CIT v. Goetze (India) Ltd.

Saurashtra Trust, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

…case of Nagesh Knitwears P Ltd (2012)(345 ITR 135), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has elucidated and explained the scope of the provisions of sec. 263 of the Act and the same has been extracted by the Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vs. Goetze (India) Ltd (361 ITR 505) as under:- “Thus, in cases of wrong opinion or finding on merits, the Commissioner of Income tax has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that the order is erroneous, by conducting necessary enquiry, if required and 14 A.Y. 2017-18 Saurashtra Trust necessary, before the order under section 263 is passed. In such cases, the order of the…

Group Housing Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC -5(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: The Regulatory Authorities. In View Of The Continuous Non-Cooperation From The Side Of The Assessee, We Deem It Fit To Dispose Of This Appeal By Hearing The Ld. Dr & Based On The Materials Available On Record.

…cco Company Ltd. and also noted the distinction between charge on profits and appropriation of profits. The extracts from this judgement is reproduced below. 3. As noticed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Vs. Goetze (India) Limited (2014) 361 ITR 505 (Del), Sub-section (1) to Section 115JB of the Act begins with a non obstante expression, which gives an overriding effect to the said section. Sub-section (2) states that every assessee being a company shall prepare a Profit and Loss account for the previous year in accordance with the of Part II and III of Schedule VI of the Act, 1956 Explanati…

M/S Serveall Construction Pvt. Ltd., Vasai vs. Dy. CIT Central 5(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: The Regulatory Authorities. In View Of The Continuous Non-Cooperation From The Side Of The Assessee, We Deem It Fit To Dispose Of This Appeal By Hearing The Ld. Dr & Based On The Materials Available On Record.

…/s. Serveall Construction Pvt. Ltd. distinction between charge on profits and appropriation of profits. The extracts from this judgement is reproduced below. 3. As noticed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Vs. Goetze (India) Limited (2014) 361 ITR 505 (Del), Sub-section (1) to Section 115JB of the Act begins with a non obstante expression, which gives an overriding effect to the said section. Sub-section (2) states that every assessee being a company shall prepare a Profit and Loss account for the previous year in accordance with the of Part II and III of Schedule VI of the Act, 1956 Explanati…

Impact Foundation (India), Mumbai vs. The Comm of Income Tax (Exemp), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.931/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18) Impact Foundation (India) बिधम/ Cit (E), Mumbai F1, 1St Floor, Laxmi Room No. 601, 6Th Floor, Vs. Wooden Mills, Opp G5A, Mtnl Building, Pedder Shakti Mills Lane, Off, Dr. Road, Dr. Gopalrao E. Moses Road, Mahalaxmi Deshmukh Marg, (W), Mumbai-400011. Cumballa Hill, Mumbai- 400026. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaat1422J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By: Shri Purushottam Tripuri (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit (Exemptions), Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Dated 24.03.2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Is Challenging The Validity Of Invocation Of Jurisdiction By Ld Cit(E) U/S 263 Of The Act.

…case of Nagesh Knitwears P Ltd (2012)(345 ITR 135), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has elucidated and explained the scope of the provisions of sec. 263 of the Act and the same has been extracted by the Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vs. Goetze (India) Ltd (361 ITR 505) as under:- “Thus, in cases of wrong opinion or finding on merits, the Commissioner of Income tax has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that the order is erroneous, by conducting necessary enquiry, if required and necessary, before the order under section 263 is passed. In such cases, the order of the Assessing Officer will be erroneo…

Pioneer Insurance & Reinsurance Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 3, Mumbai and Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax – 3(2)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T Varkey (Jm)

…case of Nagesh Knitwears P Ltd (2012)(345 ITR 135), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has elucidated and explained the scope of the provisions of sec. 263 of the Act and the same has been extracted by the Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vs. Goetze (India) Ltd (361 ITR 505) as under:- “Thus, in cases of wrong opinion or finding on merits, the Commissioner of Income tax has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that the order is erroneous, by conducting necessary enquiry, if required and necessary, before the order under section 263 is passed. In such cases, the order of the Assessing Officer will be erroneo…

Pioneer Investcorp Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 3, Mumbai and Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax – 3(2)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T Varkey (Jm)

…case of Nagesh Knitwears P Ltd (2012)(345 ITR 135), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has elucidated and explained the scope of the provisions of sec. 263 of the Act and the same has been extracted by the Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vs. Goetze (India) Ltd (361 ITR 505) as under:- “Thus, in cases of wrong opinion or finding on merits, the Commissioner of Income tax has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that the order is erroneous, by conducting necessary enquiry, if required and necessary, before the order under section 263 is passed. In such cases, the order of the Assessing Officer will be erroneo…

Pioneer Investcorp Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 3, Mumbai and Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax – 3(2)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T Varkey (Jm)

…case of Nagesh Knitwears P Ltd (2012)(345 ITR 135), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has elucidated and explained the scope of the provisions of sec. 263 of the Act and the same has been extracted by the Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vs. Goetze (India) Ltd (361 ITR 505) as under:- “Thus, in cases of wrong opinion or finding on merits, the Commissioner of Income tax has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that the order is erroneous, by conducting necessary enquiry, if required and necessary, before the order under section 263 is passed. In such cases, the order of the Assessing Officer will be erroneo…

Ashokkumar Bhanwarlal Chhajer, Sanpada vs. Pr. CIT - (Central), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

…case of Nagesh Knitwears P Ltd (2012)(345 ITR 135), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has elucidated and explained the scope of the provisions of sec. 263 of the Act and the same has been extracted by the Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vs. Goetze (India) Ltd (361 ITR 505) as under:- “Thus, in cases of wrong opinion or finding on merits, the Commissioner of Income tax has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that the order is erroneous, by conducting necessary enquiry, if required and necessary, before the order under section 263 is passed. In such cases, the order of the Assessing Officer will be erroneou…

DCIT Circle- 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

…lhi in the case of 3 M/s. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd., without appreciating the facts that the issue has not reached to its finality as the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its decision in the case of Goetz India Ltd., reported in 361 ITR 505 held that while computing Book Profit disallowance u/s 14A is required to be made. However, in its later judgment the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bhushan Steel Ltd. (ITA No. 593 & 594/2015) has taken a contrary view. 3.1 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in following the I…

ACIT, Circle - 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

…lhi in the case of 3 M/s. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd., without appreciating the facts that the issue has not reached to its finality as the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its decision in the case of Goetz India Ltd., reported in 361 ITR 505 held that while computing Book Profit disallowance u/s 14A is required to be made. However, in its later judgment the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bhushan Steel Ltd. (ITA No. 593 & 594/2015) has taken a contrary view. 3.1 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in following the I…

ACIT, Circle - 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

…lhi in the case of 3 M/s. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd., without appreciating the facts that the issue has not reached to its finality as the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its decision in the case of Goetz India Ltd., reported in 361 ITR 505 held that while computing Book Profit disallowance u/s 14A is required to be made. However, in its later judgment the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bhushan Steel Ltd. (ITA No. 593 & 594/2015) has taken a contrary view. 3.1 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in following the I…

Jeevan Deep Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

…decision rendered by co-ordinate bench in the case of Shri Narayan Tatu Rane (ITA 5 Jeevan Deep Trust No.2690 & 2691/M/2016 dated 05-05-2016, wherein the Tribunal following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd (361 ITR 505) has held that the PCIT, before holding an order to be erroneous, should have conducted necessary enquiries or verification in order to show that the finding given by the assessing officer is erroneous or the view taken by the AO is not sustainable in law. He submitted that the Ld CIT(E), in the instant case, has not carried out any such exercise…