvekar, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R. &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 246Section 4Section 5Section 56(2)(vii)Section 80

…notice of the High Court in the (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) (2011) 336 ITR 136 (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312 (SC) (2022) 138 taxmann.com 296 (Bombay) (2013) 355 ITR 172 (Guj.) (2012) 344 ITR 641 (Chattisgarh) (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) (2017) 394 ITR 733 (Mad) (2016) 387 ITR 416 (Del) (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) (2017) 291 CTR 272 (P&H) said decision. It is further submitted by Mr. Bagaria that in the reasons for reopening there was no allegation made against the assessee that they failed to fully and truly disclose all material particulars for the purpose of completion of the assessment and therefore…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY GLOBAL LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 791/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Sri C. Ramesh, A.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…ot sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) (ii)CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY GLOBAL LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, all the COs by assessee in CO

ITA 790/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S, Praveena, D.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…es not sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY GLOBAL LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 789/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Sri C. Ramesh, A.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…ot sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) (ii)CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BANGALORE vs. COFFEE DAY GLOBAL LIMITED, BANGALORE

ITA 788/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Sri C. Ramesh, A.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…ot sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) (ii)CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY GLOBAL LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 787/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Sri C. Ramesh, A.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…ot sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) (ii)CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY GLOBAL LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 786/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Sri C. Ramesh, A.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…ot sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) (ii)CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY ENTERPRISES LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the COs by assessee in CO

ITA 785/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S, Praveena, D.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…es not sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY ENTERPRISES LIMITED, BENGALURU

ITA 784/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…ot sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) (ii)CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, , BENGALURU vs. COFFEE DAY ENTERPRISES LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, all the COs by assessee in CO

ITA 783/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S, Praveena, D.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 154Section 234B(3)Section 234D

…es not sustain, addition on a different issue cannot be made. (i) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd V. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) CIT V. Adhunik Niryatlspat Ltd (2011) 63 DTR 212 (Del) (iii) Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd V. DCIT (2017) 81 Taxmann.com 73 (Madras)/(2017)394 ITR 733 (Madras) (iv) CIT V. Jet Airways (l) Ltd (2010) 331 ITR 336 (Bom) (v) CIT V. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 131 DTR 332 (Pat) (vi) CIT V. Double Dot Finance Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 47 (Mag) (Bom) & Rahul Prakash V. ITO (2013) 217 Taxman 100 (All) (vii) CIT V. Mohmed Juned Dadani (2013) 214 Taxman 38 (Guj) (viii) CIT V. Living Media India Ltd (…

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3