CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.

374 ITR 645High Court2015#14 most cited

What is CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. authority for?

In Section 153A proceedings, the scope of assessment extends to abated proceedings, enabling an assessee to raise fresh legal claims that could have been made in regular assessment proceedings.

1,823

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,244 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Continental Warehousing Corporation · Section 153A · scope of 153A assessment · abated proceedings · fresh claims in search assessment · assessee's claims 153A · Section 132 · assessment procedure · search and seizure assessment

Also reported as

58 Taxmann.com 78

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

casus omissussection 158b(b)section 158bb(1)section 153(a)section 153a(1)(b)section 158bbdeemed dividendsection 153(1)section 2(22)section 2(22)(e)section 153a(1)section 132a

Judgments citing CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.

Karishma Diamond Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-8(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 853/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Frontline Diamond Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC -8 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 2276/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Frontline Diamond Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC -8 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 2275/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Pramod Kumar Ranka, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 8 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 2274/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: FixedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Pramod Kumar Ranka, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 8 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 2273/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Pramod Kumar Ranka, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 8 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 2272/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Marine Gems Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 8 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 2271/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Marine Gems Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 8 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 2270/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: FixedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Marine Gems Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 8 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 2269/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Shri Dharmendra A Babel, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-8(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 1398/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Shri Dharmendra A Babel, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-8(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 1397/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

Shri Dharmendra A Babel, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-8(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year,

ITA 1396/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm

…vs. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v. CIT [2016] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi) and further relying on the decision of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), in paragraph no. 38 of the Act has categorically held that statements under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 020. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court recently in PCIT Vs. Shiv Kumar Agarwal [2022] 143 taxmann.com 55 (Delhi) has categorically held that the additions solely made relying on the…

The Dy Comm. of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1) ., Mumbai vs. Rps Infra Projects Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

ITA 2710/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…that the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al-Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. was a subject matter of challenge before this Court as a part of the group of appeals disposed of as CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 645/58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270 (Bom.) upholding the view of the Special M/s. RPS Infra Projects Pvt Ltd, Mumbai. Bench of the Tribunal in Al- Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Consequently, once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year i.e. it is not pending then the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under Section 153A of…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Speco Infrastructure, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

ITA 2706/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 801A

…that the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al-Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. was a subject matter of challenge before this Court as a part of the group of appeals disposed of as CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 645/58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270 (Bom.) upholding the view of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al- Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Consequently, once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year i.e. it is not pending then the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under Section 153A of the Act. This of course would not apply…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Priti Construction, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

ITA 2674/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…that the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al-Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. was a subject matter of challenge before this Court as a part of the group of appeals disposed of as CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 645/58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270 (Bom.) upholding the view of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al- Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Consequently, once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year i.e. it is not pending then M/s. Priti Construction, Mumbai. the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under Section 153A of the Act…

M/S. Bajrangbali Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd, Rourkla vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur

In the result, appeals of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 109/CTK/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.31 To 33/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017 To 2018-2019) M/S Bee Pee Rollers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3593 P & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.34 To 39/Ctk/2022 & आयकर अऩीऱ/Ita No.109/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2017 To 2020-2021) M/S Bajrangbali Steel Industries Pvt. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Ltd., Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3594 L & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.40 To 44/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2018-2019) M/S Bajrangbali Re-Rollers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aaccb 6678 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Shri B.K. Tibrewal, Ca & Ms. Nisha Rachh, Ca Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr.Cit(Osd) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2023

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate with Shri
Section 133ASection 153ASection 292CSection 69Section 69C

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़पऩया ऱेखा सदस्य के समऺ । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/IT(SS)A Nos.31 to 33/CTK/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017 to 2018-2019) M/s Bee Pee Rollers Pvt. Ltd., Vs ACIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 PAN No. :AABCB 3593 P AND आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/IT(SS)A Nos.34 to 39/CTK/2022 & आयकर अऩीऱ/ITA No.109/CTK…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Saket Infra Projects Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for A

ITA 2668/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…that the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al-Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. was a subject matter of challenge before this Court as a part of the group of appeals disposed of as CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 645/58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270 (Bom.) upholding the view of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al- Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Consequently, once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year i.e. it is not pending then the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under Section 153A of the Act. This of course would not apply i…

Semit Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 34, Mumbai

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

ITA 7526/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153C

…that the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al-Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. was a subject matter of challenge before this Court as a part of the group of appeals disposed of as CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 645/58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270 (Bom.) upholding the view of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al- Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Consequently, once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year i.e. it is not pending then the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under Section 153A of the Act. This of course would not apply i…

Semit Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 34, Mumbai

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

ITA 6997/MUM/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153C

…that the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al-Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. was a subject matter of challenge before this Court as a part of the group of appeals disposed of as CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 374 ITR 645/58 taxmann.com 78/232 Taxman 270 (Bom.) upholding the view of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in Al- Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Consequently, once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year i.e. it is not pending then the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under Section 153A of the Act. This of course would not apply i…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Skyway Infra Projects Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed, whereas appeals of the revenue are par...

ITA 2665/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 & Assessment Year: 2018-19 & Assessment Year: 2019-20 & Assessment Year: 2020-21 The DCIT, Central Circle-5(1), M/s Skyway Infra Projects Pvt. Room No. 1928, 19th floor, Air Ltd., India Building, Vs. 301, Gitanjali Arcade, Nehru Nariman Point, Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. PAN No. AAMCS 3356 G Appellant Responden…