Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust v. ADIT

115 TTJ 419Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#267 most cited

What is Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust v. ADIT authority for?

Penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with a notice issued under Section 142(1) is not leviable when the assessee demonstrates a reasonable cause for such non-compliance. The decision defines what constitutes 'reasonable cause' in this context.

292

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust · 115 TTJ 419 · Section 272A(1)(d) penalty · Section 142(1) notice · non-compliance penalty · reasonable cause · deletion of penalty · cancellation of penalty · sustainability of penalty · Delhi Tribunal

Sections most often in play

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 156Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 272a(1)section 271(l)(b)section 272section 272asection 272a(1)(d)section 271(1)(b)section 254(1)section 274section 254levy of penaltyfinal assessment ordersection 271(1)

Judgments citing Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust v. ADIT

Avarsekar & Sons P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst Ct Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5804/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…enalty contained in section 271(1)(b) of the Act. In this context, the Tribunal relied upon the following decisions:- 1. Shri Ramesh Kumar Jain vs. ACIT, ITA No.464/Mum/2013 dated 23/9/2015 2. Akhil Bharatiya Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhavan Trust v. ADIT (2008) 115 TTJ 419 (Del). and concluded as under:- “4. After hearing both the parties and on considering the above detailed factual matrix of each of the seven appeals, we are of the opinion, the assessee under consideration are eligible for relief. Further, we have also perused the cited decisions of the Tribunal (supra) which are relevant for the proposition that…

Magnum Infraprojects P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5648/MUM/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER To M/s. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 PAN:AACCM4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The ACIT, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent Appellant by : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Respondent by : Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh Date of hearing : 18/10/2016 Date of pronouncement : 21/10/2016 ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: These are seven appeals by the assessee pertaining to assessment year…

Magnum Infraprojects P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5644/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER To M/s. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 PAN:AACCM4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The ACIT, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent Appellant by : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Respondent by : Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh Date of hearing : 18/10/2016 Date of pronouncement : 21/10/2016 ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: These are seven appeals by the assessee pertaining to assessment year…

Magnum Infraprojects P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5643/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER To M/s. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 PAN:AACCM4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The ACIT, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent Appellant by : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Respondent by : Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh Date of hearing : 18/10/2016 Date of pronouncement : 21/10/2016 ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: These are seven appeals by the assessee pertaining to assessment year…

Magnum Infraprojects P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, the penalty levied of Rs

ITA 5642/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhto M/S. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-Op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 Pan:Aaccm4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The Acit, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER To M/s. Magnum Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 1201-A, Shatrunjaya Darshan Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., Sheth Motisha Cross Lane, Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027 PAN:AACCM4472D ...... Appellant Vs. The ACIT, Central Cir.45, Mumbai .... Respondent Appellant by : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Respondent by : Shri Pradeep Kr. Singh Date of hearing : 18/10/2016 Date of pronouncement : 21/10/2016 ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: These are seven appeals by the assessee pertaining to assessment year…

Glassworks Trading P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

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

ITA 6502/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Ra0 & Shri C.N. Prasad, आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 6502 & 6503/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/S. Glassworks Trading The Dcit, Central Circle-44, बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 16, Gundecha Chambers, Mumbai-400 020 N.M. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 023 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcg 6227H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Shri Rajiv Khandelwal ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Airiju Jaikaran

For Appellant: Shri NeelkanthFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

…details were filed, therefore subsequent compliances are good compliance and the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. He places reliance on the decisions of the Delhi Bench in the case of Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhawan Trust Vs ADIT (115 TTJ 419) and also the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of JIK Industries Ltd Vs DCIT in ITA Nos. 4759 to 4765/Mum/2014 dated 18.2.2016 in support of his contention that when assessment proceedings were completed and assessment order was passed u/s. 143(3) and not u/s. 144, it is unfair and unjustified in levying penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the…

Korpus Financial Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 4640/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Nidhi Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santanu Kumar Saikia
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 271(1)(b)

…016 has made an elaborate discussion on identical fact including the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. 83 ITR 26 and the case of the assessee Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs ADIT 115 TTJ 419 (Del.). If we exclude the Saturday and Sunday, falling within the given time in the notice, time taken for dispatch and delivery of the notice hardly two or three days left with the assessee. It is noted that the ld. Assessing Officer has not made a good case for non compliance on the part of the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and th…

Korpus Financial Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 4639/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Nidhi Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santanu Kumar Saikia
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 271(1)(b)

…016 has made an elaborate discussion on identical fact including the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. 83 ITR 26 and the case of the assessee Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs ADIT 115 TTJ 419 (Del.). If we exclude the Saturday and Sunday, falling within the given time in the notice, time taken for dispatch and delivery of the notice hardly two or three days left with the assessee. It is noted that the ld. Assessing Officer has not made a good case for non compliance on the part of the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and th…

Korpus Financial Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 4638/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Nidhi Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santanu Kumar Saikia
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 271(1)(b)

…016 has made an elaborate discussion on identical fact including the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. 83 ITR 26 and the case of the assessee Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs ADIT 115 TTJ 419 (Del.). If we exclude the Saturday and Sunday, falling within the given time in the notice, time taken for dispatch and delivery of the notice hardly two or three days left with the assessee. It is noted that the ld. Assessing Officer has not made a good case for non compliance on the part of the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and th…

Korpus Financial Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 4637/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Nidhi Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santanu Kumar Saikia
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 271(1)(b)

…016 has made an elaborate discussion on identical fact including the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. 83 ITR 26 and the case of the assessee Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs ADIT 115 TTJ 419 (Del.). If we exclude the Saturday and Sunday, falling within the given time in the notice, time taken for dispatch and delivery of the notice hardly two or three days left with the assessee. It is noted that the ld. Assessing Officer has not made a good case for non compliance on the part of the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and th…

Korpus Financial Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 4636/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Nidhi Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santanu Kumar Saikia
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 271(1)(b)

…016 has made an elaborate discussion on identical fact including the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. 83 ITR 26 and the case of the assessee Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs ADIT 115 TTJ 419 (Del.). If we exclude the Saturday and Sunday, falling within the given time in the notice, time taken for dispatch and delivery of the notice hardly two or three days left with the assessee. It is noted that the ld. Assessing Officer has not made a good case for non compliance on the part of the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and th…

Korpus Financial Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 4635/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Nidhi Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santanu Kumar Saikia
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 271(1)(b)

…016 has made an elaborate discussion on identical fact including the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. 83 ITR 26 and the case of the assessee Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs ADIT 115 TTJ 419 (Del.). If we exclude the Saturday and Sunday, falling within the given time in the notice, time taken for dispatch and delivery of the notice hardly two or three days left with the assessee. It is noted that the ld. Assessing Officer has not made a good case for non compliance on the part of the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and th…

Korpus Financial Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by assessee are allowed

ITA 4634/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar.

For Appellant: Nidhi Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santanu Kumar Saikia
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 271(1)(b)

…016 has made an elaborate discussion on identical fact including the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. 83 ITR 26 and the case of the assessee Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust vs ADIT 115 TTJ 419 (Del.). If we exclude the Saturday and Sunday, falling within the given time in the notice, time taken for dispatch and delivery of the notice hardly two or three days left with the assessee. It is noted that the ld. Assessing Officer has not made a good case for non compliance on the part of the assessee. Considering the totality of facts and th…

Shah Pratap Industries P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 44, Mumbai

In the result, all above seven appeals filed the Assessee are allowed

ITA 4643/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita.S./4643To4649/Mum/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2011-2012 वष" M/S. Shah Pratap Industries Pvt. Dcit, Cc-44 Room No.656, 6Th Floor, Ltd. 16, Gundecha Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Vs. Nm Road, Fort Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400 023. Pan:Aaacs5494D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:- Shri Sanjeev Kashyap-Dr Assessee By: Ms. Nidhi Patel सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 03.08.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम, 1961 अिधिनयम क" क" धारा क" क" धारा धारा धारा केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आदेश ( 1 ) 254 Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am - अनुसार Challenging The Order,Dtd.13.05.14,Of The Cit(A)-38,Mumbai, The Assessee Has Filed Appeals For The Above Mentioned Seven Ay.S.As The Issue Involved In All The Appeals Are Common,So We Are Disposing Them Off By A Consolidated Order. Effective Goa For All The Years Is Upholding The Levy Of Penalty,Imposed By The Ao,U/S.271(1)(B) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms. Nidhi PatelFor Respondent: - Shri Sanjeev Kashyap-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(b)

…1(1)(b). In support of her arguments, she relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Hindustan Steel Ltd. 83 ITR 26 and judgment of Honb’le Delhi Bench ITAT in the case of Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhavan Trust vs. ADIT 115 TTJ 419 (Del.) In nutshell she submitted that the penalty order passed by the AO was unfair and factually incorrect, unjustified and contrary to law and facts, and therefore, penalty levied by the AO should be deleted. 3.2. Per contra Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that since there was noncompliance on the part of t…

Krupa Realtorss Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-39, Mumbai

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 2950/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.2950/M/2015 (Assessment Year: 2008-2009) I.T.A. No.2951/M/2015 (Assessment Year: 2009-2010) फनाभ/ Krupa Realtors Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of 110B, Mittal Towers, Income Tax, Vs. B-Wing, Nariman Point, Central Circle-39, Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aadck1497K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi Kiran, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…of the ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Shri Ramesh Kumar Jain vs. ACIT in ITA Nos.458 to 464/Mum/2013 (AYs 2004-05 to 2010-11), dated 23.9.2015 and ITAT, Delhi Bench decision in the case of Akhil Bharatiya Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhavan Trust vs. ADIT [2008] 115 TTJ 419 (Delhi) and prayed for deciding the present appeals in the lines of the said decisions of the Tribunal. 4. After hearing both the parties and on considering the above detailed factual matrix of each of the seven appeals, we are of the opinion, the assessees under consideration are eligible for relief. Further, we have also perused the cited decis…

Welldone Real Estate Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2946/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoi.T.A. No.2946/M/2015 (Assessment Year: 2008-2009) फनाभ/ Welldone Real Estate Ltd., The Dcit, Central Circle-39, 82, Maker Chamber Iii, Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai – 21. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacw6277G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Kapil Sheth प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Ajay, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil ShethFor Respondent: Shri Ajay, DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

…of the ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Shri Ramesh Kumar Jain vs. ACIT in ITA Nos.458 to 464/Mum/2013 (AYs 2004-05 to 2010-11), dated 23.9.2015 and ITAT, Delhi Bench decision in the case of Akhil Bharatiya Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhavan Trust vs. ADIT [2008] 115 TTJ 419 (Delhi) and prayed for deciding the present appeals in the lines of the said decisions of the Tribunal. 5. After hearing both the parties and on considering the above detailed factual matrix of each of the case, I am of the opinion, the assessee under consideration is eligible for relief. Further, I have also perused the cited decisions of the Tr…

Hill Rock Construction Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 39, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2944/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoi.T.A. No.2944/M/2015 (Assessment Year: 2009-2010) फनाभ/ Hill Rock Construction Ltd., Dcit, Cc-39, 11-B, Mittal Towers, B-Wing, R.No.32(1), Gr. Floor, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-21. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabch7169M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Kapil Sheth प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Ajay, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil ShethFor Respondent: Shri Ajay, DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

…of the ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Shri Ramesh Kumar Jain vs. ACIT in ITA Nos.458 to 464/Mum/2013 (AYs 2004-05 to 2010-11), dated 23.9.2015 and ITAT, Delhi Bench decision in the case of Akhil Bharatiya Prathmik Shmshak Sangh Bhavan Trust vs. ADIT [2008] 115 TTJ 419 (Delhi) and prayed for deciding the present appeals in the lines of the said decisions of the Tribunal. 5. After hearing both the parties and on considering the above detailed factual matrix of each of the case, I am of the opinion, the assessee under consideration is eligible for relief. Further, I have also perused the cited decisions of the Tr…

Brahamputra Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 4271/DEL/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Suchitra Kamble :

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Ahuja AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Jain CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

…1 ITA 4265 to 4271/Del/2013 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. SUCHITRA KAMBLE : JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA nos. 4265/Del/2013 (AY: 2005-06) 4266/Del/2013 (AY: 2006-07) 4267/Del/2013 (AY: 2007-08) 4268/Del/2013 (AY: 2008-09) 4269/Del/2013 (AY: 2009-10) 4270/Del/2013 (AY: 2010-11) 4271/Del/2013 (AY: 2011-12) Brahamputra Infrastructure Ltd., Vs. DCIT Cen. Cir. 17, A-7, Mahipalpur, NH-8, New Delhi. Mahipalur Crossing, Mahipalpur, New Delhi-110037. PAN: AAACB 8918 K ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri R.S. Ahuja Adv. Respondent by…

Brahamputra Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 4270/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Suchitra Kamble :

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Ahuja AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Jain CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

…1 ITA 4265 to 4271/Del/2013 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. SUCHITRA KAMBLE : JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA nos. 4265/Del/2013 (AY: 2005-06) 4266/Del/2013 (AY: 2006-07) 4267/Del/2013 (AY: 2007-08) 4268/Del/2013 (AY: 2008-09) 4269/Del/2013 (AY: 2009-10) 4270/Del/2013 (AY: 2010-11) 4271/Del/2013 (AY: 2011-12) Brahamputra Infrastructure Ltd., Vs. DCIT Cen. Cir. 17, A-7, Mahipalpur, NH-8, New Delhi. Mahipalur Crossing, Mahipalpur, New Delhi-110037. PAN: AAACB 8918 K ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri R.S. Ahuja Adv. Respondent by…

Brahamputra Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 4269/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Suchitra Kamble :

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Ahuja AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Jain CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

…1 ITA 4265 to 4271/Del/2013 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. SUCHITRA KAMBLE : JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA nos. 4265/Del/2013 (AY: 2005-06) 4266/Del/2013 (AY: 2006-07) 4267/Del/2013 (AY: 2007-08) 4268/Del/2013 (AY: 2008-09) 4269/Del/2013 (AY: 2009-10) 4270/Del/2013 (AY: 2010-11) 4271/Del/2013 (AY: 2011-12) Brahamputra Infrastructure Ltd., Vs. DCIT Cen. Cir. 17, A-7, Mahipalpur, NH-8, New Delhi. Mahipalur Crossing, Mahipalpur, New Delhi-110037. PAN: AAACB 8918 K ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri R.S. Ahuja Adv. Respondent by…