Aroni Commercials Ltd. v. DCIT

ACIT 29(1), Mumbai vs. Dhaniji Bhanushali, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

…elaborately considered by the Ld.CIT(A) with reference to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. M/s. Kelvinator of India Limited [320 ITR 561] and the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd. v. DCIT [362 ITR 403] and held that reopening of assessment by issue of notice u/s. 148 is not valid and hence bad in law. What we see is a mere change of opinion of the Assessing Officer to assessee the short term capital gain shown by the assessee as business income of the assessee, beyond the period of four years from the end of the Assessment Year, where the asse…

DCIT 1(2)-2, Mumbai vs. Ozoneland Agro P.Ltd, Mumbai

…ion taken after due application of mind should be followed consistently as this lead to certainty, unless there are valid and good reasons for deviating and not accepting earlier decision.” The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Aroni Commercials Ltd.(362 ITR 403) has dealt the issue of consistency as follow: Though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to tax matters as each year is separate and distinct,nevertheless where facts are identical from year to year,there has to be uniformity and in treatment. 5.4.Similarly,in the case of Gopal Purohit(336ITR287),the jurisdictional High Court has he…

Amolika Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -9(1)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Sh. R. C. Sharma, Am & Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 505 & 506/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08&2008-09)

…ions in the assessment order itself in a composite manner. The Assessing Officer should have complied with the point of law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. Vrs. DCIT (296 ITR 90) and Aroni Commercial Ltd. Vrs. DCIT (362 ITR 403) and has not waited four weeks after the order rejecting the assessee’s objections on initiations of section 148 of the Act. Apart from this, as per the entire order of assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 there was no new tangible material on record before the Assessing Officer, and in the absence of any new tangible material on record, the order of…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. Paresh Construction & Foundations P.Ltd, Mumbai

…ion taken after due application of mind should be followed consistently as this lead to certainty, unless there are valid and good reasons for deviating and not accepting earlier decision.” The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Aroni Commercials Ltd.(362 ITR 403) has dealt the issue of consistency as follow: Though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to tax matters as each year is separate and distinct,nevertheless where facts are identical from year to year,there has to be uniformity and in treatment.” Considering the above,we hold that FAA was justified deleting the addition made by the AO.…

DCIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Piem Hotels Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Piem Hotels Ltd., 90, Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai Vivanta By Tajvs. Mumbai Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai-5 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaact5523G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM The Dy. Commissioner of M/s Piem Hotels Ltd., 90, Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai Vivanta by Taj President Vs. Mumbai cuffe parade, Colaba, Mumbai-5 Appellant .. Respondent PAN No. AAACT5523G Revenue by : M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR Assessee by : Niraj Sheth, AR Date of hearing: 20-02-2018 Date of pronouncement : 23-02-2018 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: This appeal by the Revenue is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai, [in short CIT(A)] in appeal No. CIT(A)-8/IT…

ITO (E) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Sathya Sai Trust, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am

…rial no. iv to vi above. She further submitted that rule of consistency should also be applied especially in view of judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Gopal Purohit 336 ITR 287 (Bom) and Aroni Commercial Ltd. vs. DCIT & others (2014) 362 ITR 403 (Bom). She further submitted that the amendment made to section 11 is prospective and is not to be applied retrospectively in the assessment Sadguru Seva Trust year under consideration in this appeal. She requested for confirming the order of CIT(A) and dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue. I have heard both the parties at length and have g…

Manjula H Kanuga, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT Cir 1, Kalyan

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

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.4258/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04) बनाम/ Smt. Manjula H. Kanuga Deputy Commissioner Of House No.439, Flat No.1, Income Tax Circle – 1 Vs. Sumita Building, 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Gokulnagar, Kasarali, Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Bhiwandi Kalyan (W) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Acapk5229R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) ..

…d by the assessee, then in such a case the AO should not proceed further in the matter for a period of 4 weeks. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. 296 ITR 90 and Aroni Commercials Ltd. 362 ITR 403. 7. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. It is the say of the Ld. DR that the assessment was reopened on the basis of tangible material evidence in the form of report received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai and therefore it cannot be said that there is no application of mind.…

Thomas Cook (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm M/S. Thomas Cook (India) Vs. Dcit – 1(3)(2), Limited, Thomas Cook Mumbai Building, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaact4050C Appellant) .. Respondent)

…of mind should be followed consistently as this lead to certainty, unless 7 M/s.Thomas Cook (India) Ltd., there were valid and good reasons for deviating and not accepting earlier decision. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd.(362 ITR 403) has held as under: "Though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to tax matters as each year is separate and distinct, nevertheless where facts are identical from year to year, there has to be uniformity and in treatment." In the case under consideration we find that the TPO/DRP has not proved that there was a change in the facts, as c…

Hikal Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee company are allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Amit Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5383/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 221/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05)

…es Primary Dealership Ltd. (2012) 348 ITR 299 (SC); c) CIT v. Jet Speed Audio Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 762 (Bom); ITA 5383/M/12 & ITA 221/M/14 10 d) Lalitha Chem Industries P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2014) 364 ITR 213 (Bom) e) Aroni Commercials Ltd. v. DCIT (2014) 362 ITR 403 (Bom); f) ACIT v. ICICI General Insurance Co. Ltd. (2014) 41 CCH 162 (Mum)(Trib); g) Shri Sunil Gavaskar [ITA No. 3970 & 3971IMuml20 1 0] at paras 11.4 to 11.7 on pages 16 to 18; On merits, he submitted that this issue stands squarely covered by various decisions, some of which have been filed before us, however, the same are not being discusse…

DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Sheth Financial Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5406/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06) D.C.I.T. Cir. 7(1), M/S Sheth Financial बनाम/ Room No. 622, Services P. Ltd., V. Aayakar Bhavan, (Formerly Known As P L M.K. Road, Research & Development Churchgate, Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai -400020. Sadhna House, 3 Rd Floor,, 570 P.B. Marg, Behind Mahindra Tower, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabcp4312L .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…cannot proceed within four weeks from the date of order rejecting the assessee’s objection as laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Limited v. DCIT 296 ITR 90(Bom.) and Aroni ITA 5406/Mum/2013 14 Commercials Limited v. DCIT 362 ITR 403(Bom.). it was submitted that the learned CIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merits and has quashed the re- assessment proceedings. It was submitted that if the arguments of the assessee are not accepted, then the matter can go back to the authorities below to decide the issue on merits. 9. The learned DR submitted in rejoinder and drew our att…

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Malabar Hill Club Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee are hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-5(2), M/S Malabar Hill Club R. No.571, Aaykar Bhavan Limited, बनाम/ M.K. Road, Il Palazzo, B.K. Kher Vs. Mumbai-400020 Marg, Malabar Hill, Mumbai-400006 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacw3868M

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, बी, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 DCIT-5(2), M/s Malabar Hill Club R. No.571, Aaykar Bhavan Limited, बनाम/ M.K. Road, IL PALAZZO, B.K. Kher Vs. Mumbai-400020 Marg, Malabar Hill, Mumbai-400006 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. AAACW3868M राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri Mohammed Rizwan-DR "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri J.D. Mistri, Shri Niraj…

Case New Holland Construction Equipment (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. JCIT (OSD) Cir 2(2), Mumbai

…consistency that a decision taken after due application of mind should be followed consistently as this leads to certainty, unless there are valid and good reasons for deviating and not accepting the earlier decision.” In the matter of Aroni Commercials Ltd.(362 ITR 403)the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to tax matters as each year is separate and distinct,nevertheless where facts are identical from year to year,there has to be uniformity and consistency in treatment. 6.3.We find that the AO or the FAA has not brought on record as to how the facts…

Kuwait Investment Authority, Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) RG 3(1), Mumbai

…sion taken after due application of mind should be followed consistently as this lead to certainty, unless there are valid and good reasons for deviating and not accepting earlier decision. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Aroni Commercials Ltd.(362 ITR 403) has dealt the issue of consistency as follow: Though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to tax matters as each year is separate and distinct,nevertheless where facts are identical from year to year,there has to be uniformity and in treatment. Principles of natural justice demands that a reason order has to be passed by the tax autho…

Yes Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ “ “ “ जी जी जी” खंडपीठ जी Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“G”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, "याियक राम लाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/1991/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Yes Bank Limited DCIT, -8(3)(2) 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, discovery Room No.615, 6th Floor, A…

DCIT 17(2), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Kumar Gupta, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Pawan Singh (Jm)

…consistency, the claim of the assessee should be accepted. In this regard, the Ld CIT(A) has taken support of the decisions rendered by Hon’ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gopal Purohit (336 ITR 287), Aroni Chemicals Ltd Vs. DCIT (362 ITR 403) and the decision rendered in other cases, viz., ACIT Vs. Shri Satpal Singh Sethi (ITA No.3650/Mum/2010) and M/s SMK Shares & Stock Broking pvt Ltd (ITA No.799/Mum/2009 dated 24.12.2010). (n) In support of Principles of Consistency, the Ld CIT(A) has relied upon the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang Vs.…

Thomas Cook (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 1(3), Mumbai

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं././././I.T.A./ 1261 & 1238/Mum/2015, आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 वष" Thomas Cook (India) Limited Dcit-1 (3)(2) Thomas Cook Building Mumbai. Vs. Dr. D.N. Road, Fort,Mumbai-400 001. Pan:Aaact 4050 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri N.K. Chand-Cit Assessee By: Shri Madhur Agarwal सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04.05.2016 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 31.05.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 की धारा 254(1)के अ"ग"त आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद" राजे" के अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- Challenging The Orders Dated 08.12.2014 & 24.12.2014 Of Cit(A)-58 & Of The Assesssing Officer(Ao),The Assessee Has Filed The Appeals For The Above Mentioned Two Assessment Years(Ay.S.).Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Tour Operator,Travel Agent & Is Also An Authorised Dealer In Foreign Exchange.The Details Of Filing Of Returns,Returned Incomes,Assessed Incomes Etc.Can Be Summarised As Under: A.Y. Roi Filed On Returned Assessment Assessed Dt. Of Orders Of Income(Rs.) Dt. Income(Rs.) Cit(A)/Ao 2009-10 30.09.2009 44,28,33,999/- 28/03/2013 46,8432,558/- 08.12.2014 2010-11 30.09.2010 37,15,77,109/- 16/01/2015 57,86,82,443/- 16.01.2015

…ecision taken after due application of mind should be followed consistently as this lead to certainty,unless there were valid and good reasons for deviating and not accepting earlier decision.The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd.(362 ITR 403) has held as under: “Though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to tax matters as each year is separate and distinct,nevertheless where facts are identical from year to year,there has to be uniformity and in treatment.” In the case under consideration we find that the TPO/DRP has not proved that there was a change in the facts,as comp…

Kalpak Builders, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(2), Mumbai

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amit Shuklaआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita No.5281/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Kalpak Builders, Acit 19(3), Kalpak House, 128 Turner Road, 3Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400050 Vs Mumbai-12 Pan:Aadfk1518J िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सेसेसेसे/Assessee By : Ms. Aarti Sathe िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By :Shri M.Murli सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख / Date Of Hearing :08- 03 -2016 सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement :16-03-2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A)-30,Mumbai, Dated 6.6.2014,The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Firm,Engaged In The Business Of Builders & Financial Services,Filed Its Return Of Income On 23.09. 2010, Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 14,08, 886/-.The Assessing Officer (Ao) Finalised The Assessment On 13.03.2013, Under Section 143 (3) Of The Act, Determin -Ing The Income Of The Assessee At Rs. 44, 66, 480/-.

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, ए खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - A BENCH सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अिमत शु"ल "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amit Shukla,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.5281/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Kalpak Builders, ACIT 19(3), Kalpak House, 128 Turner Road, 3rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400050 Vs Mumbai-12 PAN:AADFK1518J िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सेसेसेसे/…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) RG 4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

…the subsequent years.In other words,it can safely be said that notwithstanding the complexity of adjudication,provided for under the Act,Parliament certainly intended,consistency to be the hallmark of adjudication process.In the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd.(362 ITR 403)the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to tax matters as each year is separate and distinct,nevertheless where facts are identical from year to year,there has to be uniformity and in treatment.On an earlier occasion in the case of Gopal Purohit(336ITR287),the Hon’ble Court has held that…

Dy. Director of I-Tax (Int. Tax)-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Nuclear Power Corpn. of India Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

…the subsequent years.In other words,it can safely be said that notwithstanding the complexity of adjudication,provided for under the Act,Parliament certainly intended,consistency to be the hallmark of adjudication process.In the case of Aroni Commercials Ltd.(362 ITR 403)the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to tax matters as each year is separate and distinct,nevertheless where facts are identical from year to year,there has to be uniformity and in treatment.On an earlier occasion in the case of Gopal Purohit(336ITR287),the Hon’ble Court has held that…