Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. CIT (59 Taxmann 82)

Eci Engineering & Construction Company Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 968/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…e the Hon ITAT and it was neither raised before the AO nor before the TA CIT (A). Therefore, the Additional Grounds of Appeals filed on 11.01.2017 are not admissible. Reliance is placed on the following decisions in this regard: > Brooke Bond India Ltd (1991) 59 Taxmann 82 (Cal) > Begum Noor Banu (1993)69 Taxmann 565 (AP) 3. Without prejudice to the above, it is to submit that it becomes clear from above report of the AO that the approval of the CIT for the issue of Notice U/s 148 of the IT Act was obtained on 27.03.2012. From the records, it is seen that the Proforma proposal for re-opening of assessment was sub…

DCIT, Circle-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Eci Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…e the Hon ITAT and it was neither raised before the AO nor before the TA CIT (A). Therefore, the Additional Grounds of Appeals filed on 11.01.2017 are not admissible. Reliance is placed on the following decisions in this regard: > Brooke Bond India Ltd (1991) 59 Taxmann 82 (Cal) > Begum Noor Banu (1993)69 Taxmann 565 (AP) 3. Without prejudice to the above, it is to submit that it becomes clear from above report of the AO that the approval of the CIT for the issue of Notice U/s 148 of the IT Act was obtained on 27.03.2012. From the records, it is seen that the Proforma proposal for re-opening of assessment was sub…

Mbs Jeweller Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed in above terms

ITA 331/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Mbs Impex Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Central Circle – 3(1), Pan – Aaccm 2968E Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mbs Jeweller Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Central Circle – 3(1), Pan – Aaecm 7050M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/01/2022

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR

Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 MBS Impex Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 3(1), PAN – AACCM 2968E Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 MBS Jeweller Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 3(1), PAN – AAECM 7050M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue by: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR Dat…

Mbs Impes Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed in above terms

ITA 330/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Mbs Impex Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Central Circle – 3(1), Pan – Aaccm 2968E Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mbs Jeweller Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Central Circle – 3(1), Pan – Aaecm 7050M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/01/2022

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR

Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 MBS Impex Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 3(1), PAN – AACCM 2968E Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 MBS Jeweller Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 3(1), PAN – AAECM 7050M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue by: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR Dat…

ITO, Ward-6(2), Hyderabad vs. Ms Agarwal Foundries Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed in above terms

ITA 279/HYD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri BurraFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mitra &

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 279/H/2013 & 1719/Hyd/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s MS Agarwal Income-tax, Circle – 16(2), Foundries Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN – AAICS 4832K (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Rajat Mitra & Shri Sumit Jain Assessee by: Shri Burra Date of hearing: 19/07/2021 Date of pronouncement: 24/08/2021 O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: ITA No. 279/Hyd/2013 for AY 2009-10…

ACIT., Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. M/S M S Agarwal Foundries Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed in above terms

ITA 1719/HYD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri BurraFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mitra &

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 279/H/2013 & 1719/Hyd/2014 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s MS Agarwal Income-tax, Circle – 16(2), Foundries Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN – AAICS 4832K (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by: Shri Rajat Mitra & Shri Sumit Jain Assessee by: Shri Burra Date of hearing: 19/07/2021 Date of pronouncement: 24/08/2021 O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: ITA No. 279/Hyd/2013 for AY 2009-10…

M/S Instrumentarium Corporation Ltd., Kolkata vs. DDIT (It)-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1548/KOL/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Instrumentarium Corporation Limited………………..………………………………..……….……....Appellant P.O. Box 100, Fi-00031 Ge, Finland Cc: Pricewterhouse Coopers South City Pinnacle 7Th Floor Plot No.Xi-I Sector V Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan : Aadcg 1535 E] Ddit (I.T.)-1(1), Kolkata.….....................................................................................….......….......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sachit Jolly, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri G. Mallikarjuna, Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 27Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 3Rd , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xvi, Kolkata Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The ‘Act’), Dt. 09/06/2009. As The Issues Arising In All These Appeals Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience They Are Heard Together & Disposed Off By Assessment Year Of This Common Order. 2. The Appeals Bearing No’S Ita No. 1548 & 1549/Kol/2009 , For The Assessment Year 2003-04 & 2004-05, Were Referred By The Hon’Ble, Itat To A Special Bench Vide Order Dt. 6Th April, 2010, To Answer The Following Re-Framed Question.

Section 250

…Reliance was placed on the following decisions Sun Polytrone Industries ltd. Vs. CIT 2015 235 taxman 567 SC  Yog Builders vs. ACIT 2015 154 ITD 566 Luck. Trib.  Ultratech Cements Ltd. Vs. ACIT 2017 81 Taxmann.com 74 Bom.  Brookbond India Ltd. Vs. CIT 1991 59 Taxmann 82 (Cal.)  f) He pointed out that ground no. 1A is specifically dealt by the special bench, at para 37 to 40, of its order. 4.3 On additional Ground no. 4A, the ld. D/R, though not leaving his ground, could not point out from the order of the special bench that the issue has been a subject matter before the special bench of the tribunal. 4.4 I…

Smt. Garima Mehta, Gwalior vs. I.T.O., Ward-1(2), Gwalior

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 343/AGR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10ASection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH: AGRA BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No. 343/Agra/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10) Smt. Garima Mehta, W/o Shri Vs..ITO, Ward-1(2), Nitin Mehta, H-239, Madhav Gwalior. Nagar, Lashkar, Gwalior (M.P.) PAN: AIUPJ8270B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Mahesh Agarwal, CA. Respondent by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 15.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement 13.07.2018 ORDER PER, A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This is assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10, taking the following grounds: “1. That on t…

Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. CIT

Judgments citing Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. CIT