Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT

199 ITR 351High Court1993#162 most cited

What is Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Appellate authorities can consider additional grounds for deduction, even if not originally claimed before the Assessing Officer or Appellate Assistant Commissioner, provided the facts are not disputed and it pertains to a legal claim for correct tax liability. This is because the purpose of an appeal is to ascertain the correct tax liability.

441

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT · 199 ITR 351 · Bombay HC · additional grounds · appellate authority · legal claim · ascertain correct tax liability · revenue account deduction

Also reported as

66 Taxmann 27

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 147Section 1961Section 153ASection 139(1)Section 132Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 253(2)section 253(1)section 119chief commissionersection 115jsection 254cross objectionfinal assessment ordersection 29section 234bsection 43draft assessment order

Judgments citing Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Shumbhlaxmi Dyetex P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 3256/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

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

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…r fresh facts. 5. Therefore, while keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC), Jute Corporation of India Vs. CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC), Ahemdabad Electrical Vrs. CIT 199 ITR 351, wherein it has been held that legal grounds, which goes to the roots of the case, can be raised and allowed at any time /stage. Therefore, keeping in view the above principles in mind, we allow the assessee to raise the additional grounds. Hence, application dated 19th June 2019 is allowed and the additional ground raised by the assessee is admi…

Essar Ports Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT-6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4444/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhessar Ports Ltd. Acit-6(2)(2), Essar House, 11, Keshavrao Room No. 563 (C), Vs. Khadye Marg, Mahalaxmi, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400034. M.K. Road, Pan: Aaace8391D Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vijay Mehta & Anuj Kisnadwala Ar’S Respondent By : Shri Mukundraj Chate Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.06.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Mukundraj Chate DR
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…t of its contention the assessee has relied on the case law in National Thermal Power Corporation Vs CIT (229 ITR 383SC), Jute Corporation of India Ltd Vs CIT (187 ITR 688 SC) 4 ITA No. 4444 Mum 2017-Essar Ports Ltd. and Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Vs CIT (199 ITR 351 Bom). The ld AR for the assessee made his submissions on the lines of the contents of the application. On the contrary the ld. DR for the revenue has not strongly opposed the submissions of the assessee. Considering the facts that the assessee has raised additional ground of appeal which is purely legal in nature and no new facts are required to…

Marriott International Licensing Company Bv, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2479/MUM/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. G. S. Pannu, V.P. & Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2479, 2480 & 2481/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2007-08) In The Matter Of:-

For Appellant: Shri Paras S. Savla &For Respondent: Shri Nishant Samaiya
Section 144CSection 250

…herwise, this ground goes to the roots of the case, therefore keeping in view the principle laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Vrs CIT 229 ITR 383, Jute Corporation of India Vrs. CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC) and Ahmedabad Electricity Ltd. Vrs. CIT 199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB), we allow the application dated 10.10.18 and admit the additional grounds mentioned above for adjudicating on merits. 7 I.T.A. No. 2479, 2480 & 2481/Mum/2017 Marriott International Licensing Company BV, 7. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a company incorporated in and a tax resident of Netherlands. The return of incom…

Bhupendra C. Dalal, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD-II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5324/MUM/2013[1991-92]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2019AY 1991-92

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 254ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)

…ot raised before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R. relied on a series of decisions which are as under: 1. National Thermal Power Corporation vs. CIT (229 ITR 386 SC) 2. Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT [187 ITR 688 (SC)] 3. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Bom.) (FB)] 3 ITA No.5323/M/2013 & ors. Shri Bhupendra C. Dalal 4. CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders Pvt. Ltd.” (2012) 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) 6. The Ld. D.R., on the other hand, opposed the admission of additional ground on the ground that same were not raised before the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore can not be taken up at this stage. 7. We hav…

Bhupendra C. Dalal, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD-II) Cr-7, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5323/MUM/2013[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2019AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 254ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)

…ot raised before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R. relied on a series of decisions which are as under: 1. National Thermal Power Corporation vs. CIT (229 ITR 386 SC) 2. Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT [187 ITR 688 (SC)] 3. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Bom.) (FB)] 3 ITA No.5323/M/2013 & ors. Shri Bhupendra C. Dalal 4. CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders Pvt. Ltd.” (2012) 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) 6. The Ld. D.R., on the other hand, opposed the admission of additional ground on the ground that same were not raised before the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore can not be taken up at this stage. 7. We hav…

Jivraj P. Surani, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 15 & 16, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed whereas the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed as infructuous

ITA 4541/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…mit the additional grounds of appeal in terms of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT [229 ITR 383 SC], Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT [187 ITR 688 SC] & Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. Vs. CIT [199 ITR 351 Bom FB] and send back the matter to the file of Ld. first appellate authority on similar directions as given by the Tribunal in cited decision of another assessee belonging to the same group. For ready reference, the relevant observation of the Tribunal, in the cited order, could be extracted in the following manner: - 5. Before the Tribunal, the…

Suresh V. Kukadiya, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 15 & 16, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed whereas the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed as infructuous

ITA 4523/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…mit the additional grounds of appeal in terms of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT [229 ITR 383 SC], Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT [187 ITR 688 SC] & Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. Vs. CIT [199 ITR 351 Bom FB] and send back the matter to the file of Ld. first appellate authority on similar directions as given by the Tribunal in cited decision of another assessee belonging to the same group. For ready reference, the relevant observation of the Tribunal, in the cited order, could be extracted in the following manner: - 5. Before the Tribunal, the…

Ramdev Chemicals P. Ltd, Palghar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3, Palghar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6951/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Ramdev Chemicals P Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward-3, Palghar E-41, Midc Industrial Area Aayakar Bhavan, Bidco Road Boisar Dist. Palghar – 401 Palghar, Dist: Thane – 401 404 506 Pan/Gir No.Aabcr5210R (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)

…regard, the appellant relies upon the following landmark decisions of the Hon'ble Courts. i. National Thermal Power Corporation v. CIT [229 ITR 383 (SC)] ii.Jute Corporation of India Ltd. V. CIT [187 ITR 688 (SC)] iii. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. V. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB)] iv. CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders [349 ITR 336 (Bom)] 3 M/s. Ramdev Chemicals P. Ltd., 7. In view of the above, it is most humbly submitted that the enclosed additional ground may kindly be admitted and adjudicated upon by Your Honour.” 2.2. This additional ground was raised together with a petition framed for admission of…

Bajaj Exports Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur vs. The Dy. CIT, Central Circle, 2(3), Nagpur

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

ITA 303/NAG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Mar 2019AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Loya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153C

…l has wide power to allow to raise the additional ground before it so long as they arise from the subject-matter of the tax proceedings. In this regard, he relied on the Hon'ble Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 199 ITR 351 (FB). 11. Referring to the said judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (supra), ld. DR for the Revenue mentioned that the said judgement is applicable to the facts of the present case as the ground nos.2, 3 and 4 of the appeal are not in respect of the subject-matter of the entire tax proceedings. 7 12. We have heard both the sides on this p…

M/S. Jammu Development Authority, Jammu ( J&K) vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 498/ASR/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 498/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Jammu Development Authority, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Tax, Circle-I, Complex, Jammu, J & K Jammu (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadfj7335A Ita No. 494/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Jammu Development Authority, Tax, Circle-I, Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Jammu Complex, Jammu, J & K (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. R. K. Gupta, Ca & Shri. Vasu Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 06.05.2013, Jammu.

For Appellant: Shri. R. K. Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Shri. M. P. Singh, CIT DR

…of assessment proceedings before the taxing authorities is to assess correctly the tax liability of an assessee in accordance with law. ITA Nos. 494 & 498/Asr./2013 16 Jammu Development Authority In the case of Ahmadabad Electricity Limited vs. CIT (1993) 199 ITR 351 also, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has very wide powers while considering an appeal which may be filed by the assessee. He may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment or remand the case to the Assessing officer. This is because, unlike an ordinary appeal, the basic purpose of a tax appe…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu vs. M/S. Jammu Develpment Authority, Jammu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 494/ASR/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 498/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Jammu Development Authority, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Tax, Circle-I, Complex, Jammu, J & K Jammu (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadfj7335A Ita No. 494/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Jammu Development Authority, Tax, Circle-I, Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Jammu Complex, Jammu, J & K (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. R. K. Gupta, Ca & Shri. Vasu Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 06.05.2013, Jammu.

For Appellant: Shri. R. K. Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Shri. M. P. Singh, CIT DR

…of assessment proceedings before the taxing authorities is to assess correctly the tax liability of an assessee in accordance with law. ITA Nos. 494 & 498/Asr./2013 16 Jammu Development Authority In the case of Ahmadabad Electricity Limited vs. CIT (1993) 199 ITR 351 also, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has very wide powers while considering an appeal which may be filed by the assessee. He may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment or remand the case to the Assessing officer. This is because, unlike an ordinary appeal, the basic purpose of a tax appe…

Umesh A Mishra, Mumbai vs. ITO 10(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 1936/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1936/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) बिाम/ Mr. Umesh A Mishra Ito 10(3)(3), B/401/402, 2Nd Floor, Raheja Sherwood, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Behind Hub Mall Mumbai-400020 Western Express Highway Goregaon, East, Mumbai-400063 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aagpm0190F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Ms. Neha Paranjape Revenue By: Shri. D.G. Pansari (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.03.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 1936/Mum/2018, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 29.12.2017 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-17/It-54/16-17, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2013-14, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 22.02.2016 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2013-14. I.T.A. No.1936/Mum/2018

For Appellant: Ms. Neha ParanjapeFor Respondent: Shri. D.G. Pansari (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(C)

…reme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Company Limited v. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383(SC) as well decision of Full Bench of Hon’ble I.T.A. No.1936/Mum/2018 Bombay High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Company Limited v. CIT reported in (1993) 199 ITR 351(Bom.) , this additional ground stand admitted . We order accordingly. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual having income from salary, LIC commission and income from other sources including agriculture income, interest income etc.. The assessee filed his return of income with Revenue on 02.12.2013 which was process…

Chetan Ramniklal Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 5(4), Mumbai

ITA 3751/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri N. K. Pradhanshri Chetan Ramniklal Shah, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax 5Th Floor, Urmi Building, Central Circle-5(4) Vs. 19Th Floor, R. No. 1927 Air India Bldg 65, A.G. Road, Worli Sea Face, Mumbai-4000025 Mumbai. Pan – Aajps7227C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Awangshi Gimson, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…herwise, this ground goes to the roots of the case, therefore keeping in view the principle laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Vrs CIT 229 ITR 383, Jute Corporation of India Vrs. CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC) and Ahmedabad Electricity Ltd. Vrs. CIT 199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB), we allow the application dated 31.01.2019 and admit the additional grounds mentioned above for adjudicating on merits. P a g e | 4 ITA No.3751/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2007-08 Shri Chetan Ramniklal Shah 5. Since the additional grounds raised by the assessee challenges the very jurisdiction of the AO to reopen the assessment and this aspect goes…

Nitin Rasiklal Sanghvi, Banaskantha vs. The ITO Ward-2, Palanpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2305/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2304 & 2305/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Nitin Rasiklal Sanghvi Vs. Ito, Ward-2 Prop. M/S.Bony Exports Palanpur. 1, Paras Society Neminath Nagar, At. Deesa Tal. Deesa, Dist. Banakantha. Pan : Amjps 3742 E

For Appellant: Shri Anil BrahmkshatriyaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 148

…ect matter of the disallowance or addition is the same, there is no bar on examination of any related aspect by the Tribunal, as has been specifically held by a full bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co Ltd Vs CIT [(1993) 199 ITR 351 (Bom FB)] and reiterated by a Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Tata Communications Ltd Vs JCIT [(2009) 121 ITD SB 384 (Mum)]. That is, of course, besides the fact that there is no attempt, direct or indirect, to enlarge the subject matter of appeal. The legal plea of the learned counsel proceeds on clearly fallacious assumptions. 8.…

Nitin Rasiklal Sanghvi, Banaskantha vs. The ITO Ward-2, Palanpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2304/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2304 & 2305/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Nitin Rasiklal Sanghvi Vs. Ito, Ward-2 Prop. M/S.Bony Exports Palanpur. 1, Paras Society Neminath Nagar, At. Deesa Tal. Deesa, Dist. Banakantha. Pan : Amjps 3742 E

For Appellant: Shri Anil BrahmkshatriyaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 148

…ect matter of the disallowance or addition is the same, there is no bar on examination of any related aspect by the Tribunal, as has been specifically held by a full bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co Ltd Vs CIT [(1993) 199 ITR 351 (Bom FB)] and reiterated by a Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Tata Communications Ltd Vs JCIT [(2009) 121 ITD SB 384 (Mum)]. That is, of course, besides the fact that there is no attempt, direct or indirect, to enlarge the subject matter of appeal. The legal plea of the learned counsel proceeds on clearly fallacious assumptions. 8.…

M/S. Pgs Premiere Conferencing Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1)(3), Bengaluru

In the result, Assessee’s appeal for asst

ITA 2804/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri P.C Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.H Sundar Rao, CIT
Section 194JSection 251(1)(a)Section 254(1)Section 31(3)(a)Section 40a

…y the statutory provisions. In the absence of any statutory provision, the appellate authority is vested with all the plenary powers, which the subordinate authority may have in the matter" Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. and Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Born)] In the aforesaid case, the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court at page 369, has observed as under: "We do not find anything in section 254(1) of the Income-tax Act which limits the jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal in any manner. For reasons which we have set out earlier, the phrase "pass such order thereon" does not in any way restrict the ju…

Nikon India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6870/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Nikon India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Plot No.71, Sector-32, Circle-3(1), Institutional Area, Gurgaon. Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccn5100F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishal Kalra, Shri S.S. Tomar & Shri Ankit Shahni, Advocates Revenue By : Shri H.K. Choudhalry, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 9Th October, 2018 Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C Of The It Act, 1961 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Belongs To Nikon Group Of Cases Which Is Involved In A Broad Spectrum Of Business Centred On Precision Equipment, Imaging Products, Instruments & Other Business. The Activities Of The Nikon Group Are Carried Out Through The Following Divisions:- I) Precision Equipment Business, Ii) Imaging Products Business, Iii) Instruments Business, Iv) Other Businesses. 3. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 24.11.2014 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.66,47,37,700/-. The Assessing Officer Made A Reference U/S 92Ca(1) Of The It Act To Determine The Arm’S Length Price Of The International Transactions Entered Into By The Assessee With Its Aes During The F.Y. 2013-14. The Tpo, During The Course Of Tp Assessment Proceedings Observed That The Assessee Has Entered Into The Following International Transactions During The Year:- No. Nature Of Transaction Value (Inr) Method Applied 1. Purchase Of Goods, Promotional & 6,571,207,639 Rpm Other Supplies 2 Purchase Of Fixed Assets 7,049,548 Tnmm 3 Service Income 30,717,853 Tnmm 4 Warranty Reimbursements Received 69,937,244 Cup 5. Cost Reimbursements Received 2,619,750 Cup 6 Cost Reimbursements Paid 5,628,706 Cup

For Appellant: Shri Vishal KalraFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhalry, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92BSection 92C

…to various decisions, he submitted that the assessee is entitled to raise additional claim before the appellate authorities that were made earlier in the return of income. He relied on the following decisions:- i) Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1993) 199 ITR 351 (Bombay); 11 ii) CIT vs. Kerala State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. (1992) 193 ITR 624 (Ker.); iii) DCM Benetton India Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 173 Taxman 283 (Del); iv) Allied Motors (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 677 (SC); v) CIT vs. C.L. Gupta & Sons (2003) 259 ITR 513 (All); vi) Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (2015) 173 TTJ 513 (…

Popatlal Mohanlal Chordiya vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 1817/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 271Section 274Section 69C

…in the case NTPC Ltd. reported in 229 ITR 383 and in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. reported in 187 ITR 688 and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ahmedabad 4 Shri Popatlal Mohanlal Chordiya Electricity Company reported in 199 ITR 351 he submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee should be admitted. 6. After hearing both the sides and considering the additional grounds raised by the assessee being purely legal in nature and no fresh facts are required to be investigated, the additional grounds raised by the assessee are admitted for adjudication. 7. In th…

Mahendra Kumar Patiodia, Mumbai vs. Asst Cut CC 40, Mumbai

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

ITA 2982/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 1999-2000

For Appellant: Mrs. Ritika Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari, D.R
Section 143(2)

…why the additional ground not raised earlier. The ld AR stated that it should be admitted as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Company Ltd. vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC), Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. vs. CIT (1993) 199 ITR 351 (Bom) and Jute Corporation India vs. CIT (1991) 187 (ITR) 688. According to the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee has not shown any reason or material due to which the said ground could not be raised in the first round of appeal either before the AO or before the Ld. CIT(A) or before the Tribunal and therefore finally denied the admission of this ground.…

Chandrakant Gulabrao Borde, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 13(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 104/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare & Shri D.Y. PanditFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 10Section 147Section 17Section 28Section 56

…se of NTPC Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 229 ITR 383, the judgment in the case of Jute Corporation of India reported in 187 ITR 7 Chandrakant Gulabrao Borde 688, the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Company reported in 199 ITR 351. 11. On going through the facts of the case narrated above, we are of the opinion that the additional ground raised by the assessee is required to be admitted for adjudication by virtue of binding decisions on the same. 12. We heard both the parties on this limited issue of validity of reassessment proceedings and perused the orders of the Reven…