M/S. Roseberry Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Meerut
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed
ITA 2995/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2018AY 2008-09
Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09 Roseberry Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 14D, 14Th Floor, Hansalaya, Central Circle, 15, Barakhamba Road, Bhainsali Road, New Delhi. Meerut. Pan: Aabcr3485J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.C. Srivastava & Shri Suvinay K. Dash, Advocates Revenue By : Shri S.S. Rana, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10Th March, 2015 Of The Cit(A), Meerut, Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Derives Income From Interest On Loans & Advances Granted By It As An Nbfc & Profit On Sale Of Mutual Funds. The Return Of Income Was Filed On 6Th November, 2008 Declaring Total Income Of Rs. Nil. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) On 8Th July, 2009. Subsequently, The Case Was Reopened U/S 147 After Duly Recording The Reasons In Writing. In Response To Notice U/S 148 Of The It Act Dated 23Rd October, 2009, The Assessee Submitted To Treat The Original Return As Return Filed In Compliance To Notice U/S 148 Of The It Act, 1961. Subsequently, The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment U/S 147/143(3) On 31St December, 2009 Determining The Total Income At Rs.73,510/- Wherein He Made Certain Additions By Disallowing Stt Debited To P&L Account, Income-Tax Debited, Disallowance U/S 14A & Preliminary Expenses.
For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 68
…moters & Finlease (P) Ltd. 18 taxmann.com 217; viii) CIT vs. Ultra Modern Exports (P) Ltd. 40 taxmann.com 458; ix) CIT vs. Frostair (P) Ltd. 26 taxmann.com 11; x) CIT vs. N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 42 taxmann.com 339; xi) CIT vs. Empire Builtech (P) Ltd. 366 ITR 110; & xii) CIT vs. Focus Exports (P) ltd. 51 taxmann.com 46. 10 12. The ld. counsel for the assessee in his rejoinder submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Raj Kumar Arora (supra) is of no help to the Revenue for the reason that the High Court has only held that the assessment can be framed u/s 153A even if n…
