What is Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT authority for?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's powers are similar to those of the assessee and it can permit additional grounds to be raised, provided it exercises its power under Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, judiciously for substantial justice.

How many judgments cite Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT?

28 judgments on BharatTax cite Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT (208 ITR 958), spanning 2016 to 2023.

Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT (208 ITR 958)

MICHAEL GRAVES DESIGN GROUP INC.,USA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs i

ITA 6007/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15 & Asstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Seth, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 115ASection 143(3)

…le 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 by applying its judicial mind as the said power is given with a view to doing substantial justice between the parties. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in its Full Bench decision in Ashok Vardhan Birla vs. CWT 208 ITR 958 (Bom) (FB) has held that the powers of the Tribunal are similar to those of the assessee. The Tribunal can permit additional grounds to be raised. In National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that a question of law arising out of facts found by the authorities and which goes at the root of the jur…

MICHAEL GRAVES DESIGN GROUP INC.,USA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs i

ITA 7683/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15 & Asstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Seth, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 115ASection 143(3)

…le 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 by applying its judicial mind as the said power is given with a view to doing substantial justice between the parties. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in its Full Bench decision in Ashok Vardhan Birla vs. CWT 208 ITR 958 (Bom) (FB) has held that the powers of the Tribunal are similar to those of the assessee. The Tribunal can permit additional grounds to be raised. In National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that a question of law arising out of facts found by the authorities and which goes at the root of the jur…

USV P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT-C-5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 891/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Blem/S. Usv Private Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 5(2) Arvind Vitthal Gandhi Chowk 1908, 19Th Floor Govandi (East), Mumbai- 400088 Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 Pan: Aaacu1366N (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle- 5(2) V. M/S. Usv Private Limited 1908, 19Th Floor Arvind Vitthal Gandhi Chowk Air India Building, Nariman Point Govandi (East), Mumbai- 400088 Mumbai- 400021 Pan: Aaacu1366N

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 245CSection 35Section 37Section 37(1)

…ns: - Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [187 ITR 688 (SC)] - CIT v. S. Nelliappan [66 ITR 722 (SC)] - National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [229 ITR 383 (SC)] Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. & Ors. v. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Bom)] - Ashok Vardhan Birla v, CWT [208 ITR 958 (Bom)] Inaroo Ltd. v. CIT [204 ITR 312 (Bom)] - CIT v. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd. [141 ITR 626 (Bom)] 59. Ld. DR objected for admission of the additional grounds as they were never raised before appellate proceedings and therefore cannot be admitted. 60. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe that as the said ad…

M/S. PRACTO TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 154/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: S/Shri Dhanesh Bafna & Ali Asgar Rampurawala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT-2(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92D

…n of India Ltd., 187 ITR 688 (SC) • Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. and Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT, 199 ITR 351 (Bom) • New India Industries Ltd., 207 ITR 1010 (Guj) • National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC) • Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT, 208 ITR 958 (Bom) • Controller of Estate Duty v. R. Brahadeeswaran, 163 ITR 680 (Mad) • Inaroo Ltd. v. CIT, 204 ITR 312 (Bom) • CIT v. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd., 141 ITR 622 (Bom) 5. We have heard both the parties on the admission of additional grounds. These additional grounds are already available on the record of lower authorities and do not require fresh…

M/S CHEMESTER FOOD INDUSTRY,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-III, AMRITSAR

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

ITA 583/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ranjan Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)

…admitted though not produced before the lower authorities and the discretion of the Tribunal will not be interfered with unless exercised on non-existent or imaginary grounds. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in its Full Bench decision in Ashok Vardhan Birla vs. CWT 208 ITR 958 (Bom) (FB) has held that the powers of the Tribunal are similar to those of the assessee. The Tribunal can permit additional grounds to be raised. In National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that a question of law arising out of facts found by the authorities and which goes at the root of the jur…

ZYDUS HEALTHCARE LTD,GANGTOK vs. ACIT, CIR. 3(2), GANGTOK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 139/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healhcare Limited,……..................Appellant (Successor To Zydus Healthcare Sikkim), 4Th Floor, ‘D’ Wing, Zudus Corporate Park, Scheme No. 63, Survey No. 536, Khoraj (Gandhinagar), Nr. Vaishnodevi Circle, Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar, Gujrat-382481 [Pan: Aaacg1895Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim-737101 Appearances By: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, Ca & Sonal Pandey, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 20, 2023 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 156Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…(iii)CIT v Nelliappan (S.) [1967] 66 ITR 722 (SC); (iv)Ahemdabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v CIT |1993) 199 ITR 351 (Bom.); (v)Inaroo Ltd. v CIT [1993] 204 ITR 312 (Bom.); 2 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healthcare Limited (vi)Ashok Vardhan Birla v CWT [19941 208 ITR 958 (Bom.); (vii) CIT v Govindram Bros. Pvt. Ltd. [1983] 141 ITR 626 (Bom.). 4. The contention of the assessee for permission to raise additional grounds of appeal is that Scheme of the Income Tax Act contemplates that under section 144C of the income Tax Act, the ld. Assessing Officer was required to first prepare a draft assessment order and such…

S.S. ORAL HYGIENE PRODUCTS P. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH COLGATE PALMOLIVE (I) LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 774/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…in the aforesaid case has held that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the assessee‟s additional ground, even though the claim has not been made before either the Ineme Tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner Ashok Vardhan Birla vs. CWT [208 ITR 958 (Bom)] In this case, following its decision in case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra) and the decision of the Apex Court in case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court, in the context of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, observed that the powers of the appellate authorities are the same as the powers of the asse…

SS ORAL HYGEINE PRODUCTS P.LTD (NOW MERGED WITH COLGATE-PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(3) ( NOW ADDL CIT 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 5677/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…in the aforesaid case has held that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the assessee‟s additional ground, even though the claim has not been made before either the Ineme Tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner Ashok Vardhan Birla vs. CWT [208 ITR 958 (Bom)] In this case, following its decision in case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra) and the decision of the Apex Court in case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court, in the context of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, observed that the powers of the appellate authorities are the same as the powers of the asse…

DCIT CIR 3(3), MUMBAI vs. S.S ORAL HYGIENE PRODUCTS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 5538/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…in the aforesaid case has held that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the assessee‟s additional ground, even though the claim has not been made before either the Ineme Tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner Ashok Vardhan Birla vs. CWT [208 ITR 958 (Bom)] In this case, following its decision in case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra) and the decision of the Apex Court in case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court, in the context of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, observed that the powers of the appellate authorities are the same as the powers of the asse…

YCH LOGISTICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Dr. S.Palani Kumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…n’ble Supreme Court in the case of CT vs. Nelliappan (S.), (1967) 66 ITR 722 4) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd., vs. CIT, (1993) 199 ITR 351 5) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ashok Vardhan Birla vs. CWT (1994) 208 ITR 958 6) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Inaroo Ltd., vs. CIT (1993) 204 ITR 312 7) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Govindram Bros. Pvt. Ltd., (1983) 141 ITR 626 4. On the other hand, the ld.CIT-DR, Dr. S. Palani Kumar opposed admissibility of additional ground for the reason that this matter has I.T.A. No.322/Chny/2016 travel…

TEXTRON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1342/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Sumeet Khurana, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

…rporation of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) • Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. and Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT, 199 ITR 351 (Bom) • New India Industries Ltd., 207 ITR 1010 (Guj) • National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC) • Ashok Vardhan Birla, 208 ITR 958 (Bom) • Controller of Estate Duty v. R. Brahadeeswaran, 163 ITR 680 (Mad) 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR raised serious objections for admission of additional grounds. Page 4 of 17 6. We have perused the material on record on the admission of additional grounds. Since the facts relating to the issues raised in the additional grounds are alrea…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIES TRUST 2008 SERIES 14, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal for A

ITA 4789/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Iii Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat17440L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Matru Mandir 2008 Series 36 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16925L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals In Ita No.4789/Mum/2017, 4791/Mum/2017 & 4794/Mum/2017 For A.Y.2010-11 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 32/It-604/23(1)(2)/2015-16, Cit(A)-32/It-48/19(3)(2)/2012-13 & Cit(A)-32/It-483/Ito-19(3)(4)/12-13 Respectively Dated 24/04/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 26/02/2016, 31/10/2012 Respectively By The Ld. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(2) & 19(3)(2) Respectively, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 148Section 161Section 161(1)Section 61

…n from AAC's order, so long as these grounds were in respect of subject matter of entire tax proceedings. The Courts have also upheld admission of additional grounds in the following cases: • CIT v. S. Nelliappan (66 ITR 722 (SC) • Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT (208 ITR 958 (Bom.) 7. The Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of Pradeep G. Vora vide ITA No. 2187/Mum/2006 pronounced on 30.05.2014 examined the issue of admission of additional ground in detail vide para Nos. 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 of the order. In paragraph No. 3.1, it is held that the power of the Tribunal to allow an additional plea/additional evidence originates…

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICALS LTD),MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2(2), MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 872/MUM/2013[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1999-00

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री राजेश क मार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष। BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 915/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 916/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 917/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 918/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 869/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa ba…

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICALS LTD),MUMBAI vs. JCIT SP RG, 1, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 871/MUM/2013[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1998-99

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री राजेश क मार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष। BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 915/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 916/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 917/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 918/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 869/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa ba…

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICALS LTD),MUMBAI vs. JCIT SP RG, 1, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 870/MUM/2013[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1997-98

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री राजेश क मार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष। BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 915/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 916/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 917/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 918/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 869/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa ba…

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING P.LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICALS LTD),MUMBAI vs. JCIT SP RG, 1, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 869/MUM/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1996-97

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री राजेश क मार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष। BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 915/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 916/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 917/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 918/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 869/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa ba…

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICAL LTD),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 2(2), MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 918/MUM/2012[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 1999-00

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 915/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 916/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 917/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 918/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 869/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 870/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 871/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 872/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 1999-00)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री राजेश क मार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष। BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 915/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1996-97) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 916/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1997-98) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 917/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1998-99) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 918/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 1999-00) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 869/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa ba…

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

…which are on record in the assessment proceedings we fail to see why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee." Ashok Vardhan Birla vs. CWT [208 ITR 958 (Born)] In this case, following its decision in case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra) and the decision of the Apex Court in case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court, in the context of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, observed that the powers of the appellate authorities are the same as the powers of the asse…

ZOETIS PHARMACEUTICALS RESEARCH P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 11(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3715/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3715/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15) बिाम/ Zoetis Pharmaceutical Acit 11(3)(2) Research P. Ltd., Mumbai 31, Level-3, V. Kalpataru Synergy, Opp. Grand Hyatt, Santacruz (E), Mumbai-400055 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aadcp5293L (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Siddharth Shah Revenue By : Shri. C.S. Sharma, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 3715/Mum/2018, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 31.03.2018 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2014-15, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 28.12.2016 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 2014-15. I.T.A. No.3715/Mum/2018

For Appellant: Shri. Siddharth ShahFor Respondent: Shri. C.S. Sharma, DR

Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251

…relied upon the following decisions:- 1. CIT v. S. Nelliappan [16 ITR 722 (SC)] 2. Ahmadabad Electricity Co. Ltd. and Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Bom)] 3. National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT 229 ITR 383(SC) 4. Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT [208 ITR 958 (Bom)] 5. Inaroo Ltd. v. CIT [204 ITR 312 (Bom)] 6. CIT vs. Govindram Bros. P. Ltd. [141 ITR 626 (Bom)] The Ld. DR objected to the admission of the additional ground but however left the matter to the discretion of the Bench to decide as to admission of these additional grounds of appeal 4. We have heard both the rival parties and gone through th…

VIACOM 18 MEDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST DIT (IT) 4(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 667/MUM/2016[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Respondent: Shri M. V. Rajguru

Section 195Section 248

…on of India Limited v CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) - National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v CIT [19981 229 ITR 383 (SC) - CIT v Nelliappan (S.) |1967] 66 ITR 722 (SC) - Ahemdabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom.) - Ashok Vardhan Birla v CWT |1994| 208 ITR 958 (Bom.) - Inaroo Ltd. v CIT (1993] 204 ITR 312 (Bom.) - CIT v Goviodram Bros. Pvt. Ltd. [1983] 141 ITR 626 (Bom.) 5. Since the facts are identical, we are referring to the facts and figures from ITA No. 667/Mum/2016. Accordingly, we adjudicate the issues arising out of all the above grounds including the additional grounds as under: Viacom 18 M…

Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT

What is Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT authority for?

Also referred to as

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Ashok Vardhan Birla v. CWT

MICHAEL GRAVES DESIGN GROUP INC.,USA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

MICHAEL GRAVES DESIGN GROUP INC.,USA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

USV P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT-C-5(2), MUMBAI

M/S. PRACTO TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

M/S CHEMESTER FOOD INDUSTRY,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-III, AMRITSAR

ZYDUS HEALTHCARE LTD,GANGTOK vs. ACIT, CIR. 3(2), GANGTOK

S.S. ORAL HYGIENE PRODUCTS P. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH COLGATE PALMOLIVE (I) LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(3), MUMBAI

SS ORAL HYGEINE PRODUCTS P.LTD (NOW MERGED WITH COLGATE-PALMOLIVE (INDIA) LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(3) ( NOW ADDL CIT 10(3), MUMBAI

DCIT CIR 3(3), MUMBAI vs. S.S ORAL HYGIENE PRODUCTS P.LTD, MUMBAI

YCH LOGISTICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

TEXTRON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIES TRUST 2008 SERIES 14, MUMBAI

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICALS LTD),MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2(2), MUMBAI

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICALS LTD),MUMBAI vs. JCIT SP RG, 1, MUMBAI

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICALS LTD),MUMBAI vs. JCIT SP RG, 1, MUMBAI

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING P.LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICALS LTD),MUMBAI vs. JCIT SP RG, 1, MUMBAI

SABRAS INVESTMENT & TRADING CO. LTD ( NOW MERGED WITH TATA CHEMICAL LTD),MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 2(2), MUMBAI

M/S. PGS PREMIERE CONFERENCING PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(3), BENGALURU

ZOETIS PHARMACEUTICALS RESEARCH P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 11(3)(2), MUMBAI

VIACOM 18 MEDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST DIT (IT) 4(3)(1), MUMBAI