B.R. Bamasi v. CIT

83 ITR 223High Court1972#1495 most cited

What is B.R. Bamasi v. CIT authority for?

Under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules, an assessee can raise an additional ground to support an order in their favour from the lower appellate authority, but not to obtain further relief or annul the assessment, thus adversely affecting the appellant.

76

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

B.R. Bamasi v. CIT · 83 ITR 223 · Rule 27 · ITAT Rules · additional ground · sustain order · not for further relief · adversely affect appellant · Bombay High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 1963Section 153ASection 143(1)Section 151

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)section 33(4)section 147(b)closely held companysection 34(1)section 33accumulated profitssection 292bbsection 282section 34section 148(2)sanctioning authority

Judgments citing B.R. Bamasi v. CIT

Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad vs. Rajeev Kumar Arora, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and Rule 27

ITA 642/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Banita Devi Naorem, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…mbai Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Shri Ashwin Narendra Lodha in ITA No. 6584/Mum/2010 dated 23.12.2016 for Asst Year 2007-08 wherein the Tribunal by placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B R Bamasi vs CIT reported in 83 ITR 223 (Bom) and CIT vs Gilbert & Barker reported in 111 ITR 529 (Bom) had held as under:- “3. In brief, the relevant facts are that the respondent-assessee is an individual and he filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2007-08 on 27.7.2007 declaring total income of Rs.11,76,955/-, which was duly processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the…

Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad vs. Rajeev Kumar Arora, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and Rule 27

ITA 641/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Banita Devi Naorem, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…mbai Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Shri Ashwin Narendra Lodha in ITA No. 6584/Mum/2010 dated 23.12.2016 for Asst Year 2007-08 wherein the Tribunal by placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B R Bamasi vs CIT reported in 83 ITR 223 (Bom) and CIT vs Gilbert & Barker reported in 111 ITR 529 (Bom) had held as under:- “3. In brief, the relevant facts are that the respondent-assessee is an individual and he filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2007-08 on 27.7.2007 declaring total income of Rs.11,76,955/-, which was duly processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the…

Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad vs. Rajeev Kumar Arora, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and Rule 27

ITA 622/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Banita Devi Naorem, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…mbai Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Shri Ashwin Narendra Lodha in ITA No. 6584/Mum/2010 dated 23.12.2016 for Asst Year 2007-08 wherein the Tribunal by placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B R Bamasi vs CIT reported in 83 ITR 223 (Bom) and CIT vs Gilbert & Barker reported in 111 ITR 529 (Bom) had held as under:- “3. In brief, the relevant facts are that the respondent-assessee is an individual and he filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2007-08 on 27.7.2007 declaring total income of Rs.11,76,955/-, which was duly processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle, Pune vs. Mahindra International School Academy, Pune

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 980/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 143(3)

…tion on an issue which is decided against a respondent; followed by the main lower appellate order going in it’s favour; subject to a limitation that the maximum relief in such an instance is that of rejection of appeal only as per B.R. Bamasi vs. CIT [1972] 83 ITR 223 (Bom.). There is also no indication in the Revenue’s 13 ITA.No.980/PUN./2023 instant appeal about the foregoing compliance of sec.143(3) 1st proviso (i) and (ii) by the Assessing Officer (supra). We thus accept the assessee’s foregoing legal arguments in principle and reject the Revenue’s instant appeal in very terms. Ordered accordingly. A…

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Sunil Aggarwal, Faridabad

ITA 1529/DEL/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 119

…point raised by the respondent- assessee, based on the CBDT Circular dated 14/08/2019 (supra), is allowed in defence of the relief granted by the CIT(A) following the ratio of the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Ramasi vs. CIT, 83 ITR 223 (Bom), where in the following discussion is relevant; “The judgment of the Tribunal in our case clearly shows that, although the assessee wanted to raise a new point as a ground of defence in the appeal, he specifically stated that he wanted to rely upon it only for the purpose of having the appeal by the department for enhancement in income-tax…

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Sunil Aggarwal, Faridabad

ITA 1528/DEL/2021[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 119

…point raised by the respondent- assessee, based on the CBDT Circular dated 14/08/2019 (supra), is allowed in defence of the relief granted by the CIT(A) following the ratio of the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Ramasi vs. CIT, 83 ITR 223 (Bom), where in the following discussion is relevant; “The judgment of the Tribunal in our case clearly shows that, although the assessee wanted to raise a new point as a ground of defence in the appeal, he specifically stated that he wanted to rely upon it only for the purpose of having the appeal by the department for enhancement in income-tax…

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Sunil Aggarwal, Faridabad

ITA 1527/DEL/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 119

…point raised by the respondent- assessee, based on the CBDT Circular dated 14/08/2019 (supra), is allowed in defence of the relief granted by the CIT(A) following the ratio of the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Ramasi vs. CIT, 83 ITR 223 (Bom), where in the following discussion is relevant; “The judgment of the Tribunal in our case clearly shows that, although the assessee wanted to raise a new point as a ground of defence in the appeal, he specifically stated that he wanted to rely upon it only for the purpose of having the appeal by the department for enhancement in income-tax…

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Sunil Aggarwal, Faridabad

ITA 1526/DEL/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 119

…point raised by the respondent- assessee, based on the CBDT Circular dated 14/08/2019 (supra), is allowed in defence of the relief granted by the CIT(A) following the ratio of the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Ramasi vs. CIT, 83 ITR 223 (Bom), where in the following discussion is relevant; “The judgment of the Tribunal in our case clearly shows that, although the assessee wanted to raise a new point as a ground of defence in the appeal, he specifically stated that he wanted to rely upon it only for the purpose of having the appeal by the department for enhancement in income-tax…

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Sunil Aggarwal, Faridabad

ITA 1525/DEL/2021[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 119

…point raised by the respondent- assessee, based on the CBDT Circular dated 14/08/2019 (supra), is allowed in defence of the relief granted by the CIT(A) following the ratio of the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Ramasi vs. CIT, 83 ITR 223 (Bom), where in the following discussion is relevant; “The judgment of the Tribunal in our case clearly shows that, although the assessee wanted to raise a new point as a ground of defence in the appeal, he specifically stated that he wanted to rely upon it only for the purpose of having the appeal by the department for enhancement in income-tax…

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Sunil Aggarwal, Faridabad

ITA 1524/DEL/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 119

…point raised by the respondent- assessee, based on the CBDT Circular dated 14/08/2019 (supra), is allowed in defence of the relief granted by the CIT(A) following the ratio of the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Ramasi vs. CIT, 83 ITR 223 (Bom), where in the following discussion is relevant; “The judgment of the Tribunal in our case clearly shows that, although the assessee wanted to raise a new point as a ground of defence in the appeal, he specifically stated that he wanted to rely upon it only for the purpose of having the appeal by the department for enhancement in income-tax…

DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Sunil Aggarwal, Faridabad

ITA 1523/DEL/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Dec 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 119

…point raised by the respondent- assessee, based on the CBDT Circular dated 14/08/2019 (supra), is allowed in defence of the relief granted by the CIT(A) following the ratio of the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Ramasi vs. CIT, 83 ITR 223 (Bom), where in the following discussion is relevant; “The judgment of the Tribunal in our case clearly shows that, although the assessee wanted to raise a new point as a ground of defence in the appeal, he specifically stated that he wanted to rely upon it only for the purpose of having the appeal by the department for enhancement in income-tax…

M/S Sanofi India Ltd (Formerly Known As Aventis Pharma Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ACIT RG 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1606/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

…then the revenue succeeds only to the extent that the appeal of the assesses would fait. 10.7 The scope of Rule 27 of ITAT Rules has been discussed by the Hon'b!e jurisdictions! High Court in the case of Bamasi (B.R.) v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 83 ITR 223 as under, "But even if the assesses had not made such a statement, the above judgment shows that the assesses would be entitled to raise a new ground, provided it is a ground of law and does not necessitate any other evidence to be recorded, the nature of which would not only be a defence to the appeal itself, but may also affect the validity of t…

ACIT- 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Mm/S Sanofi India Limited (Formerly Known As Aventis Pharma Ltd)., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1302/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 271(1)(c)

…then the revenue succeeds only to the extent that the appeal of the assesses would fait. 10.7 The scope of Rule 27 of ITAT Rules has been discussed by the Hon'b!e jurisdictions! High Court in the case of Bamasi (B.R.) v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 83 ITR 223 as under, "But even if the assesses had not made such a statement, the above judgment shows that the assesses would be entitled to raise a new ground, provided it is a ground of law and does not necessitate any other evidence to be recorded, the nature of which would not only be a defence to the appeal itself, but may also affect the validity of t…

ACIT Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. G Trade and Capital Venture Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3211/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…erred to the decision of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi v. B.R. Bamasi v. of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay) CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay). The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the ay High Court in the said case has held that has held that assessee could use the argument only to assessee could use the argument only to sustain the order of the ld sustain the order of the ld. first appellate authority, but not to get for but not to get for the relief and ha…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3038/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…erred to the decision of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi v. B.R. Bamasi v. of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay) CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay). The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the ay High Court in the said case has held that has held that assessee could use the argument only to assessee could use the argument only to sustain the order of the ld sustain the order of the ld. first appellate authority, but not to get for but not to get for the relief and ha…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3037/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…erred to the decision of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi v. B.R. Bamasi v. of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay) CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay). The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the ay High Court in the said case has held that has held that assessee could use the argument only to assessee could use the argument only to sustain the order of the ld sustain the order of the ld. first appellate authority, but not to get for but not to get for the relief and ha…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3036/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…erred to the decision of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi v. B.R. Bamasi v. of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay) CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay). The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the ay High Court in the said case has held that has held that assessee could use the argument only to assessee could use the argument only to sustain the order of the ld sustain the order of the ld. first appellate authority, but not to get for but not to get for the relief and ha…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3035/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…erred to the decision of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi v. B.R. Bamasi v. of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay) CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay). The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the ay High Court in the said case has held that has held that assessee could use the argument only to assessee could use the argument only to sustain the order of the ld sustain the order of the ld. first appellate authority, but not to get for but not to get for the relief and ha…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3034/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…erred to the decision of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi v. B.R. Bamasi v. of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay) CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay). The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the ay High Court in the said case has held that has held that assessee could use the argument only to assessee could use the argument only to sustain the order of the ld sustain the order of the ld. first appellate authority, but not to get for but not to get for the relief and ha…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Central-Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gm Modular Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, application

ITA 3033/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3033 To 3038/Mum/2022 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-2020 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S Gm Modular Pvt. Ltd., Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th 8/9 Bokadia Industrial Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, Estate Waliv, Sativali Road, Mumbai-400020. Vasai East Vasai Palghar-401 208. Pan No. Aabcg 3313 Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Asstt. Cit Central Circle-2(1), M/S G Trade & Capital Old Cgo Building, 804, 8Th Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Floor, M.K. Road, 6 G Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020. New Linking Road, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aadcg 7583 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Jain a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…erred to the decision of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the AO under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. He referred to of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi v. B.R. Bamasi v. of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay) CIT 83 ITR 223 (Bombay). The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the ay High Court in the said case has held that has held that assessee could use the argument only to assessee could use the argument only to sustain the order of the ld sustain the order of the ld. first appellate authority, but not to get for but not to get for the relief and ha…