CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07)

116 TTJ 225Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#12044 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 357,294 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07)

Nalanda Engicon Pvt. Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 329/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…this connection your kind attention is also drawn to the decision in the case of Manmal Jain v. ITO (10) 39 SOT 5 (URO) and also to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07) 294 ITR 310 and also to the decisions reported in 108/ 116 TTJ 225 (Ahd.-B)/(08) 22 SOT 68 (Bom) and (1984) 31 ITD 52 (SB-Delhi) holding that in an assessment made u/s 143(3) it should be presumed that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made after proper application of mind and also holding that the assessee has no control over the way, the assessment is drafted by the AO and generally issues which are accepted…

Nalanda Engicon Pvt. Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 328/PAT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…this connection your kind attention is also drawn to the decision in the case of Manmal Jain v. ITO (10) 39 SOT 5 (URO) and also to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07) 294 ITR 310 and also to the decisions reported in 108/ 116 TTJ 225 (Ahd.-B)/(08) 22 SOT 68 (Bom) and (1984) 31 ITD 52 (SB-Delhi) holding that in an assessment made u/s 143(3) it should be presumed that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made after proper application of mind and also holding that the assessee has no control over the way, the assessment is drafted by the AO and generally issues which are accepted…

Nalanda Engicon Pvt. Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 327/PAT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…this connection your kind attention is also drawn to the decision in the case of Manmal Jain v. ITO (10) 39 SOT 5 (URO) and also to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07) 294 ITR 310 and also to the decisions reported in 108/ 116 TTJ 225 (Ahd.-B)/(08) 22 SOT 68 (Bom) and (1984) 31 ITD 52 (SB-Delhi) holding that in an assessment made u/s 143(3) it should be presumed that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made after proper application of mind and also holding that the assessee has no control over the way, the assessment is drafted by the AO and generally issues which are accepted…

Nalanda Engicon Pvt. Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 326/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…this connection your kind attention is also drawn to the decision in the case of Manmal Jain v. ITO (10) 39 SOT 5 (URO) and also to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07) 294 ITR 310 and also to the decisions reported in 108/ 116 TTJ 225 (Ahd.-B)/(08) 22 SOT 68 (Bom) and (1984) 31 ITD 52 (SB-Delhi) holding that in an assessment made u/s 143(3) it should be presumed that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made after proper application of mind and also holding that the assessee has no control over the way, the assessment is drafted by the AO and generally issues which are accepted…

Nalanda Engicon Pvt. Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 325/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…this connection your kind attention is also drawn to the decision in the case of Manmal Jain v. ITO (10) 39 SOT 5 (URO) and also to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07) 294 ITR 310 and also to the decisions reported in 108/ 116 TTJ 225 (Ahd.-B)/(08) 22 SOT 68 (Bom) and (1984) 31 ITD 52 (SB-Delhi) holding that in an assessment made u/s 143(3) it should be presumed that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made after proper application of mind and also holding that the assessee has no control over the way, the assessment is drafted by the AO and generally issues which are accepted…

Nalanda Engicon Pvt. Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 323/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…this connection your kind attention is also drawn to the decision in the case of Manmal Jain v. ITO (10) 39 SOT 5 (URO) and also to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07) 294 ITR 310 and also to the decisions reported in 108/ 116 TTJ 225 (Ahd.-B)/(08) 22 SOT 68 (Bom) and (1984) 31 ITD 52 (SB-Delhi) holding that in an assessment made u/s 143(3) it should be presumed that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made after proper application of mind and also holding that the assessee has no control over the way, the assessment is drafted by the AO and generally issues which are accepted…

Nalanda Engicon Pvt. Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT (Central), Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 322/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.322 To 329/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2021-22

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…this connection your kind attention is also drawn to the decision in the case of Manmal Jain v. ITO (10) 39 SOT 5 (URO) and also to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07) 294 ITR 310 and also to the decisions reported in 108/ 116 TTJ 225 (Ahd.-B)/(08) 22 SOT 68 (Bom) and (1984) 31 ITD 52 (SB-Delhi) holding that in an assessment made u/s 143(3) it should be presumed that the assessment u/s 143(3) had been made after proper application of mind and also holding that the assessee has no control over the way, the assessment is drafted by the AO and generally issues which are accepted…

The Sasme Co-Op. Society Ltd, Surat vs. Pr, CIT-2, Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 185/SRT/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.Ta No.185/Srt/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Sasme Co-Op. Society Ltd, Vs. The Principal Sasme Bhavan Kotsafil Main Commissioner Of Income Road, Surat – 395 003. Tax, Surat-2. [Pan: Aaaas 3507 M] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रतीकीओर से/Assessee By Shri Hiren R.Vepari – Ar राज"कीओर से /Revenue By Shri Ritesh Mishra - Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 25.02.2021 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 03.03.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judicial Memeber: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Surat-2, (Pcit), Passed Under Section 263 Of Income-Tax Act Dated 16Th March 2020. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “(1) The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Was Not Justified In Assuming Jurisdiction Under Section 263 Without Satisfying Conditions. (2) The Appellant Submits That The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Ought Not To Have Invoked Provision Of Section 263 On The Very Same Point On Which The Assessing Officer Had Made Enquiry & Had Taken Position. (3) The Appellant Further Submit The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Did Not Appreciate The Subtle Portion Of Law We Are Proceeding Under Section 263 Do Not Extend To Sustain A Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Office To Take A Different View In The Same Matter. (5) The Learned Pcit Was Driving By Extraneous Consideration In Not Dropping The Proceeding Under Section 263.”

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(d)

…2(Bom).  Skyline Builders Vs. CIT [2019] 412 ITR 182 (Ker).  CIT Vs. Sunil Lamba [2019] 412 ITR 480 (Delhi).  Siddh International Vs. CIT [2009] 19 DTR 281 (Ahd Trib.).  Shaileshbhai Shah Vs. ACIT [2005] 98 TTJ 154 (Ahd).  Jet Electronics Vs. ACIT [2008] 116 TTJ 225 (Ahd).  Gujarat Guardian Ltd., Vs. DCIT [2008] 11 DTR 370 (Delhi Tribunal).  Honda Siel Power Products Ltd., Vs. CIT [2009] 22 DTR 164 (Delhi Tribunal).  Ajit Gupta Vs. ITO [2007] 108 TTJ 301 (Del).  P.N.Writer & Co. Ltd., Vs. Addl. CIT [2006] 7 SOT 346 (Mum).  N.P.Santosh Kumar Vs. ACIT [2008] 12 DTR 87 (Cochin Tribunal).  Smt.Varanandhini…

CIT v. Eicher Ltd. (07) (116 TTJ 225) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax