Aroni Commercials Ltd. v. DCIT

362 ITR 403High Court2014#828 most cited

What is Aroni Commercials Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

An assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue if the Assessing Officer fails to conduct a proper and adequate inquiry, making it subject to revision under Section 263, unless the revision is a mere change of opinion.

125

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Aroni Commercials Ltd v DCIT · Section 263 · inadequate enquiry · lack of enquiry · erroneous assessment order · prejudicial to revenue · mere change of opinion · revision of assessment · Section 147 · Section 148

Also reported as

101 DTR 244

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 139(1)Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 263ofinadequate enquirysection 263(1)revision under section 263mere change of opinionsection 56(2)(x)revision u/s 263assessment order erroneouslack of enquirymalabar industrialchange of opinionsection 292b

Judgments citing Aroni Commercials Ltd. v. DCIT

Adrija Farms Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1333/Hyd

ITA 1331/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.1331/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2019-2020 Adrija Farms Private The ACIT, Limited, Hyderabad vs. Central Circle-2(4)), PAN AAQCA0197D Hyderabad. Telangana. PIN – 500 038. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.1333/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2019-2020 Dakshyani Horticulture The ACIT, Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad vs. Central Circle-2(4)), PAN AAGCD3611D Hyderabad. Telangana. PIN – 500 038. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.1328/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2019-2020 M/s. Prayaga Gree…

Spark Vidyuth Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1322 & 1323/Hyd

ITA 1330/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

…t u/sec.147 of the Act. In support of these submissions, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee, relied on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Hindustan Lever vs., RB Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay); Aroni Chemicals Ltd vs., DCIT [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) and Prashant S. Joshi Vs. ITO (2010) 324 ITR 154 (Bombay) [copy of orders are placed in the paper book-1 at Page Nos.268 to 279] that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for re-opening cannot be improved or substituted or supplemented at a later stage when subjected to judicial challenge and the issue of whether the AO had reas…

Prayaga Green Meadows Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1333/Hyd

ITA 1328/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.1331/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2019-2020 Adrija Farms Private The ACIT, Limited, Hyderabad vs. Central Circle-2(4)), PAN AAQCA0197D Hyderabad. Telangana. PIN – 500 038. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.1333/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2019-2020 Dakshyani Horticulture The ACIT, Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad vs. Central Circle-2(4)), PAN AAGCD3611D Hyderabad. Telangana. PIN – 500 038. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.1328/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2019-2020 M/s. Prayaga Gree…

Prathima Eggsel Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1322 & 1323/Hyd

ITA 1327/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

…t u/sec.147 of the Act. In support of these submissions, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee, relied on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Hindustan Lever vs., RB Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay); Aroni Chemicals Ltd vs., DCIT [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) and Prashant S. Joshi Vs. ITO (2010) 324 ITR 154 (Bombay) [copy of orders are placed in the paper book-1 at Page Nos.268 to 279] that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for re-opening cannot be improved or substituted or supplemented at a later stage when subjected to judicial challenge and the issue of whether the AO had reas…

Prathima Eggsel Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1322 & 1323/Hyd

ITA 1326/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

…t u/sec.147 of the Act. In support of these submissions, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee, relied on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Hindustan Lever vs., RB Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay); Aroni Chemicals Ltd vs., DCIT [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) and Prashant S. Joshi Vs. ITO (2010) 324 ITR 154 (Bombay) [copy of orders are placed in the paper book-1 at Page Nos.268 to 279] that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for re-opening cannot be improved or substituted or supplemented at a later stage when subjected to judicial challenge and the issue of whether the AO had reas…

Prathima Resorts & Restaurants Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1322 & 1323/Hyd

ITA 1324/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

…t u/sec.147 of the Act. In support of these submissions, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee, relied on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Hindustan Lever vs., RB Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay); Aroni Chemicals Ltd vs., DCIT [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) and Prashant S. Joshi Vs. ITO (2010) 324 ITR 154 (Bombay) [copy of orders are placed in the paper book-1 at Page Nos.268 to 279] that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for re-opening cannot be improved or substituted or supplemented at a later stage when subjected to judicial challenge and the issue of whether the AO had reas…

Msn Institute of Medical Sciences Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, ITA.No.1322 & 1323/Hyd

ITA 1323/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 153DSection 263

…t u/sec.147 of the Act. In support of these submissions, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee, relied on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Hindustan Lever vs., RB Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay); Aroni Chemicals Ltd vs., DCIT [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) and Prashant S. Joshi Vs. ITO (2010) 324 ITR 154 (Bombay) [copy of orders are placed in the paper book-1 at Page Nos.268 to 279] that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for re-opening cannot be improved or substituted or supplemented at a later stage when subjected to judicial challenge and the issue of whether the AO had reas…

Millennium Developers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax -3, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1847/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanmillennium Developers Pvt. Ltd. Pcit-3, Ground Floor, Ceejay House, Vs. R. No. 612, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Shivsagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Bhavan, M. K. Road, Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Mumbai-400 020 Pan: Aabcm6404C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri B. V. Jhaveri, Ld. Ar Department Represented By : Shri Anurag Tripathi, Ld. Dr Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 18.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.01.2025

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 253Section 263Section 37(1)Section 80G

…s Pvt. Ltd. of AO is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. In support of its submissions, Ld. AR relied on the following judgments:- i) CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay) ii) Aroni Commercial Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2014) 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) 7. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the decision of Ld. PCIT. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and examined the material placed on record as well as judgments relied upon by the parties. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Commissioner to Income Tax Vs. Gabriel India Ltd. [1993] 71 Taxman 585 (Bombay) dated 15.04.1993had…

Alosha Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 356/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…Vs- S.P.Chaliha And Others reported in (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC). (vii) Bharat Jayantilal Patel Vs. Union of India And Others reported in [2015] 378 ITR 596 (Bom). (viii) Aroni Commercials Ltd -Vs- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax And Another reported in [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bom). (ix) Asian Paints Ltd -Vs- Deputy Commissioner of Income- tax And Another reported in [2008] 296 ITR 90 (Bom). (x) Hewlett Packard Financial Services (India) (P) Ltd -Vs- Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax reported in [2023] 152 taxmann.com 559 (Karnataka). 7. On the other hand, ld. D.R. vehemently argued supporting the order of ld. CIT(Ap…

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Svadeshi Enterprise(Hubli), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2785/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer V. Svadeshi Enterprise(Hubli) R.N. 234, 2Nd Floor 12/A Yusuf Building Kautilya Bhawan, Bkc Veer Nariman Road, Fort Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400051 Mumbai-400023 Pan: Aapfs0181B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vijay Mehta Shri Veerbhandra Mahajan Department Represented By :

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…urged before us by the Revenue is identical to the contentions which was urged by the Revenue in the earlier decision of this Court in respect of the same respondent assessee reported as Aroni Commercials Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income- Tax and Anr., 362 ITR 403. This Court had in the aforesaid decision dealt with the above objections raised by the Revenue as under “We are of the view that once a query is raised during the assessment proceedings and the assessee has replied to it, it follows that the query raised was a subject of consideration of the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment. It…

V.K.Nanavaty Share and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2614/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2614/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13) V. K. Nanavaty Share & बिधम/ Ito, Ward-4(2)(4) R. No. 647, 6Th Floor, Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd Vs. R-709, Rotunda Building, Aaykar Bhavan, Bombay Stock Exchange, Maharishi Karve Road, M. S. Marg, Fort, Mumbai- Churchgate, Mumbai- 400023. 400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacv9670N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ravikant Pathak Revenue By: Dr. Yogendra T. Wakare सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/04/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi, Dated 30.05.2023 For Ay. 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of The Reopening By Ao (Jurisdiction) U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). So The Legal Issue Is Taken Up First.

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Dr. Yogendra T. Wakare
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…tends to re-open, the impugned issuance of the re-opening notice on the same facts which were considered earlier, clearly amounts to change of opinion and would be wholly without jurisdiction (Refer Hon’ble Bombay High Court decision in Aroni Commercial Ltd. (362 ITR 403). In addition, one should bear in mind the fine distinction between “Reason to Suspect” and “Reason to believe”. Information adverse may trigger “Reason to Suspect” which is not sufficient to reopen an assessment because as per section 147 of the Act, AO should have “Reasons to believe”, escapement of income” and not Reason to suspect escapement…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Ritesh Jain, Indore

ITA 794/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani & It(Ss)Ano.14/Ind/2022 (Assesssment Year 2011-12

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…easonable period to the assessee to challenge the order of the AO dated 15.12.2017 disposing of the objections of the assessee against the notice u/s 148 of the Act in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Aroni Commercial Ltd. vs. DCIT 362 ITR 403. Since the issue raised in the cross objection goes to the root of the matter therefore, we first take up the CO for hearing and adjudication. The assessee in the C.O. has raised following grounds: Page 2 of 116 ITANo.794/Ind/2018 & IT(SS)A No.14 & 07/Ind/2022 Ritesh Jain & M.P. Agro Nutri Food Ltd. “1. That having regard to the facts and cir…

Khed Economic Infrastructure Pvt Ld, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14, Pune

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 923/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.923/PUN./2023 Assessment Years 2011-2012 Khed Economic Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., The DCIT, Circle-14, Level-4, Amar Avinash Aayakar Sadan, Bodhi Corporate Plaza, S.No.11, Tower, 548/2B, Salisbury 11/1 to 11/4, Plot No.D/2, Park, Gultekdi, Atur Bund Garden Road, Pune. vs. Sangtani Park, Lane No.1, PIN – 411 001 Pune – 411 037. PAN AADCK2683F Maharashtra. Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A.No.924/PUN./2023 Assessment Year 2012-2013 Khed Economic…

Khed Economic Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(2), Pune

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 925/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.923/PUN./2023 Assessment Years 2011-2012 Khed Economic Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., The DCIT, Circle-14, Level-4, Amar Avinash Aayakar Sadan, Bodhi Corporate Plaza, S.No.11, Tower, 548/2B, Salisbury 11/1 to 11/4, Plot No.D/2, Park, Gultekdi, Atur Bund Garden Road, Pune. vs. Sangtani Park, Lane No.1, PIN – 411 001 Pune – 411 037. PAN AADCK2683F Maharashtra. Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A.No.924/PUN./2023 Assessment Year 2012-2013 Khed Economic…

Khed Economic Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), Pune

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 924/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.923/PUN./2023 Assessment Years 2011-2012 Khed Economic Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., The DCIT, Circle-14, Level-4, Amar Avinash Aayakar Sadan, Bodhi Corporate Plaza, S.No.11, Tower, 548/2B, Salisbury 11/1 to 11/4, Plot No.D/2, Park, Gultekdi, Atur Bund Garden Road, Pune. vs. Sangtani Park, Lane No.1, PIN – 411 001 Pune – 411 037. PAN AADCK2683F Maharashtra. Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A.No.924/PUN./2023 Assessment Year 2012-2013 Khed Economic…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad vs. Drs Logistics Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1718/HYD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri KC DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan. Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…rified and thereafter approval was taken. We are in agreement with the petitioner's counsel who placed reliance on the following Judgments: (i) Hindustan Lever Ltd. (supra) Wadkar. (ii) Aroni Commercials Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2014] 44 taxmann.com 304/224 Taxman 13/362 ITR 403 (Bom.). (iii) Peninsula Land Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2022] 134 taxmann.com 33/284 Taxman 556/439 ITR 582 (Bom.). (iv) First Source Solutions Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2021] 132 taxmann.com 121/438 ITR 139 (Bom.). 10. Having perused the reasons and the information, we find no new tangible material as contended by the respondents. Debits and Credits can in n…

Shah Construction Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax-Cenral Circle-1(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 864/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Ram Krishna Kedia
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

…014 and 29.01.2014 vide which details pertaining to work in progress and various expenses debited to P.S.L A/c were submitted. The ld. Counsel has also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd. Vs. DCIT 101 DTR 244 (Bom) and in the case of CIT vs. Prima Paper and Engineering Industry 364 ITR 222 (Bom). He also referred the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi Vs. Income Tax Officer 234 ITR 154 (Bom) and the case of NDT System and Another Vs. ITO & Other 363 ITR 605 (Bom). After perusal of the reason recorded as referred sup…

Shah Construction Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax-Cenral Circle-1(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 863/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Ram Krishna Kedia
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

…014 and 29.01.2014 vide which details pertaining to work in progress and various expenses debited to P.S.L A/c were submitted. The ld. Counsel has also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd. Vs. DCIT 101 DTR 244 (Bom) and in the case of CIT vs. Prima Paper and Engineering Industry 364 ITR 222 (Bom). He also referred the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi Vs. Income Tax Officer 234 ITR 154 (Bom) and the case of NDT System and Another Vs. ITO & Other 363 ITR 605 (Bom). After perusal of the reason recorded as referred sup…

Shah Construction Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax-Cenral Circle-1(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 862/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Ram Krishna Kedia
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

…014 and 29.01.2014 vide which details pertaining to work in progress and various expenses debited to P.S.L A/c were submitted. The ld. Counsel has also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd. Vs. DCIT 101 DTR 244 (Bom) and in the case of CIT vs. Prima Paper and Engineering Industry 364 ITR 222 (Bom). He also referred the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi Vs. Income Tax Officer 234 ITR 154 (Bom) and the case of NDT System and Another Vs. ITO & Other 363 ITR 605 (Bom). After perusal of the reason recorded as referred sup…

Shah Construction Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax-Cenral Circle-1(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 861/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Ram Krishna Kedia
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

…014 and 29.01.2014 vide which details pertaining to work in progress and various expenses debited to P.S.L A/c were submitted. The ld. Counsel has also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd. Vs. DCIT 101 DTR 244 (Bom) and in the case of CIT vs. Prima Paper and Engineering Industry 364 ITR 222 (Bom). He also referred the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi Vs. Income Tax Officer 234 ITR 154 (Bom) and the case of NDT System and Another Vs. ITO & Other 363 ITR 605 (Bom). After perusal of the reason recorded as referred sup…