CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate

53 ITR 225Supreme Court of India1964#211 most cited

What is CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate authority for?

The Commissioner (Appeals) holds plenary powers when disposing of an appeal, with their scope being coterminous with the Assessing Officer. This allows the CIT(A) to exercise all powers of the AO, including admitting additional evidence and redetermining income.

359

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate · 53 ITR 225 · powers of Commissioner (Appeals) · plenary powers CIT(A) · scope of appellate authority · coterminous powers AO · admitting additional evidence appeal · appellate procedure · Section 246 powers · income-tax appeal

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 147Section 132Section 153DSection 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 31(3)section 274(2)section 245hacasus omissussection 153(a)section 115jasection 144basection 31section 245section 144asection 246section 158bc

Judgments citing CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate

M/S Malvika Agrotech Pvt. Ltd., Dhar vs. The ITO-2(2), Indore

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

ITA 358/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Malvika Agrotech Ito, 2(2), Pvt. Ltd, Indore Plot No.185, Sector-1, Pithampur, Dhar (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aaccm6451G Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri C.P. Rawka,Ca Date Of Hearing 10.09.2018 Date Of 19.9.2018 Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50CSection 68

…cer either himself or direct the Assessing Officer to do so in terms of Section 250(4) of the Act” and Hon’ble Court holding in favour of the assessee taking support from the view taken by Hon’ble Apex court in the case of CIT Vs Kanpur Coals Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that “it is undisputed that the power of CIT (Appeals) is co terminus with that of Assessment Officer, in fact the CIT (Appeals) can do what the Assessing Officer can do”. 10. Similar view was also taken by the Hon'ble High of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs Ahmedabad PrincipalCompanies (1994) 76 Taxmann.com 109(G…

Skylark Build, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai

ITA 4370/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Skylark Build Acit, Central Circle-4(2) 402, Sagar Avenue 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Plot B-54, Junction Of M.K.Road, Vs. Lallubhai Park & S.V. Road Mumbai 400020 Andheri (W), Mumbai 400058 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aazfs0404K Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Skylark Build Acit, Central Circle-4(2) 402, Sagar Avenue 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Plot B-54, Junction Of M.K.Road, Vs. Lallubhai Park & S.V. Road Mumbai 400020 Andheri (W), Mumbai 400058 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aazfs0404K

…hetty Sahana Builders & Developers (P) Ltd. . refused to call for a statement of case. It is in these circumstances that the appellant filed the appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held as under : "5. In CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC), a three Judge Bench of this Court discussed the scope of s. 31(3)(a) of the IT Act, 1922 which is almost identical to s. 251(1)(a). The Court held as under : 'If an appeal lies, s. 31 of the Act describes the powers of the AAC in such an appeal. Under s. 31(3)(a) in disposing of such an appeal the AAC may, in the case of an order of assessme…

Skylark Build, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai

ITA 3237/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Skylark Build Acit, Central Circle-4(2) 402, Sagar Avenue 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Plot B-54, Junction Of M.K.Road, Vs. Lallubhai Park & S.V. Road Mumbai 400020 Andheri (W), Mumbai 400058 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aazfs0404K Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Skylark Build Acit, Central Circle-4(2) 402, Sagar Avenue 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Plot B-54, Junction Of M.K.Road, Vs. Lallubhai Park & S.V. Road Mumbai 400020 Andheri (W), Mumbai 400058 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aazfs0404K

…hetty Sahana Builders & Developers (P) Ltd. . refused to call for a statement of case. It is in these circumstances that the appellant filed the appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held as under : "5. In CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC), a three Judge Bench of this Court discussed the scope of s. 31(3)(a) of the IT Act, 1922 which is almost identical to s. 251(1)(a). The Court held as under : 'If an appeal lies, s. 31 of the Act describes the powers of the AAC in such an appeal. Under s. 31(3)(a) in disposing of such an appeal the AAC may, in the case of an order of assessme…

DCIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Sudhakar M. Shetty, Mumbai

ITA 2906/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Skylark Build Acit, Central Circle-4(2) 402, Sagar Avenue 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Plot B-54, Junction Of M.K.Road, Vs. Lallubhai Park & S.V. Road Mumbai 400020 Andheri (W), Mumbai 400058 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aazfs0404K Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Skylark Build Acit, Central Circle-4(2) 402, Sagar Avenue 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Plot B-54, Junction Of M.K.Road, Vs. Lallubhai Park & S.V. Road Mumbai 400020 Andheri (W), Mumbai 400058 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aazfs0404K

…hetty Sahana Builders & Developers (P) Ltd. . refused to call for a statement of case. It is in these circumstances that the appellant filed the appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held as under : "5. In CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC), a three Judge Bench of this Court discussed the scope of s. 31(3)(a) of the IT Act, 1922 which is almost identical to s. 251(1)(a). The Court held as under : 'If an appeal lies, s. 31 of the Act describes the powers of the AAC in such an appeal. Under s. 31(3)(a) in disposing of such an appeal the AAC may, in the case of an order of assessme…

Neela R. Mondal, Mumbai vs. ITO 26(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 6581/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 69

…s erred in law and facts in not considering the Judictional Hon’ble Bombay Nigh Court decision in case Prabhavati- 231 ITR. 5. The Hon’ble CIT (A) has erred in law and facts in not considering the Hon’ble S.C decision in case of CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC).” 3. Briefly stated facts are that the AO noticed during the assessment proceedings that there are total bank deposits in the assessee’s bank accounts i.e. maintained with Bank of Baroda Vide A/c No. 04190100009125 amounting to ₹ 41,50,000/-, Union Bank of India vide A/c No. 319702010740880 amounting to ₹ 5,00,000, Syndicate Bank vide A/c No…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Bioplus Life Sciences Pvt Ltd

In the result, I pass the following:-

ITA/1014/2017HC Karnataka24 Jul 2018

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar Writ Petition No.1014 Of 2017 (T-Kst) Between: M/S. Rainbow Colour Lab, No.13, D.J.C. Complex, Hudson Circle, Bengaluru – 560 027. A Partnership Firm Represented By Its Partner Sri.G.K.Madan Mohan, Aged About 62 Years, S/O Sri.G.V.Krishna Reddy. ...Petitioner (By Sri. M.Thirumalesh, Advocate ) And: 1. State Of Karnataka

Section 12

…. We would, therefore, hold that the expression ‘any person’ in the setting in which it appears must be confined to a person intimately connected in the aforesaid sense with the assessments of the year under appeal.” 13. In CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [53 ITR 225] this Court held that where the Income Tax Officer assessed the income of an association of persons under Section 31(3)(b), the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was competent to set aside the assessment and to direct the Income Tax Officer to assess the members individually. The Court observed that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had u…

Income-Tax Officer vs. Magic Software Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, cross objection filed by assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1802/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1802/Pun/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Ito, Ward-11(1), Pune अपीलाथ"/Appellant ….

For Appellant: Shri Arun Chhabra & Ms. Shilpa SFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 143(2)Section 92C

…ram [(1997)139 CTR (SC) 484] " Jute of Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and another [(1990)88CTR(SC)66] " Inventors Industrial Corp. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1992)194 ITR 548 (Bom.)] " CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [( 1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC)] " CIT vs. Motor Industries Co. Ltd. (1998] 97 Taxman 7 (Karnataka)) " Indu Arts vs. ACIT ([2017] 88 taxmann.com 182 (Delhi - Trib.)) In the light of above judicial precedents, the Respondent humbly requests the Hon'ble bench to reject E- Infochips Limited from the final set of comparable companies without the condition imposed by the Ld. CI…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Jugal Kishore Arora, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 157/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(3)Section 80

…ress the above arguments, the appellant has relied upon the following case laws :- (i) Chicago Pneumatic India Ltd. v. DCIT, Bombay 15 SOT 252 (Mum) (ii) Sam Global Securities Ltd. vs. ITO (DELHI) I.T.A. No. 1760/Del/2009. (iii) Kanpur Coal Syndicate vs. CIT 53 ITR 225 (iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities Ltd. 360 ITR 682 (Delhi High Court). (v) NTPC vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (Supreme Court). (vi) Sushil Kumar Das vs. ITO (ITA No. 193/Kol/2011) (vii) NHK Spring Ltd. (Delhi ITAT) In the light of the above facts and circumstances and the case laws cited by us, your honours may kindly accept the claim of short term ca…

ITO 31(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Surekha Vilas Soudagar, Mumbai

ITA 5198/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…ferring the matter to the Valuation Cell ?" The Court observed that the scope of the appellate power under the provisions of the Income- tax Act was considered in the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in the cases of CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 ; Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 6881 and CIT v. Nirbheram Daluram [1997] 224 ITR 610 That the power of the appellate authority is as wide as that of the Assessing Officer was emphatically stated and reiterated in the decisions. The Court further held that what was said by the Apex Court in relation to the appellate power under th…

DCIT (It) 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Dipendu Bapalal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4751/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

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

Section 114Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 6

…cannot be charged repeatedly in the hands of different persons or in the hands of the same person." (Emphasis supplied) This view may be taken to be approved by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 (SC). The view taken in that case was that tax can levied on either of the said two entities, that is, an association of persons or the individual members of an association, according to the provisions of the Act. Joti Prasad's case (supra) was also referred to by that Supreme Court in Income-tax Officer v. Bachu Lal Kapoor [1966] 60 ITR 74, 79, 8…

ITO, WD-29(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Maakali Enterprise, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1412/KOL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.Dasgupta, Addl. CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri D.Bhaumik, Advocate & Shri S.K.Saha, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…e, nor at the remand stage, in spite of being given ample opportunity to do so. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made, on grounds of the assessment order being cryptic, when as per Supreme Court in the case of Kanpur Coal Syndicate [53 ITR 225 (SC)], the powers of CIT(A) is co-terminus with that of the AO "he can do what the ITO can do and can also direct him to do what he failed to do". 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify, delete or include any of the grounds of appeal.” 3. Ground No.1 relates to the deletion of addition of Rs.10,37,732/- on account of materials…

The DCIT, Circle-3(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Harjivanbhai Chaganbhai Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2460/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2384/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Harjivanbhai C. Patel, Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co., Vs Income-Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 3(2), 105, Sakar-I, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Abupp 1238 N आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2460/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Harjivanbhai C. Patel, C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co., Income-Tax, Vs Chartered Accountants, Circle 3(2), 105, Sakar-I, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Abupp 1238 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pd. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/04/2018 आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue & The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Ahmedabad Dated 21St July, 2016 Arising In The Assessment Order Dated 27.02.2015 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri PD. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr DR
Section 131Section 143(3)

…. CIT231 ITR 1 (Bom.) iii) K. Mohammed Vs. ITO 107 ITR 808 (Ker.) iv) Dwarka Prasad Vs. ITO 63 ITD 1 (ITAT - Pat) v) B.L. Choudhury Vs. CIT 105 ITR 371 (Ori.) vi) ITO Vs. Industrial Roadways (2007) 19(I) ITCL 460 (ITAT-Mum). vii) CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC). viii) CIT vs. Nirbheram Daluram 224 ITR 610 (SC) In view of ratio laid down in above case laws, the additional evidences so submitted are decided to be admitted. The jurisdictional directions laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) are also being relied. As there is no response from t…

Shri Harjivanbhai C. Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2384/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2384/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Harjivanbhai C. Patel, Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co., Vs Income-Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 3(2), 105, Sakar-I, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Abupp 1238 N आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2460/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Harjivanbhai C. Patel, C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co., Income-Tax, Vs Chartered Accountants, Circle 3(2), 105, Sakar-I, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Abupp 1238 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pd. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/04/2018 आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue & The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Ahmedabad Dated 21St July, 2016 Arising In The Assessment Order Dated 27.02.2015 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri PD. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr DR
Section 131Section 143(3)

…. CIT231 ITR 1 (Bom.) iii) K. Mohammed Vs. ITO 107 ITR 808 (Ker.) iv) Dwarka Prasad Vs. ITO 63 ITD 1 (ITAT - Pat) v) B.L. Choudhury Vs. CIT 105 ITR 371 (Ori.) vi) ITO Vs. Industrial Roadways (2007) 19(I) ITCL 460 (ITAT-Mum). vii) CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC). viii) CIT vs. Nirbheram Daluram 224 ITR 610 (SC) In view of ratio laid down in above case laws, the additional evidences so submitted are decided to be admitted. The jurisdictional directions laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) are also being relied. As there is no response from t…

ITO, WD-51(4), Kolkata vs. Shri Rabindra Nath Sikdar, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1097/KOL/2015[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 28Section 44A

…f the assessee-company. As regards the justification of computation of loss by the Commissioner (Appeals) after looking into the audited accounts as well as the past records himself, it has been held by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 and reiterated in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 that the AAC has plenary powers in disposing of an appeal The scope of his power is co-terminus with that of the ITO. He could do what the ITO could do and also direct him to do what he had failed to do in view of these decisions, it was to beheld that in disposing of an appeal…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S.Karnataka State Financial Corporation Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1604/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raoasst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corporation Ltd. ‘Ksfc Bhavan’, No.1/1, Thimmaiah Road, Near Cantonment Railway Station, Bengaluru. … Respondent Pan:Aaack 9480 H Appellant By : Shri A.C.Raju, Ca. Respondent By : Shri B.R.Ramesh, Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 18/01/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/04/2018 O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Bengaluru, [Cit(A)], Dated 28/06/2016 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Briefly Facts Of The Case Are As Under: The Respondent-Assessee Is An Undertaking Of Government Of Karnataka Set Up For The Purpose Of Providing Finance To Industries In The State Of Karnataka. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Was Filed On 30/09/2009. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By Order Dated 28/11/2011 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act' For Short] At Loss Of Rs.3,58,95,3461/. While Doing So, The Ao Disallowed A Sum Of Rs.34,17,548/- Invoking The Provisions Of Section 14A Of The Act, Legal & Professional Charges In Page 2 Of 8 Connection With Issue Of Bonds Of Rs.41,79,935/-, Also Not Allowed The Claim For Deduction Of Rs.548.64 Lakhs Being The Liability Arising On Account Rejection By Government Of Karnataka On The Ground That The Claim Was Not Made In The Original Return Of Income.

For Appellant: Shri A.C.Raju, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R.Ramesh, JCIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…d have occupied the minds of the Courts in numerous occasions. Page 5 of 8 31. In the case of Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 the Supreme Court noted with approval observation of the Court in the case of CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 to the effect that "The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, therefore, has plenary powers in disposing of appeal. The scope of his power is co-terminus with that of the Income-tax Officer. He can do what the Income-tax Officer can do and also direct him to do what he has failed to do." It was observed that there was no reason why the appellate autho…

Design Core, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 617/JPR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai (DCIT)
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 234BSection 244A(3)Section 40Section 40A(3)

…mitted that the settled legal is that proposition that the powers of the first appellate authority are very vide and co-terminus with those of the AO and what AO can do, he can do and what AO fail to do, that also he can do. Kindly refer Kanpur Coal Syndicate 53 ITR 225 (SC). Section 251 and 252 of the Act has also been worded keeping the same spirit, as also rule 46A. Section 250 (4) empowers the CIT (A) to make further inquiries on its own or to direct the AO to make further inquiry and to report him. The embargo put on his power u/r 46A (1) & (2) has also been loosened by sub-rule 4, which also empower the CIT…

Wadhwagroup Holdings P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 5(4), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6357/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Wadhawan Group Holdings Deputy Commissioner Of बिधम/ Pvt. Ltd., 301, 3Rd Floor, Platina, Income Tax, Central Circle- Plot C-59, G Block Bandra 5(4), Vs. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai. Mumbai-400 051 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaccv3961G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Wadhawan Group Income Tax, Central Circle- Holdings Pvt. Ltd., 301, 3Rd बिधम/ 5(4), Room No. 1927, 19Th Floor, Platina, Plot C-59, G Floor, Air India Building. Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Nariman Point Bandra East, Mumbai- 400 021 Mumbai-400 051 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaccv3961G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ram Tiwari, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Jain, A.R
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…allowance claimed by the assessee under Sec. 14A could safely be cured at the stage of the first appeal. The CIT(A) fortified his aforesaid view by taking support of the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC). The CIT(A) in the backdrop of his aforesaid conviction deliberated on the disallowance of Rs.5,83,352/- offered by the assessee under Sec. 14A in its return of income in the backdrop of the facts available on record and the accounts of the assessee. The CIT(A) after necessary examination of the accounts of the assessee, observed that as the…

DCIT Cen Cir 5(4), Mumbai vs. Wadhawan Group Holdings P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6268/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Wadhawan Group Holdings Deputy Commissioner Of बिधम/ Pvt. Ltd., 301, 3Rd Floor, Platina, Income Tax, Central Circle- Plot C-59, G Block Bandra 5(4), Vs. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai. Mumbai-400 051 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaccv3961G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Wadhawan Group Income Tax, Central Circle- Holdings Pvt. Ltd., 301, 3Rd बिधम/ 5(4), Room No. 1927, 19Th Floor, Platina, Plot C-59, G Floor, Air India Building. Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Nariman Point Bandra East, Mumbai- 400 021 Mumbai-400 051 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaccv3961G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ram Tiwari, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Jain, A.R
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…allowance claimed by the assessee under Sec. 14A could safely be cured at the stage of the first appeal. The CIT(A) fortified his aforesaid view by taking support of the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC). The CIT(A) in the backdrop of his aforesaid conviction deliberated on the disallowance of Rs.5,83,352/- offered by the assessee under Sec. 14A in its return of income in the backdrop of the facts available on record and the accounts of the assessee. The CIT(A) after necessary examination of the accounts of the assessee, observed that as the…

Centram Broking P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4525/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S Centrum Broking Pvt. Ltd Dy. Cit- Range 4(1), बिधम/ 5Th Floor, Santacruz (E), Mumbai. Mumbai -400 098. Vs.

For Appellant: Shri J.D Mistry, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…ed that the CIT(A) by enhancing the income of the assessee had acted well within his jurisdiction. The ld. D.R in order to support his aforesaid contention relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC) and drew our attention to the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court recorded at Page 6 of its order. The ld. A.R in rebuttal submitted that Page 4 of the CIT(A) order clearly referred to the letter dated. 20.12.2010, therefore, the contention of the ld. D.R that no such letter was filed with the CIT(A) was disproved. The ld. D.R submitted th…

Samkit Diamonds Exporters, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(3), Mumbai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee as well of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4133/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4133/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Samkit Diamonds Exporters Acit 19(3) 111 Prasad Chambers, Tata Mumbai Road No.2, Opera House, V. Mumbai 400004 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aakfs5302F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Sanjay K ParikhFor Respondent: Shri. V. Vidyadhar,Sr DR
Section 143(3)

…d CIT(A) powers are coterminous with that of the AO and the learned CIT(A) should have conducted enquiry if it is required in the matter and the AO having failed to conduct the same. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225(SC) has also held that powers of learned CIT(A) are co-terminus with powers of the AO. The assessee has relied on the decision of Ratnalaya Diamonds Private Limited(supra) of which both of us were party to the said order, however, in the said case the assessee has before the tribunal given concession to be assessed at an additional income computed…