How many judgments cite CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.?

1,673 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 151, Section 143(2).

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

320 ITR 561Supreme Court of India2010#18 most cited

What is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. authority for?

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

1,673

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. · Kelvinator of India · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment proceedings · mere change of opinion · fresh tangible material · escapement of income · reason to believe · validity of reassessment

Also reported as

187 Taxmann 3122 SCC 723187 Taxmann.com 312

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 151 Section 143(2)Section 68 Section 139

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

kelvinator fresh tangible material mere change of opinion first proviso to section 147 material facts necessary for assessment full and true disclosure change of opinion beyond four years live link tangible material escapement of income reason to believe

Judgments citing CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Surat vs. M/S. Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1180/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.776 &1180/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vs. 1.Income Tax Officer, 1.Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., 5/A, 932, 402, Gopinath Ward 1(1) (1), Surat. Apartment, Jadakhadi, Mahidharpura, Surat.395 003. [Pan: Aaica 4525 F] 2.Income Tax Officer, 2. Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Ward 1(1) (1), Surat. 5/A, 932, 402, Gopinath Apartment, Jadakhadi, Mahidharpura, Surat 395 003. [Pan: Aaica 4525 F] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Suchek Anchaliya – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri J. K. Chandnani – Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 27.08.2019

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…oever nature with the said Shri Bhanwarlal M. Jain. M/s. Rose Gems Pvt. Ltd. is assessed to tax. The payment are made through account payee cheques. There should be live link with reasons recorded as held in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561/187 Taxman 312(SC). Reliance was placed on various case laws as mentioned in appellate order by the Ld. CIT(A). It was further submitted that retracted statement of third party could not be made basis of reopening of assessment. However, the CIT (A) observed that there was credible information from Investigation Wing Mumbai regarding search and s…

Sri Jitendra Kumar Pandey, Bokaro vs. DCIT Circle-2, Hzb

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 89/RAN/2018[10-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi27 Aug 2019

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri D.C.Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…e assessing officer warranting exercise of jurisdiction under section 147/148 of the Act. He submitted that this is a case of change of opinion, hence, in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC), the reassessment proceedings is bad in law and same should be quashed. 7. Replying to above, ld D.R. supported the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the reassessment proceedings framed u/s.147 of the Act. He submitted that since the assessee failed to substantiate the difference in sundry creditors before the Assessing Officer, hence, th…

Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 776/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

Ritesh Kantilal Bafna, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2327/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Ritesh Kantilal Bafna Son & Legal Heir Of Late Vs. Kantilal M Bafna, 801, Shatrunjay Darshan, Ito, Wd-19(2)(2), Love Lane, Cross Lane, Mumbai Byculla, Mumbai [Pan : Aaapb8051G]

For Appellant: Shri C.V. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kusum Bansal, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…original assessment proceedings. We are therefore of the considered view that this is a mere change of opinion by the AO, which is not permissible under the Act. The case of assessee is squarely covered by the decision of CIT V. Kelvinator of India Ltd.[2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) and various other decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and Co-ordinate Benches. In this connection, we are of the view that the assessment proceedings are bad in law and are quashed. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed. 5. Since we have decided the issue on legal ground, the issue raised in grounds, need not to be adjudic…

M/S Manish Finlease (P) Ltd, Patna vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Patna

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

…d assessment, accordingly he had validly assumed jurisdiction in this regard. 2.9 So far as the test of reason to believe vis-a-vis change of opinion is concerned particularly in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of M/s Kelvinator India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 affirming the judgment of the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court in the same case reported at 123 Taxman 423, the said judgment has to be seen the particular facts of the case. In that case, the assessee had filed its return of income along with computation of income, annual report, tax audit report, etc but the assessee did not claim certain exp…

M/S Bsn Joshi & Sons Ltd, Khurda vs. ACIT, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6/CTK/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack08 Aug 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2003-2004

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Sethi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessments. He P a g e 5 | 10 ITA No.0 6/CTK /2 011 Assessm ent Y ear : 20 03- 04 referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator India Ltd. (2010) 310 ITR 561 (SC). Ld A.R. submitted that the assessment year involved in this appeal is 2002-03 and notice u/s.148 of the Act has been issued and served on the assessee on 17.3.2009. He submitted that notice u/s.148 of the Act has to be issued from the end of the relevant assessment years and since this has not been done, the reopening of assessment is bad…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cirlcle-1, Kakinada vs. G. Narayana Rao, Kakinada

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 593/VIZ/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blethe Acit, Circle-1, Vs. Grandhi Narayana Rao, Kakinada. Prop. : Sri Dhana Lakshmi Oil & General Merchants, D.No.27-9-14/1, Pulavarthy Street, Kakinada. Pan No. Abqpg 1242 D (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 19/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 593/Viz/2018) (Asst. Year : 2009-10) Grandhi Narayana Rao, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, Prop. : Sri Dhana Lakshmi Oil Kakinada. & General Merchants, D.No. 27-9-14/1, Pulavarthy Street, Kakinada. Pan No. Abqpg 1242 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.V.N. Hari – Advocate. Department By : Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2019. Date Of Pronouncement : 07/08/2019. O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR

Section 143(3)

…serving that the approach of the Assessing Officer is not justified. So far as order u/sec.143(3) r.w.s. 147 is concerned, it is only mere change of opinion and by following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator India Ltd. [(320 ITR 561 (SC)] has held that notice is invalid and the reassessment proceedings are void ab initio. These two separate assessment orders passed by the Assessing C.O.No.19/VIZ/2019 (G. Narayana Rao) Officer, though ld. CIT(A) has passed combined order dated 29/06/2018, the Department has to file two separate appeals before the Tribunal instead of that, one…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. M/S. Seco Tools India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the Cross Objections of assessee are allowed and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 813/PUN/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.812 & 813/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण पुणे न्यायपीठ “बी” पुणे में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE सुश्री सुषमा चावऱा, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अयिऱ चतुवेदी, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं. / ITA Nos.812 & 813/PUN/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2002-03 & 2003-04 The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle 6, Pune …. Vs. M/s. Seco Tools India Pvt. Ltd., Gat No.582, Pune Nagar Road, Koregaon Bhima, Tal Shirur, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Pune – 412216 PAN: AAACS8793F प्रत्याक्षेप सं./CO Nos.30 & 31/PUN/2018 यििाारण वषा / Assessm…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Superior Films (P) Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed; accordingly, Revenue’s appeal is

ITA 4938/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gurjit Batra and Shri S.M. Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…FIT FOR PUBLICATION (ANM) (BS) ITA No.- 4938/Del/2012. (AM) (JM) M/s Superior Films Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘G’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No:- 4938/Del/2012 (Assessment Year: 2004-05) Income Tax Officer, M/s Superior Films (P) Ltd., Ward 9(4), Vs. Satyam Cinema Building, New Delhi. Ranjit Nagar, New Delhi. PAN No: AAACS1360C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Gurjit Batra and Shri S.M. Mathur, CA Revenue by : Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. Dr ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM This appeal…

M/S.Samkit Gems, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3980/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Blem/S. Samkit Gems Income Tax Officer V. 12A, Paradise Apartment Ward No. 19(3)(2) Opp. Matru Ashish Building Matru Mandir, Tardev Road Nepean Sea Road Mumbai – 400 007 Mumbai – 400 006 Pan: Aakfs 8254 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan Department By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

For Appellant: Shri K.A. VaidyalinganFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 40

…ready 6 M/s. Samkit Gems provided along with the original return filed by the assessee, the reopening of assessment after expiry of four years would amount to impermissible review. 8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd., [320 ITR 561] it has been held as under: - “6. On going through the changes, quoted above, made to Section 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, re-opening could be done under above two conditions and fulfillment of the said conditions alone conferred jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer to make a back assessment, but…

Sanjay Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 63(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 825/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Sanjay Kumar Jain, ITO, Ward 63(2), B-2/78, Ashok Vihar, Vs New Delhi Phase-II, New Delhi – 6 (PAN: AAGPJ2808K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Rajat Jain, FCA & Sh. Akshat Jain, FCA Respondent by Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.11.2018 of the CIT(A)-20, New Delhi relating to A. Y. 2009-10 on the following grounds:- i) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred…

M/S. G.N.Mohanty and Co., Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 397/CTK/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. G.N.Mohanty & Co., Plot Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), Bhubaneswar. No.2060/2061,2062 S, Samatarpur Chhak, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aaefg 3478 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B.K. Mohapatra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…even indicate or allege that any fresh information came to the knowledge of the assessing officer warranting exercise of jurisdiction under section 147/148 of the Act. 8. He relied on the decision of the Hon’ble apex Court in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.: 320 ITR 561(SC). The relevant observations of the apex Court are as under: "On going through the changes, quoted above, made to Section 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, re- opening could be done under above two conditions and fulfillment of the said conditions alone conferred jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer…

Prasanta Kumar Routray, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 111/CTK/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…ear: 2 013 -14 u/s.44AB of the Act. Hence, it cannot be considered that the remuneration paid to partners was not furnished during the course of original assessment. 8. He relied on the decision of the Hon’ble apex Court in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.: 320 ITR 561(SC). The relevant observations of the apex Court are as under: "On going through the changes, quoted above, made to Section 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, re- opening could be done under above two conditions and fulfillment of the said conditions alone conferred jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer…

Smt Ruchika Agarwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 270/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Meena (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 3

…the issue has been examined by the A.O. during the course of assessment proceedings. Accordingly, it was claimed that reopening was not valid. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. M/s Kelvinator of India Limited (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) (ii) CIT Vs. M/s Hindustan Zinc Ltd. (2017) 393 ITR 264 (Raj) (iii) CIT Vs. Bhanji Lavji (1971) 79 ITR 582 (SC) (iv) DCIT Vs Purolator (2012) 343 ITR 155 (Del) (v) Kimplas Trenton Fittings Ltd. Vs ACIT (2012) 340 ITR 299 (Bom) (vi) Desai Bros Ltd. Vs DCIT (2005) 272 ITR 335 (Bom) (vii) Bhot Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 161 (Bom) (v…

ACIT 7(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Niyanand Inrastructure Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross

ITA 2255/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Acit, 7(2)(2), R. No. 623, 6 Th Nityanand Infrastructure Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Ltd., Opp Abhudaya Nagar Vs. Rd, Mumbai Post Office, G.D. Ambedkar Marg, Mumbai -400033 (Appellant) .. Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacn1981E Co No. 266/Mum/2018 (Arising In Ita No. 2255/Mum/2017 For Ay 2009-10) Nityanand Infrastructure Ltd., Acit, 7(2)(2), R. No. 623, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp Abhudaya Nagar Post Vs. Office, G.D. Ambedkar Marg, M.K. Rd, Mumbai Mumbai -400033 (Appellant) .. Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Sh. Vachashpati Tripathi, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Sh. Dr. K. Shivram, Sr. Adv Sh. Rahul K. Hakani, ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01-07-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19-07-2019

For Appellant: Sh. Vachashpati Tripathi, DRFor Respondent: Sh. Dr. K. Shivram, Sr. Adv

Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…to the question as to whether assessee would be allowed to a deduction under section 80M of the Act. Hon’ble Bombay High Court has considered this issue by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561. Hon’ble Bombay High Court held as under: - “11. The provisions of section 147 of the Act empower the Assessing Officer to reopen an assessment or issue a notice for reassessment provided that he has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. In a judgment 11 CO No. 266/Mum/2018 of a Division Bench of this Court in German Remedies L…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(2), Mumbai vs. Khyati Realtors Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, therefore, petition succeeds and is allowed

ITA 4710/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh , Jm Dcit, Cir. 6(3)(2) Vs. M/S. Khyati Realtors Pvt.Ltd R.No.522, 5Th Floor 301/68, Manek Bhuvan 1St Hindu Colony Aayakar Bhavan M.K.Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 014 Pan/Gir No.Aacck4422B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH , JM DCIT, CIR. 6(3)(2) Vs. M/s. Khyati Realtors Pvt.Ltd R.No.522, 5th Floor 301/68, Manek Bhuvan 1st Hindu Colony Aayakar Bhavan M.K.Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 014 PAN/GIR No.AACCK4422B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by Shri. B. Yadagiri Assessee by Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Date of Hearing 17/06/2019 Date of Pronouncement 17/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.4710/Mum/2017 for A.Y.2008-09 arises out of the order by the ld. Com…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2234/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar

Section 244A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. 1801, 1802 & 1803/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2007-08, 2007-08 & 2009-10) M/s. Union Bank of India v. DCIT (LTU) – 2 29th Floor, World Trade Centre Central Accounts Department 6th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan Cuffe Parade 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg Mumbai - 400 005 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAACU 0564 G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 2231, 2232, 2233 & 2234/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 1991-92, 2007-08, 2007-08 & 2009-10) DCIT (LTU) – 2 v. M/s. Union Bank of India 2…