Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors.

GOVIND MANSHARAM DINGWA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 22(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

…o weeks thereafter;" [Emphasis Supplied] V. Further, the following observations of the various High Courts on the aspect of providing material relied upon along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act also merit attention as under: (a) Anurag Gupta v. ITO [454 ITR 326 (Bom HC)] It goes without saying that providing information to the Petitioner, without furnishing the material based upon which the section 148A(b) of the Act totally illusive and ephemeral. The fact that the material also was required to be supplied can very well be gauged from the clear directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi…

GOVIND MANSHARAM DINGWA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 22(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

…o weeks thereafter;" [Emphasis Supplied] V. Further, the following observations of the various High Courts on the aspect of providing material relied upon along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act also merit attention as under: (a) Anurag Gupta v. ITO [454 ITR 326 (Bom HC)] It goes without saying that providing information to the Petitioner, without furnishing the material based upon which the section 148A(b) of the Act totally illusive and ephemeral. The fact that the material also was required to be supplied can very well be gauged from the clear directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Ashi…

ABHISHEK JAYKETU JOSHI,MUMBAI vs. AC CIR-42(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarabhishek Jayketu Joshi Ac Cir-42(2)(1), C-73, Venus Society, R. G. Kautilya Bhavan, Thadani Marg, Worli Sea Vs. Mumbai-400 051 Face, Mumbai-400 018 Pan/Gir No. Ackpj8583H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri M. M. Golvala, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 13.01.2026

…s not been discharged in the present case. 21. In support of the jurisdictional challenge, the learned Authorised Representative placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Anurag Gupta v. Income-tax Officer [2023] 150 taxmann.com 99 / 454 ITR 326, and submitted that the ratio laid down therein squarely applies to the facts of the present case. It was contended that the Hon’ble High Court has categorically held that furnishing of information without supplying the material relied upon renders the proceedings under section 148A(b) unsustainable, as it deprives the assessee of an effective op…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. CEC-ITD CEM-TPL JOINT VENTURE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. CEC-ITD CEM-TPL JOINT VENTURE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed and Revenue's appeals are dismissed

…reliance was\nplaced on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of\nUOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024).\nFurther, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble\nBombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and\nOrs (454 ITR 326).\n8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no\nmaterial was provided along with notice issued u/s.148A(b) of\nthe Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs.\n97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect.\nIII. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in\nresponse to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. CEC-ITD CEM-TPL JOINT VENTURE , MUMBAI

…port reliance was placed on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s.148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act w…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. CEC-ITD CEM-TPL JOINT VENTURE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. CEC-ITD CEM-TPL JOINT VENTURE , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed and Revenue's appeals are dismissed

…eliance was\nplaced on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of\nUOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). \nFurther, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble\nBombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and\nOrs (454 ITR 326).\n8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no\nmaterial was provided along with notice issued u/s.148A(b) of\nthe Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs.\n97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect.\nIII. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in\nresponse to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the…

CEC- ITD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed and Revenue's appeals are dismissed

…iance was\nplaced on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of\nUOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). \nFurther, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble\n\nBombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and\nOrs (454 ITR 326).\n\n8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no\nmaterial was provided along with notice issued u/s.148A(b) of\nthe Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs.\n97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect.\n\nIII. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in\nresponse to notice u/s, 148A(b) of…

CEC - ITD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

CEC- ITD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

CEC-ITD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…

CEC- ITD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…e judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of UOI & Ors. v. Rajeev Bansal (Civil Appeal No. 8629 of 2024). Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble CEC-LTD CEM TPL JOINT VENTURE Bombay High Court in the case of Anurag Gupta v. ITO and Ors (454 ITR 326). 8. Thus, it was pointed out that in the case of the assessee no material was provided along with notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act and in fact the information in relation to sum of Rs. 97.11 Lacs provided in the referred notice was incorrect. III. Proposition 2: Submission filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s, 148A(b) of the Act…