Aventis Pharma Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

ACIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. National Bank for Agriculature and Rural Developement, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () A.C.I.T-3(2)(2) National Bank For Agriculture & R. No. 674, 6Th Floor, Vs. Rural Development, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, C-24, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai -400 020 Complex,Bandra, Mumbai – 400 051 Pan No. Aaact4020G (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Jehangir Mistri, Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman, Cit D.R Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M:

…he mind of the AO during the assessment proceedings under s. 143(3). Consequently, it is evident that there is an absence of tangible material before the AO”. Also, the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction in the case of Aventis Pharma Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom), reiterating its aforesaid view that reassessment proceedings cannot be permitted on the basis of a „Change of opinion‟ had held as under:- ITA No.4277/Mum/2016 A.Y. 2007-08 15 ACIT 3(2)(2)Vs. National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development “There is merit in the submission which has been urged on behalf of the assessee that there was…

M.S Mahindra Cie Automotive Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Circle-6(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Mahindra Cie Automotive Ltd The Deputy Commissioner Of (As A Successor Of Hinoday Industries Ltd.) Vs. Income Tax, Circle 6(3) Mahindra Towers, 1St Floor, Room No. 515, Aayakar Bhavan, P.K. Kurne Chowk, Worli M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai - 400 018 Pan No. Aabcm6632J (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri H.P. Mahajani, A.R Revenue By : Shri Mahendra Ahuja, D.R Date Of Hearing : 22/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/11/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M:

…he mind of the AO during the assessment proceedings under s. 143(3). Consequently, it is evident that there is an absence of tangible material before the AO”. Also, the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction in the case of Aventis Pharma Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom), reiterating its aforesaid view that ITA No. 1575/Mum/2020 A.Y.2008-09 9 M/s Mahindra CIE Automotive Ltd. Vs. The DCIT, Circle 6(3) reassessment proceedings cannot be permitted on the basis of a „Change of opinion‟ had held as under:- “There is merit in the submission which has been urged on behalf of the assessee that there was no tangib…

Chandra Financial Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Chandra Financial Services Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., Achal Building, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Income Tax-2(1)(1), 21, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001

…Y. 2009-10 18 Chandra Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT-2(1)(1) Consequently, it is evident that there is an absence of tangible material before the AO”. Also, the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction in the case of Aventis Pharma Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom), reiterating its aforesaid view that reassessment proceedings cannot be permitted on the basis of a „Change of opinion‟ had held as under:- “There is merit in the submission which has been urged on behalf of the assessee that there was no tangible material before the AO on the basis of which the assessment could have been reopened and what…

M/S. Gyanshankar Investment & Trading Co. P. Ltd.(Before Amalgamation M/S. Stellar Credit& E-Trading P. Ltd), Mumbai vs. The DCIT Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2012-13

…ed as it amounts to review of earlier assessment order which is not permissible under the Act. The case of the assessee is covered by a plethora of judgments namely; > CIT vs Kelvinator of India (2010) 187 Taxman 312 (SC) > Aventies Pharma Ltd vs. ACIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom- HC) > Jashan Textile Mills (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 542/[2007] 164 Taxman 243 (Bom). > German Remedies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2006] 287 ITR 494/152 Taxman 269 (Bom) > CIT vs. Former Finance (2003) 264 ITR 566 (SC) > Balakrishna Hiralal Wani vs. ITO (2010) 321 ITR 519 (Bom.) > CIT vs Purolator India Ltd ITA No. 489 of 2011 (Delhi HC) 1…

Twin Earth Securities P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT RG 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Twin Earth Dy.Cit, Securities P. Ltd., Range - 4(2)(1), 301/302 Prime Plaza, Room No.642, Vs. 38-A, S.V. Road, 6Th Floor, Santacruz (West), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 054 M.K. Road, Pan: Aabct3066F Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Amit Pratap Singh, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2020 O R D E R

…nsidered in the original assessment proceedings while allowing a claim of the Appellant. Thus, the notice dated 26.03.2015 issued u/s 148(1) of the Act is without jurisdiction as has been held in the following decisions: i. Aventis PharmaLtd. vs. ACIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom)- Bombay High Court. ii. Rushabh Enterprises vs. ACIT- [2015] 60 taxmann.com 134 (Bombay)- Bombay High Court 11. The notice issued u/s 148(1) of the Act is without jurisdiction as the Ld. AO carried out reassessment proceedings to rectify his earlier stand for which proceedings u/s 154 of the Act could have been carried out. It is submitted…

Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy.C.I.T., Cent.Cir.10(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income D-2, Medley Houses, 16Th Road, Tax-10(2)(2), Vs. Midc Area, Andheri (East), Mumbai Mumbai – 400 093 Pan – Aaacm2764J (Appellant) (Respondent) Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, D-2, Medley House, 16Th Road, Central Circle – 44, Vs. Midc Area, Andheri (East), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai Mumbai Pan – Aaacm2764J (Appellant) (Respondent)

…he mind of the AO during the assessment proceedings under s. 143(3). Consequently, it is evident that there is an absence of tangible material before the AO”. Also, the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction in the case of Aventis Pharma Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom), reiterating its aforesaid view that reassessment proceedings cannot be permitted on the basis of a „Change of opinion‟, had held as under:- “There is merit in the submission which has been urged on behalf of the assessee that there was no tangible material before the AO on the basis of which the assessment could have been reopened and wha…

Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal,Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Kotak Mahindra Asset Assistant Commissioner Of Income Management Co. Ltd.,C-27 बिधम/ Tax- 14(2)(1), Mumbai. Bkc, G Block, Bandra Kurla Vs. Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai 400 051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaack5576C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Deputy Commissioner Of Kotak Mahindra Asset Management बिधम/ Income Tax- 14(2)(1), 432, 4Th Co. Ltd., C-27 Bkc, G Block, Bandra Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kurla Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400 020. 400 051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaack5576C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…mind of the AO during the assessment proceedings under s. 143(3). Consequently, it is evident that there is an absence of tangible material before the AO‖. Lastly, the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction in the case of Aventis Pharma Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom), reiterating its aforesaid view that reassessment proceedings cannot be permitted on the basis of a „Change of opinion‟, had held as under:- ITA NO(s). 1815/Mum/2017 & 1794/Mum/2017 16 Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Co. Ltd. Vs ACIT-14(2)(1) & DCIT-14(2)(1) Vs. Kotak Mahindra asset Management Co. Ltd. ―There is merit in the submission whi…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Co.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal,Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Kotak Mahindra Asset Assistant Commissioner Of Income Management Co. Ltd.,C-27 बिधम/ Tax- 14(2)(1), Mumbai. Bkc, G Block, Bandra Kurla Vs. Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai 400 051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaack5576C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Deputy Commissioner Of Kotak Mahindra Asset Management बिधम/ Income Tax- 14(2)(1), 432, 4Th Co. Ltd., C-27 Bkc, G Block, Bandra Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kurla Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400 020. 400 051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaack5576C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…mind of the AO during the assessment proceedings under s. 143(3). Consequently, it is evident that there is an absence of tangible material before the AO‖. Lastly, the Hon‟ble High Court of jurisdiction in the case of Aventis Pharma Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom), reiterating its aforesaid view that reassessment proceedings cannot be permitted on the basis of a „Change of opinion‟, had held as under:- ITA NO(s). 1815/Mum/2017 & 1794/Mum/2017 16 Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Co. Ltd. Vs ACIT-14(2)(1) & DCIT-14(2)(1) Vs. Kotak Mahindra asset Management Co. Ltd. ―There is merit in the submission whi…

Panther Fincap & Management Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1326/Mum/2012 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) Panther Fincap & Management The Asst. Commissioner Of Services Ltd. Income Tax, Central Circle Bhupen Chambers, Ground 40, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Floor, 9, Dalal Street, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 023 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./ Pan No. Aaacp3045P अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Dr. P Daniel, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23-08-2018 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31-08-2018 Aadosa / O R D E R

…nd it is merely a change of opinion as the AO has applied his mind to the facts of the case and taken a view. For this the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Aventis Pharma Ltd. vs. ACIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom), Asteriods Trading Investments (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2009) 308 ITR 1990 (Bom), ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2020) 325 ITR 471 (Bom). 9. When this was pointed to the learned Sr. Departmental Representative that was the failure on the part of the assessee, he only referred to the re-assessment order and that the assessee…