Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT

15 SOT 252Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2007#959 most cited

What is Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer must grant the correct deduction after due verification of claims made by the assessee, even if not perfectly articulated initially. This principle applies in assessment proceedings, including those involving specific deductions like those for export-oriented units under Section 10B.

111

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd v DCIT · 15 SOT 252 · ITAT Mumbai · Assessing Officer duty to verify · correct deduction · Section 10B · export oriented undertaking · assessment procedure · assessee claim verification · Section 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 132Section 147Section 143(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(5)

Issues it is cited on

section 153(a)(1)section 8d(2)(ii)section 17(2)(iiia)section 10b(8)section 8dsection 9(1)(ii)section 17(2)section 158bb(1)section 5(b)section 153(a)retraction of statementsection 153a(1)(a)

Judgments citing Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT

Suman Malhotra, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2941/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

…evised return has already been elapsed. Reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders [2012] 349 ITR 336/208 Taxman 498/23 taxmann.com 23 (Born.) and order of the Tribunal in Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2007] 15 SOT 252 (Born.). On the other hand, the ld. DR, though defended the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order, but had no objection if the matter is remanded to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the ass…

Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, (OSD), Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 3086/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…with the action of the AO, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). It has relied upon the following decisions in supports of its claim: i) CIT Vs. M/s.Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd., 306 ITR 402; ii) Chicago Pneumatic India ltd. Vs. DCIT, 15 SOT 252 (Bom); iii) JCIT Vs. Hero Honda Finlease Ltd., 115 TTJ 0752 (Del); iv) Asheesh Securities Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 297 ITR 317 (Del); v) Moser Bear India Ltd. Vs. JCI, 108 ITD 80 (Del); vi) SNC Lavalin/Acres Inc. Vs. ACIT, 15 SOT 1 (Del); vii) Kisan Discretionary family Trust Vs. ACIT, 113 TTJ 918 (Ahd) ITA No.692 /Ahd/2011 and 7 Others ACIT Vs. Dishman Ph…

The ACIT, (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 2957/AHD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…with the action of the AO, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). It has relied upon the following decisions in supports of its claim: i) CIT Vs. M/s.Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd., 306 ITR 402; ii) Chicago Pneumatic India ltd. Vs. DCIT, 15 SOT 252 (Bom); iii) JCIT Vs. Hero Honda Finlease Ltd., 115 TTJ 0752 (Del); iv) Asheesh Securities Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 297 ITR 317 (Del); v) Moser Bear India Ltd. Vs. JCI, 108 ITD 80 (Del); vi) SNC Lavalin/Acres Inc. Vs. ACIT, 15 SOT 1 (Del); vii) Kisan Discretionary family Trust Vs. ACIT, 113 TTJ 918 (Ahd) ITA No.692 /Ahd/2011 and 7 Others ACIT Vs. Dishman Ph…

The DCIT(OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 817/AHD/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…with the action of the AO, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). It has relied upon the following decisions in supports of its claim: i) CIT Vs. M/s.Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd., 306 ITR 402; ii) Chicago Pneumatic India ltd. Vs. DCIT, 15 SOT 252 (Bom); iii) JCIT Vs. Hero Honda Finlease Ltd., 115 TTJ 0752 (Del); iv) Asheesh Securities Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 297 ITR 317 (Del); v) Moser Bear India Ltd. Vs. JCI, 108 ITD 80 (Del); vi) SNC Lavalin/Acres Inc. Vs. ACIT, 15 SOT 1 (Del); vii) Kisan Discretionary family Trust Vs. ACIT, 113 TTJ 918 (Ahd) ITA No.692 /Ahd/2011 and 7 Others ACIT Vs. Dishman Ph…

Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 773/AHD/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…with the action of the AO, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). It has relied upon the following decisions in supports of its claim: i) CIT Vs. M/s.Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd., 306 ITR 402; ii) Chicago Pneumatic India ltd. Vs. DCIT, 15 SOT 252 (Bom); iii) JCIT Vs. Hero Honda Finlease Ltd., 115 TTJ 0752 (Del); iv) Asheesh Securities Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 297 ITR 317 (Del); v) Moser Bear India Ltd. Vs. JCI, 108 ITD 80 (Del); vi) SNC Lavalin/Acres Inc. Vs. ACIT, 15 SOT 1 (Del); vii) Kisan Discretionary family Trust Vs. ACIT, 113 TTJ 918 (Ahd) ITA No.692 /Ahd/2011 and 7 Others ACIT Vs. Dishman Ph…

The DCIT(OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

ITA 692/AHD/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

…with the action of the AO, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A). It has relied upon the following decisions in supports of its claim: i) CIT Vs. M/s.Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd., 306 ITR 402; ii) Chicago Pneumatic India ltd. Vs. DCIT, 15 SOT 252 (Bom); iii) JCIT Vs. Hero Honda Finlease Ltd., 115 TTJ 0752 (Del); iv) Asheesh Securities Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 297 ITR 317 (Del); v) Moser Bear India Ltd. Vs. JCI, 108 ITD 80 (Del); vi) SNC Lavalin/Acres Inc. Vs. ACIT, 15 SOT 1 (Del); vii) Kisan Discretionary family Trust Vs. ACIT, 113 TTJ 918 (Ahd) ITA No.692 /Ahd/2011 and 7 Others ACIT Vs. Dishman Ph…

Shri Dron Sureshkumar Rao, Baroda vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Baroda

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1378/AHD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Ms.Sonia Kumar, SR.DR
Section 43(5)

…me Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. 284 ITR 323 is examined: • Romeo International 221 CTR 491 (P&H) • CIT vs. Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd. 303 ITR 353 (P&H) 4 • Earesson Net Work Power India Pvt. Ltd. 19 DTR 441 (Mum.) • Chicago Pneumatic India Limited 15 SOT 252 (Mum) • MoserBaer95ITR148(AT)(Del.) Without prejudice to the above, it is with respect submitted that there may be restrictions with regard to additional claim, not made in the return of income, on the Ld. A.O. However, such restrictions do not apply to the appellate authorities as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze referred…

DCIT, Circle-7, Kolkata vs. M/S. East India Business Centre (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1882/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jun 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 154

…Supreme Court in the case of Goetz India Ltd. 157 Taxmann 1 (SC) wherein it was held that the AO has not power to entertain any claim by an Assessee which is not supported by a revised return of income. 9. In the case of Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. vs. DCIT 15 SOT 252 (2007) (ITAT) (Del). The Delhi ITAT, in the context of allow ability of new claims during the assessment proceedings without having recourse to a revised return, has, placing reliance on principle embedded in Article 265 of Indian constitution (No tax can be collected except by the authority of law), CBDT Circular No. 14 dated 11 April 1955 and ex…

M/S. Chitrakoot Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 6802/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Naveen Chandra, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153CSection 68

…312 ITR 222 CIT v. Rose Services Apartment India P. Ltd., [2010] 326 ITR 100 (Delhi) CIT v. Jindal Saw Pipes Ltd., [2010] 328 ITR 338 (Delhi) CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. – 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT (2007) 15 SOT 252 (Mumbai). 8.4 Ld. Counsel of the assessee has also filed the Written Submissions with regard to his contention on the incorrect assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 and on additional legal grounds, which reads as under:- “INCORRECT ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. Ld. AO has provi…

M/S. Chitrakoot Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 6801/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Naveen Chandra, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153CSection 68

…312 ITR 222 CIT v. Rose Services Apartment India P. Ltd., [2010] 326 ITR 100 (Delhi) CIT v. Jindal Saw Pipes Ltd., [2010] 328 ITR 338 (Delhi) CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. – 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT (2007) 15 SOT 252 (Mumbai). 8.4 Ld. Counsel of the assessee has also filed the Written Submissions with regard to his contention on the incorrect assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 and on additional legal grounds, which reads as under:- “INCORRECT ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. Ld. AO has provi…

M/S. Global Televenture Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the 4 Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 1341/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K.Saroha, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 14ASection 68

…312 ITR 222 CIT v. Rose Services Apartment India P. Ltd., [2010] 326 ITR 100 (Delhi) CIT v. Jindal Saw Pipes Ltd., [2010] 328 ITR 338 (Delhi) CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. – 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT (2007) 15 SOT 252 (Mumbai). 10.4 Ld. Counsel of the assessee has also filed the Written Submissions with regard to his contention on the incorrect assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 and on additional legal grounds, which reads as under:- “INCORRECT ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. Ld. AO has prov…

M/S. Global Heritage Venture Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the 4 Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 1336/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K.Saroha, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 14ASection 68

…312 ITR 222 CIT v. Rose Services Apartment India P. Ltd., [2010] 326 ITR 100 (Delhi) CIT v. Jindal Saw Pipes Ltd., [2010] 328 ITR 338 (Delhi) CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. – 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT (2007) 15 SOT 252 (Mumbai). 10.4 Ld. Counsel of the assessee has also filed the Written Submissions with regard to his contention on the incorrect assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 and on additional legal grounds, which reads as under:- “INCORRECT ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. Ld. AO has prov…

M/S. Global Heritage Venture Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the 4 Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 1335/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Apr 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K.Saroha, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 14ASection 68

…312 ITR 222 CIT v. Rose Services Apartment India P. Ltd., [2010] 326 ITR 100 (Delhi) CIT v. Jindal Saw Pipes Ltd., [2010] 328 ITR 338 (Delhi) CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. – 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT (2007) 15 SOT 252 (Mumbai). 10.4 Ld. Counsel of the assessee has also filed the Written Submissions with regard to his contention on the incorrect assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 and on additional legal grounds, which reads as under:- “INCORRECT ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. Ld. AO has prov…

M/S. Global Realty Creations Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the 4 Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 1245/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A.K.Saroha, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 14ASection 68

…312 ITR 222 CIT v. Rose Services Apartment India P. Ltd., [2010] 326 ITR 100 (Delhi) CIT v. Jindal Saw Pipes Ltd., [2010] 328 ITR 338 (Delhi) CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. – 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT (2007) 15 SOT 252 (Mumbai). 10.4 Ld. Counsel of the assessee has also filed the Written Submissions with regard to his contention on the incorrect assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 and on additional legal grounds, which reads as under:- “INCORRECT ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. Ld. AO has prov…

Tata Condulting Engineers Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby ordered to be Allowed

ITA 3595/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.3595/Mum/2013 & 6786/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) बनाम/ Tata Consulting Engineers The Additional Limited (Formerly Known As Commissioner Of Income Vs. Tce Consulting Engineers Tax Range 7(3) Limited) Matulya Aayakar Bhavan, Centre A, 249, Senapati M. Karve Road, Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400013 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabct0772E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dinesh Vyas & Srihari Iyer Assessee By: Capt. Pradeep Arya सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.09.2016 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.11.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Two Appeals Against The Order Dated 15.02.2013 & 09.08.2012 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively. Since Common Question Of Law & Facts

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas & Srihari Iyer
Section 120(4)(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…mmarily dismissed the ground that claim can made before the AO otherwise then by filing revised A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10 return. In his support he referred cases of Balmukund Acharya (310 ITR 310), Ramco International (332 ITR 306), Chicago Pnematic India Ltd. (15 SOT 252), Hero Honda Finlease Ltd. (115 TTJ 752) and Raj Rani Gulati (345 ITR 350). DR supported the order of the FAA. 12.2 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find that the FAA has rejected the claim made by the assessee as he was of the opinion that the assessee should have filed a revised return of income. We find…

Tata Consulting Engineers Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG OSD (7), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby ordered to be Allowed

ITA 6786/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.3595/Mum/2013 & 6786/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10) बनाम/ Tata Consulting Engineers The Additional Limited (Formerly Known As Commissioner Of Income Vs. Tce Consulting Engineers Tax Range 7(3) Limited) Matulya Aayakar Bhavan, Centre A, 249, Senapati M. Karve Road, Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400013 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabct0772E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Dinesh Vyas & Srihari Iyer Assessee By: Capt. Pradeep Arya सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21.09.2016 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25.11.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Two Appeals Against The Order Dated 15.02.2013 & 09.08.2012 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively. Since Common Question Of Law & Facts

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas & Srihari Iyer
Section 120(4)(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…mmarily dismissed the ground that claim can made before the AO otherwise then by filing revised A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10 return. In his support he referred cases of Balmukund Acharya (310 ITR 310), Ramco International (332 ITR 306), Chicago Pnematic India Ltd. (15 SOT 252), Hero Honda Finlease Ltd. (115 TTJ 752) and Raj Rani Gulati (345 ITR 350). DR supported the order of the FAA. 12.2 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find that the FAA has rejected the claim made by the assessee as he was of the opinion that the assessee should have filed a revised return of income. We find…

Superna R. Motwane, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 19(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 8864/MUM/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.8864/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02) Mrs. Superna R. Motwane, Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Gnyanghar, 14 Th Road, Income Tax, V. Khar (West), Circle – 19(1), Mumbai -400 052. 3 Rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpk5356 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap,DR
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80H

…rt, the A.O. has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. v. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323(SC). The assessee submitted that the action of the A.O. was not proper. The ITAT in the case of Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. (2007) 15 SOT 252 (Mum) wherein the Tribunal relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. (supra) and held in the said order that the learned CIT(A) has powers coterminous with the powers of the A.O and the appellate proceedings are continuation of ITA 8864/Mum/2010 11 the original proceedings and the learned CIT(A) have en…

DCIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Aig Life Insurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are dismissed and Cross objections are partly allowed

ITA 1035/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 44

…d the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Ltd. 1160 ITR 920 (SC)). (e) The decision of Apex Court in the case of Goetze Ltd v CIT has been considered by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT (15 SOT 252) where the Tribunal allowed the taxpayer's claim for deduction under sections 80HH and 80-1 of the Act during the course of assessment proceedings without filing a revised return. (f) The aforesaid principle of accepting the Circular No. 55 and allowing claims through letter has been followed by the Tribunal all over the country in the following c…

Mantor Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 196/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

…assessee in the course of assessment proceedings for which the assessee has not filed revised return any claim in the return. 29 ITANos.7404 & 7405/M/2014 & ITA Nos.194 to 196/M/15 37. The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd vs. DCIT (15 SOT 252) after considering the decision of Apex Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. 284 ITR 323 has held that the AO is bound to assess the correct income and for this purpose, the AO may grant reliefs/refunds suo moto or can do so on being pointed out by the assessee in the course of assessment proceedings for which the assessee has not filed revise…

Mantor Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 195/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

…assessee in the course of assessment proceedings for which the assessee has not filed revised return any claim in the return. 29 ITANos.7404 & 7405/M/2014 & ITA Nos.194 to 196/M/15 37. The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd vs. DCIT (15 SOT 252) after considering the decision of Apex Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. 284 ITR 323 has held that the AO is bound to assess the correct income and for this purpose, the AO may grant reliefs/refunds suo moto or can do so on being pointed out by the assessee in the course of assessment proceedings for which the assessee has not filed revise…