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 367,181 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.

Kanji Pitamber & Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 40, Mumbai

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

ITA 467/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rahul K. Hakani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, D.R
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 37

…r & Co. qua the sums declared by the assessee as gifts treating them as cash credit covered under section 153 of the Act. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court applied the view taken in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bom). We, therefore, respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, direct the AO to delete all the additions made in this year as the same are not based on the incriminating material. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 11. At the outset, the Ld. A.R. submitted vide letter 02.03.17 req…

DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh vs. M/S Dhg Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA 990/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Dhg Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcd1364Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The D.C.I.T., Vs. M/s DHG Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-II, SCO 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. PAN: AADCD1364Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DR Respondent by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA & Ms. Kanika Gupta, CA Date of hearing : 02.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 09.05.2018 ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M.: The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order passed by learned Commissioner of Income…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.A. Projects (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the Cross Objection filed by assessee stands allowed and the appeal filed by Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 565/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2007-08 Dcit, Central Circle-03 Vs. M.A. Projects (P) Ltd. New Delhi Ba-17A, Dda Flats Asok Vihar New Delhi 110 052 Pan: Aaecm 2372 E Cross Objection No.257/Del/2014 (In Ita 565/Del/2014) Assessment Year 2007-08 M.A.Projects (P) Ltd. Vs. Dcit, C.C. 3 New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: BENCH “E” NEW DELHI BEFORE SRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2007-08 DCIT, Central Circle-03 vs. M.A. Projects (P) Ltd. New Delhi BA-17A, DDA Flats Asok Vihar New Delhi 110 052 PAN: AAECM 2372 E Cross Objection No.257/Del/2014 (In ITA 565/Del/2014) Assessment Year 2007-08 M.A.Projects (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT, C.C. 3 New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT, DR Assessee by: Sh. Suresh Gupta, C.A. Date of hearing: 05.04.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 04.05.2018 ORDER PER BEENA A P…

DCIT CC 7(1), Mumbai vs. Maneesh Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5828/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 10BSection 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…the Act. The learned CIT(A), by following the decision of the Special Bench in the case of All Cargo Global Logistic Ltd. (137 ITD 287), which has since been affirmed by Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the name of CIT Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (374 ITR 645), set aside the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The learned CIT(A), however, confirmed the addition relating to sale of scarp. The Revenue is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the addition relating to deduction allowed u/s. 10B of the Act on the reasoning that the Revenue has not accepted the order passed by Hon'…

Leelavati Vijaykumar Kotecha, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is

ITA 1295/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1294 To 1297/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11, 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 127Section 139Section 153ASection 68

…during search and no assessments are pending at the time of initiation of proceedings u/s. 153A, assessments made u/s. 153A is without jurisdiction. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom) has held that if there was no incriminating material found during search, no addition can be made where there was no pending assessments. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 (Bom). In the instant case, we find that since the assessment for assessment…

Leelavati Vijaykumar Kotecha, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is

ITA 1294/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1294 To 1297/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11, 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 127Section 139Section 153ASection 68

…during search and no assessments are pending at the time of initiation of proceedings u/s. 153A, assessments made u/s. 153A is without jurisdiction. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 (Bom) has held that if there was no incriminating material found during search, no addition can be made where there was no pending assessments. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gurinder Singh Bawa 386 ITR 483 (Bom). In the instant case, we find that since the assessment for assessment…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 681/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

…the additions if any have to be allowed to be made in the non-abated assessment only based on incriminating material and the same gets strength in view of the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), CIT Vs. Gurinder Singh Bawa 79 taxmann.com 398 and CIT v. Murli Agro Products Ltd. 49 taxmann.com 172. Therefore, in our view, the objection raised by the assessee in the appeal is allowed. 12. In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed. ITA No.680/PUN/2015 – A.Y. 2008-09 (By Revenue) 13. Revenue raised the followi…

Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 699/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

…the additions if any have to be allowed to be made in the non-abated assessment only based on incriminating material and the same gets strength in view of the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), CIT Vs. Gurinder Singh Bawa 79 taxmann.com 398 and CIT v. Murli Agro Products Ltd. 49 taxmann.com 172. Therefore, in our view, the objection raised by the assessee in the appeal is allowed. 12. In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed. ITA No.680/PUN/2015 – A.Y. 2008-09 (By Revenue) 13. Revenue raised the followi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 682/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

…the additions if any have to be allowed to be made in the non-abated assessment only based on incriminating material and the same gets strength in view of the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), CIT Vs. Gurinder Singh Bawa 79 taxmann.com 398 and CIT v. Murli Agro Products Ltd. 49 taxmann.com 172. Therefore, in our view, the objection raised by the assessee in the appeal is allowed. 12. In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed. ITA No.680/PUN/2015 – A.Y. 2008-09 (By Revenue) 13. Revenue raised the followi…

Welspun Corp Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesses in ITA No

ITA 5371/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 40

…ials found as a result of search for the assessment years which are unabated as on the date of search. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nava Sheva) Ltd (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bom) and Division Bench of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Murli Agro Products Ltd (2014) 49 Taxman.172. The Ld.AR also relied upon the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Special Bench in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics td vs DCIT (2012) 137 ITD 287 (Mum)(SB). 10. The Ld.Senior Counsel appearing for the revenue submitted that…

DCIT Cen Cir 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sun Investment P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, grounds taken by assessee in the A

ITA 522/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

Section 115Section 115JSection 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 153C

…eld that no addition beyond amount disallowed in original proceedings, hence no further addition in 153A proceeding without any incriminating document. CIT(A) has reached to this conclusion after following the order of the Mumbai Tribunal in case of Allcargo (374 ITR 645). Since no incriminating material was found during course of search with regard to travelling expenses incurred for the purpose of business, there is no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) for holding that AO was not justified in making disallowance of travelling expenses. 20. Last grievance of Revenue relates to deleting addition in respect of 14A…

DCIT Cen Cir 1(3), Mumbai vs. Allied Digital Services Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5155/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 43B

…ssessee’s enhanced claim for deduction made in the return filed under Section 153A of the Act and in coming to such decision reliance has been, inter alia, placed on the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing 374 ITR 645 (Bom). Against this decision assessee is in appeal before us. 5. At the time of hearing the learned A.R. quite fairly pointed out that considering the date of search the original assessment for the year under consideration did not abate in terms of the second proviso to section 153A(1) of the Act. As a consequence of such fact-situation the coro…

Allied Digital Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 3, Mumbai

In the result, all the captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5046/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 43B

…ssessee’s enhanced claim for deduction made in the return filed under Section 153A of the Act and in coming to such decision reliance has been, inter alia, placed on the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing 374 ITR 645 (Bom). Against this decision assessee is in appeal before us. 5. At the time of hearing the learned A.R. quite fairly pointed out that considering the date of search the original assessment for the year under consideration did not abate in terms of the second proviso to section 153A(1) of the Act. As a consequence of such fact-situation the coro…

Allied Digital Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 3, Mumbai

In the result, all the captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5045/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 43B

…ssessee’s enhanced claim for deduction made in the return filed under Section 153A of the Act and in coming to such decision reliance has been, inter alia, placed on the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing 374 ITR 645 (Bom). Against this decision assessee is in appeal before us. 5. At the time of hearing the learned A.R. quite fairly pointed out that considering the date of search the original assessment for the year under consideration did not abate in terms of the second proviso to section 153A(1) of the Act. As a consequence of such fact-situation the coro…

Allied Digital Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 3, Mumbai

In the result, all the captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5044/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena
Section 10ASection 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 43B

…ssessee’s enhanced claim for deduction made in the return filed under Section 153A of the Act and in coming to such decision reliance has been, inter alia, placed on the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing 374 ITR 645 (Bom). Against this decision assessee is in appeal before us. 5. At the time of hearing the learned A.R. quite fairly pointed out that considering the date of search the original assessment for the year under consideration did not abate in terms of the second proviso to section 153A(1) of the Act. As a consequence of such fact-situation the coro…

DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh vs. M/S Akj Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh

ITA 993/CHANDI/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2006-07 The Dcit, Vs. Ms. Akj Portfolio Pvt Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, H.No.1133, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh Chandigarh Pan No. Aafca3127N

For Appellant: Shri Gulsha Raj, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Chadha
Section 132Section 153A

…elhi High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla’ [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Del) and further in the case sof ‘Principal CIT Vs. Meeta Gutgutia’ [2017] 395 ITR 506, Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation’ [2015] 374 ITR 645 (Bom.), Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Salasor Stock Broking Ltd 2016 (8) TMI 1131 and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of ‘Kabul Chawla’ (supra) has also followed by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of case of ‘PCIT Vs. RSA Digi Prints’ 2017 (9) TMI 530. The Ld. Counsel has also referred…

M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2521/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…nt, argued that notice in respect of Assessment Years 2000-01 and 2001-02 was even time barred.” Support, is also drawn from the following judgments: i) BiswanathGarodiaVs.DCIT (2016) 76 taxmann.com81 ii) CIT Vs.ContinentalWarehousinhg (NhavaSheva) Ltd (2015 374 ITR 645). iii) Jai Steel (India) Jodhpur Vs. ACIT (2013) 259 CTR 281 iv) CIT Vs.Deepak Kumar Aggarwal (2017) 398 ITR 586 v) Principal CIT Vs.DipakJashvantalaPanchal (2017) 397 ITR 253. vi) Principal VIT vs.Lalit Jain (2017) 384 ITR 543 vii) Pr.CIT vs. Dvangi Alias Rupa (2017 394 ITR 184 viii) Chintels India Ltd Vs. DCIT (2017) 397 ITR 416 ix) Smt. Anjli…

M/S. Cliff Trexim Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2520/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…nt, argued that notice in respect of Assessment Years 2000-01 and 2001-02 was even time barred.” Support, is also drawn from the following judgments: i) BiswanathGarodiaVs.DCIT (2016) 76 taxmann.com81 ii) CIT Vs.ContinentalWarehousinhg (NhavaSheva) Ltd (2015 374 ITR 645). iii) Jai Steel (India) Jodhpur Vs. ACIT (2013) 259 CTR 281 iv) CIT Vs.Deepak Kumar Aggarwal (2017) 398 ITR 586 v) Principal CIT Vs.DipakJashvantalaPanchal (2017) 397 ITR 253. vi) Principal VIT vs.Lalit Jain (2017) 384 ITR 543 vii) Pr.CIT vs. Dvangi Alias Rupa (2017 394 ITR 184 viii) Chintels India Ltd Vs. DCIT (2017) 397 ITR 416 ix) Smt. Anjli…

M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2519/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…nt, argued that notice in respect of Assessment Years 2000-01 and 2001-02 was even time barred.” Support, is also drawn from the following judgments: i) BiswanathGarodiaVs.DCIT (2016) 76 taxmann.com81 ii) CIT Vs.ContinentalWarehousinhg (NhavaSheva) Ltd (2015 374 ITR 645). iii) Jai Steel (India) Jodhpur Vs. ACIT (2013) 259 CTR 281 iv) CIT Vs.Deepak Kumar Aggarwal (2017) 398 ITR 586 v) Principal CIT Vs.DipakJashvantalaPanchal (2017) 397 ITR 253. vi) Principal VIT vs.Lalit Jain (2017) 384 ITR 543 vii) Pr.CIT vs. Dvangi Alias Rupa (2017 394 ITR 184 viii) Chintels India Ltd Vs. DCIT (2017) 397 ITR 416 ix) Smt. Anjli…

DCIT CC 7(2), Mumbai vs. Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7022/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Saktijit Dey (Jm)

Section 132Section 153A

…T(A) noticed that there was no incriminating material with regard to addition made by the Assessing Officer 2 M/s. Ruchi Soya Industries Limited and the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645 that addition can be made in the case of assessment years, which are not abated, only on the basis of incriminating material seized during the course of search. Since the year under consideration was unabated assessment year and since no incriminating material was found supporting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, the learned CIT(A)…