Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT

Epc Industries Ltd, Nashik vs. ACIT OSD 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Cn Prasad: (A.Y : 2007-08) Epc Industries Ltd. Vs. Acit Osd 10(1) Plot No.H-109, Midc Mumbai Ambad Nashik – 422010 Pan : Aaace2659J (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

…285 ITR 26(Bom)] (4) German Remedies Ltd. Vs CIT [(2006) 287 ITR 494(Bom)] (5) Siemens Information Systems Ltd Vs Asstt. CIT [(2007) 295 ITR 333 (Bom)] (6) Haryana Accrylic Manufacturing Co.Vs.CIT[(2009) 308 ITR 38 (Del.)] (7) Asain Paints Vs Dy.CIT [(2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom)] 5. Coming to the merits of the case, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing plastic pipes. Up to A. Y. 2001-02 company has incurred huge loss as a result it become sick company and got registered by BIFR in terms of section 3(1)(O) of Sick Industrial Companies Act (SICA). H…

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Steel Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

…v CIT [2010] 329 ITR 257 (Bom) 10. ACIT v ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd [2002] 348 ITR 299 (SC) 11. Bedmutha Industries Ltd v DCIT [2013] 87 DTR 305 (Bom) 12. Titanor Components Ltd v ACIT [2012] 342 ITR 183 (Bom) 13. Asian Paints Ltd v DCIT [2009] 308 ITR 195 (Bom) 14. Hindustan Lever Ltd v R B Wadkar, ITO [2004] 268 ITR 332(Bom) 15. NDT Systems v ITO [2014] 363 ITR 603 (Bom) 16. Johri Lal (HUF) v CIT [1973] 88 ITR 439 (SC) M/s. Tata Steel Ltd. 17. Chhugamal Rajpal v S P Chaliha [1971] 79 ITR 603 (SC) 18. Central India electric Supply Co. Ltd v ITO [2011] 333 ITR 237 (Del) 19. United Electrical Co (P…

Jord Engineers (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 8(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Shri Amit Shukla ()

…sessee. Hence the AO has reopened the assessment on mere change of opinion and hence the reopening has to be held as bad in law. The Ld A.R also placed reliance on the decision given by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd Vs. DCIT (2009)(308 ITR 195). 11 I.T.A. No.644 & 718/Mum/2015 16. The Ld D.R, on the contrary, submitted that the assessee has shown the Filters and Cane Harvester as finished goods. There is no change in the quantity of opening and closing stock in respect of the above two items. The assessee has claimed impugned deduction by valuing the closing stock at a lower rate. The…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…re to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. The decisions of Bombay High Court in the cases of Asteroids Trading and Investments P Ltd, 308 ITR 190 (Bom), Siemens Information Systems Ltd, 295 ITR 333 (Bom) and Asian Paints Ltd, 308 ITR 195 (Bom) are also on similar lines where proceedings u/s 147 have been held to be invalid because re- opening was based on mere "change of opinion". In these decisions, the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court (Full Bench), in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) (FB) has been followed. The decision of Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Cou…

ACIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Fiat India P.Ltd ( Now Known As New Holland (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain D C I T – 10(1) M/S. Fiat India P. Ltd. Room No. 455, 4Th Floor (Now New Holland (India) P. Ltd.) 303, Central Plaza, 166 Cst Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E) Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400098 Pan – Aaaci3922Q Appellant Respondent

…05 was on account of mere change of opinion, on the same set of facts available on record, which is not permissible in law as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kelvinator India Ltd. (320 ITR 561) and Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Asian Paints Ltd. (308 ITR 195 (Bom). To sum up, the learned A.R. of the assessee contended that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any facts in relation to capital reduction. Mere change of opinion on same set of facts already disclosed before the AO was not a valid ground for reopening the assessment since there was no income of the assessee liable…

DCIT 1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Intelnet Global Services P. Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-1(2)(1), M/S Intelnet Global Services R. No.535, 5Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Intelnet Towers, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Mindspace, Malad West, Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaaci7387P C.O. No.99/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.7428/Mum/2014) Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Intelnet Global Services Dcit-1(2)(1), Pvt. Ltd. Intelnet Towers, R. No.535, 5Th Floor, बनाम/ Mindspace, Malad West, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400064 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaaci7387P

…ion and on the basis of mere change of opinion, reopening of assessment is not permissible. As was held in CIT vs TTK Prestige ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 390 (Karn.) SLP dismissed in 2010 322 ITR (St.) 14 (SC). Reference also made to Asian Paints ltd. vs DCIT (2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom.), Andhra Bank Ltd. vs CIT (1997) 225 ITR 447 (SC). The observations of the Supreme Court are a protection against the abuse of power; they also protect the Revenue which can, in the light of subsequent coming into light of facts or law, reopen the assessment. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, since, there was no new tangible materia…

Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai vs. Muimbai Stock Brokers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed”

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2006-07 Acit-4(3), M/S Mumbai Stock 6Th Floor, R. No.649, बनाम/ Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, R No.10A, 1St Floor, 7/10, Vs. M.K. Road, Botwala Building, Mumbai-4020 Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumbai-400023 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aabcm4133A

…ion and on the basis of mere change of opinion, reopening of assessment is not permissible. As was held in CIT vs TTK Prestige ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 390 (Karn.) SLP dismissed in 2010 322 ITR (St.) 14 (SC). Reference also made to Asian Paints ltd. vs DCIT (2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom.), Andhra Bank Ltd. vs CIT (1997) 225 ITR 447 (SC). The observations of the Supreme Court are a protection against the abuse of power; they also protect the Revenue which can, in the light of subsequent coming into light of facts or law, reopen the assessment. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, since, there was no new tangible materia…

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

Asst CIT CC 8(4), Mumbai vs. Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

Asst CIT CC 8(4), Mumbai vs. Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…that the AO has reopened the assessee‟s case merely on change of opinion regarding allocation of expenses which is not a legitimate reason to reopen assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Asian Paints Ltd., 308 ITR 195. Accordingly there is no justification in the order of AO reopening the completed assessment. 23. In the result appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2006-07 is allowed. 13 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 24. In these years the assessment has been reopened within the period of four years on the very same issue of allocation of expe…

ACIT Cir 12(3), Mumbai vs. Kabra & Associates, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6965/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Acit Circle – 12(3), M/S Kabra & Associates, बनाम/ R. No. 137, Ist Floor, 2 Nd Floor, Jash Chambers, V. Aayakar Bhavan, Sir P.M. Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai 400 023. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaffk2000F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…e income has escaped assessment which is merely a change of opinion. The assessee relied upon the following decisions:- 1. CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd., 256 ITR 1 (Affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in 320 ITR 561 (SC)). 2. Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT,(2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom) 3. NDT Systems v. ITO, 255 CTR 113 (Bom) ITA 6965/Mum/2014 7 The ld. CIT(A) rejected the contentions of the assessee on the ground that the A.O. clearly recorded that the assessee has deducted TDS on amount of Rs. 1,29,63,647/- paid for contractors , professionals and brokerage in the first eleven months of the financial year 2006-07 and…