Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT

Ashish N. Gupta, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 41(4)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarashish N. Gupta Vs. Ito, Ward 41(4)(1) 1501, Anmol Enclave Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc S.V Road, Goregoan, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 062. Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Aazpg7658K (Applicant) (Respondent)

…the date of disposal of objection is bad in law and void. Reliance is placed on the decision of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. ITO [2002] 125 Taxman 963 (SC),s Bharat Jayantilal Patel v. UOI (2015) 378 ITR 596 (Bombay (HC) and Asian Paints v. Dy. CIT (2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom HC) 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. A.O. has erred by initiating the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the I. T. Act, 1961 by merely relying on the information received by his office from Dy. Director (Inv.) Unit- 6(2), Mumbai without understanding the provisions of section 147 that the same was only borr…

Rupa Infotech and Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14(1)(20, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri () Ι.Τ.Α. No. 4750/Mum/2025

…the Ld.AO has no power to review concluded assessment in the garb of reopening. 5. 4. At this juncture, we refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., reported in (2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom) wherein the Hon'ble Court held that when all facts were before Ld.AO at the time of original assessment even assuming that Ld.AO failed to apply his mind in the original assessment, the Ld.AO is precluded to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator India Ltd. (supra) held that “there is conceptual dif…

Income Tax Officer, Churchgate vs. M/S Nnm Securities Pvt. Ltd., Fort

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Ito-4(2)(1) M/S. Nnm Securities P. Ltd. Room No. 644 1111 Stock Exchange Tower Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Dalal Street, Fort M.K. Road Mumbai-400 023. Mumbai-400 020. Pan : Aaacn8070G Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 154/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year : 2016-17)

…jection raised by “Internal Audit Party”. As the issue involved was already dealt by earlier AO, reopening on the same issue amounts to mere change of opinion, and the same is not permitted as held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. 308 ITR 195 (Bom). iv) The assessment year involved is A.Y. 2016-17 and reopening was done after four years which is again not permitted by law as it was held that notice issued after expiry of four years where there is no allegation that the appellant has not disclosed material facts necessary for reopening as held in Sound Castings (P) Ltd. 250 CTR 119 (Bo…

Thumbprint Advertising Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, 13(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, grounds of

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt.Renu Jauhri(Physical Hearing)

…pening on same issue is nothing but change of opinion. To support his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in Gagan Omprakash Navani Vs ITO (2022) 138 taxmann.com 233, Asian Paints Ltd. vs DCIT (2009) 308 ITR 195, and Marico Ltd. vs ACIT (2019) 111 taxmann.com 253. 5. On merit, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee has shown all the receipts in the return of income and offered the same for taxation. In the assessment proceedings as well as during reassessment proceeding, the assessee furnished various documents and explanations to substantiat…