How many judgments cite CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal?

225 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal (417 ITR 325), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(2), Section 148, Section 147, Section 143(3), Section 292BB, Section 142(1).

CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal

417 ITR 325Supreme Court of India2019#396 most cited

What is CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal authority for?

Issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) is a mandatory requirement for completing an assessment when a return is filed, including reassessment under Section 147/143(3). The complete absence of this notice renders the assessment invalid and is not curable by Section 292BB.

225

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Laxman Das Khandelwal · Section 143(2) notice mandatory · non-issuance of notice · assessment invalid · Section 292BB · curative provision · service of notice · Section 147 reassessment · Section 143(3) assessment · Hotel Blue Moon affirmed

Also reported as

108 Taxmann.com 183266 Taxmann 171310 CTR 8

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 148 Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 292BB Section 142(1)Section 139 Section 144

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 292bb section 292b section 124(3)section 292 section 120 section 29 section 124 section 158bc service of notice section 127 section 139(4)section 158

Judgments citing CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal

Shri Raoof R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Baroda

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on jurisdiction

ITA 3367/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B

…ord any documents to contradict the Affidavit filed by the assessee regarding non-service/non-issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Lakshman Das Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman 171/417 ITR 325, held that it is clear that the infirmities in the manner of service of notice alone would be amenable to under section 292BB, but not the complete absence of notice itself; Notice issued beyond the period of limitation partakes the character of absence of notice itself in the eye of law and as such, section 292BB would not save such a notice de…

Shivaji S Desai, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 22(3)4, Mumbai

In the result, the assessment order is quashed and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2272/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthy: A.Y : 2009-10 Shivaji S. Desai Vs. Income Tax Officer – 22(3)(4), Sagar Darshan Chs, Tower No. 2, Mumbai. (Respondent) Flat No. 1001, 10Th Floor, Sector-18, Nerul (W), Navi Mumbai. (Appellant) Pan : Affpd3240K Appellant By : Shri Prakash Pandit Respondent By : Shri Abhijeet Chaudhary & Shri Mehul Jain Date Of Hearing : 17/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/09/2022

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Abhijeet Chaudhary &

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…omes to the rescue of Revenue to regularise any defect in service of notice. However, where there is no notice, the provision of Section 292BB of the Act does not cure the defect. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal reported as 417 ITR 325(SC) in an unambiguous terms has held that absence of service of notice cannot be cured by invoking the provisions of section 292BB of the Act. For the sake of completeness the relevant extract of the observation made by Hon’ble Apex Court are reproduced herein below: “9. According to section 292BB of the Act, if the assessee had participated in…

Neeraj Kumar, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Barot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 3067/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3067/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Neeraj Kumar Ito Vs. House No. 5, Rana Farm Barot. House, Manshi Vihar, Sector-23, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Dmtpk8828J अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 234A

…143(2) of the Act before completion of the reassessment the reassessment made u/s 144/147 of the Act is bad in I.T.A.No.3067/Del/2018 law. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal (417 ITR 325). 3. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submits that issue of notice u/s 143(2) is only procedural in nature and non issue of such notice will not render the reassessment order bad in law. 4. Heard rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the record placed before us. On perusal of the intimation issued by Income Tax Offic…

Mr. Shashikant M Udani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 26 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2232/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘G‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Shashikant M. Udani Vs. ACIT-26(3), H-210, Ansa Industrial Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan Estate C-11, BKC Bandra (E) Saki Vihar Road Room No.501, Andheri (E) – 400 072 Mumbai – 400 051 PAN/GIR No.AAAPU2812L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri M Subramanian Revenue by Smt. Kanupriya Damor Date of Hearing 10/08/2022 Date of Pronouncement 26/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): These appeals in ITA Nos.2231/Mum/2019 & 2232/Mum/2019 for A.Yrs.2010-1…

Mr. Shashikant M Udani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 26 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2231/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

Manorma V. Rathi, Mumbai vs. ACIT 21(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 778/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhsmt. Manorma V. Rathi Vs. The Acit, Circle 21(1) C/O G.P. Mehta & Co. C-10, Vi Floor, Cas., 807, Tulsiani Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Chambers, 212, Nariman Bandra Kurla Complex, Point, Mumbai Bandra (E), 400 021 Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aabpr3678Q Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: G.P. MehtaFor Respondent: Hoshang B. Irani

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(C)

…ITA No.778/Mum/2011 A.Y. 2006-07 1 Smt. Manorma V. Rathi Vs. The ACIT, Circle 21(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Smt. Manorma V. Rathi Vs. The ACIT, Circle 21(1) C/o G.P. Mehta & Co. C-10, VI Floor, CAS., 807, Tulsiani Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Chambers, 212, Nariman Bandra Kurla Complex, Point, Mumbai Bandra (E), 400 021 Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AABPR3678Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : G.P. Mehta Respondent by : Hoshang B. Irani Date of Hearing 21.04.2022 Date o…

M/S J R Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., Gujrat vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2534/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.2534/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S J R Roadlines Pvt. Ltd..............................................…………………Appellant Plot No.14, Sector 8, Gandhidham, Kutch, Gujarat-370201. [Pan: Aadcp9373R] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata………...........……………….....………..…..Respondent Present: For The Assessee: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar For The Department: Shri Praveen Kishore, Cit-Dr, On 06.01.2022 Shri Sudipta Guha, Cit-Dr, On 26.05.2022 Date Of Hearing : January 06, 2022 & May 26, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 27, 2022 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 01.10.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Kolkata [Hereinafter As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT-DR, on 06.01.2022

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.2534/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s J R Roadlines Pvt. Ltd..............................................…………………Appellant Plot No.14, Sector 8, Gandhidham, Kutch, Gujarat-370201. [PAN: AADCP9373R] vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata………...........……………….....………..…..Respondent Present: For the assessee: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR For the Department: Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT-DR, on 06.01.2022 Shri Sudipta Guha, CIT-DR, on 26.05.2022 Date of hearing : January 06, 2022 &…

Nishit Fincap P. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward 18(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 1424/DEL/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda[Assessment Year: 2008-09]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153(1)Section 153CSection 68

…hat the notice u/s 143(2) as per provisions of the Act as there is no saving clause given in section 143(3) of the Act. Relying on various decisions including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Laxman Das Khandelwal, reported in 417 ITR 325 (SC), he submitted that the failure to issue a notice u/s 143(2) renders the assessment order void even if the assessee has participated in the proceedings and the provisions of section 292BB does not save complete absence of notice. He submitted that the provisions of section 292BB to apply, the notice must have emanated from the department. It…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 vs. M/S Consortium Nussli Comfort Net

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/63/2022HC Delhi25 Mar 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

Section 124(3)Section 143(2)Section 292B

…ce under Section 143(2) of the Act or after completion of assessment proceedings, whichever is earlier. 4. He also submits that Section 292BB has been interpreted by the Apex Court recently in Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal, [2019] 417 ITR 325 (SC) wherein it has been held as under:- “9. According to section 292BB of the Act, if the assessee had participated in the proceedings, by way of legal fiction, notice would be deemed to be valid even if there be infractions as detailed in the said section. The scope of the provision is to make service of notice having certain infirmities…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Indrani Prasad, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed”

ITA 467/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 113Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 158Section 271

…ed u/ s.143(2), therefore) the assessment order in question is legally . unsustainable and the same is quashed." 6.2 Respectfully, following the ratio laid down in the above cases which has again been affirmed by Hon'ble S.C in case of Mr. Laxmandas Khandewal 417 ITR 325 (S.C) and the facts and circumstances of the case as brought out supra, it is held that the proceedings are not validily initiated and the order passed thereafter is liable to be set aside and the order passed is set aside. The assessee succeeds on above grounds. As the order is set aside in the absence of valid notice u/s 143(2), the other groun…

Indrani Prasad, New Delhi vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed”

ITA 409/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR)

Section 113Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 158Section 271

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Dr.P.S.Prasad, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1570/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S.Godara

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Solgy Kottaram, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(1)(a)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1570/HYD/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Asst.Commissioner of Dr.P.S.Prasad, Income Tax, Vs New Delhi Central Circle-3(2), [PAN: AAMPP4844K] HYDERABAD (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Solgy Kottaram, CIT-DR For Assessee : Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, AR Date of Hearing : 02-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 21-03-2022 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This Revenue’s appeal for AY.2010-11 arises from the CIT(A)-11, Hyder…

Dr. Shri. Gurunath Shankarappa Wachech, Solapur vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1 (2), Solapur

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1445/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dr. Shri Gurunath Shankarappa Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), Wachche Solapur Plot No.13, S.No.316, Vishal Nagar Jule Solapur, Solapur-413004 Pan : Aalpw9544N Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav Date Of Hearing 03-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07-03-2022

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…ation in the assessment proceedings / re- assessment proceedings would be deemed as a proper service of notice. This section does not deal with the issuance of the requisite notice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal (2019) 417 ITR 325 (SC) has held that section 292BB deals with failure of service of notice and not failure to issue notice. Since, admittedly, no notice was issued u/s 148 in this case, I am satisfied that the entire edifice of re- assessment created by the AO is without any bedrock. Ex consequenti, the re-assessment order is vitiated and the resultant 5 Dr. Shri…

Indian Clothing League(P) Ltd., Noida vs. ITO, Ward-26(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 505/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Clothing League (P) Ltd., Vs. Ito, Rupinder Kumar Aggarwal, Ward-26(2), Advocate, B-1A/22H, New Delhi. Sector-51, Noida. Pan: Aaccv3439R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2022 Order

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…148 of the Act and prior to framing the order of assessment u/s 147/143(3) of the Act, order of assessment so framed is without jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed as such:- i) ACIT v. Hotel blue Moon 321 ITR 362 (SC); ii) CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal 417 ITR 325 (SC); iii) PCIT v. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd 383 ITR 448 (Del); iv) Pr. CIT v. Silver Line and Anr 383 ITR 455 (Del); v) PCIT v. Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd. 398 ITR 701 (Del) ; and vi) CIT v. Delhi Kalyan Samiti ITA No. 696/2015 (Del) dated 22.3.2016 8. Referring to the order of the CIT(A) at para 4.2.2., he submitted that…

M/S. Rajdhani Crafts, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-4 Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1281/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 10BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1281/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s Rajdhani Crafts, cuke A.C.I.T., Vs. Plot No. 54-55, Road No. 5, VKI Circle-4, Area, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AADFR 7865 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by: Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of He…

Smt. Arwa Hararwala, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 7(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed on the legal issue raised

ITA 1/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri Ravishankar S.V

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Arwa Hararwala, Flat B-502, Wilson The Income tax Apartments, Officer, 13th Cross, Wilson Garden, Ward – 7 (2)(2), Bangalore – 560 027. Bangalore. Vs. PAN: ABVPA7712K APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri Ravishankar S.V, Assessee by Advocate : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Revenue by CIT-OSD(DR) Date of Hearing : 22-10-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 20-12-2021 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed by assessee against order dat…

Jt. CIT (OSD)- CC - 1(4), Mumbai vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeals and Cross Objection of the assessee for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3764/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nishant ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra

Section 115Section 153CSection 32Section 35Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs.1412, 1413 2461 & 2462/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2012-13, 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) UltraTech Cement Ltd., v. DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) Ahura Centre, “B" Wing Pratishtha Bhavan, Old. C.G.O. Bldg., 2nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 PAN: AAACL6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 2871, 2872 &2873/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) v. UltraTech Cement Lt…

DCIT- CC- 1(4), Mumbai vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeals and Cross Objection of the assessee for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are partly

ITA 2873/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nishant ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra

Section 115Section 153CSection 32Section 35Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs.1412, 1413 2461 & 2462/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2012-13, 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) UltraTech Cement Ltd., v. DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) Ahura Centre, “B" Wing Pratishtha Bhavan, Old. C.G.O. Bldg., M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai 2nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 PAN: AAACL6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 2871, 2872 &2873/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) v. UltraTech Cement Lt…

DCIT -CC-1(4), Mumbai vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeals and Cross Objection of the assessee for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are partly

ITA 2872/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nishant ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra

Section 115Section 153CSection 32Section 35Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs.1412, 1413 2461 & 2462/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2012-13, 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) UltraTech Cement Ltd., v. DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) Ahura Centre, “B" Wing Pratishtha Bhavan, Old. C.G.O. Bldg., M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai 2nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 PAN: AAACL6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 2871, 2872 &2873/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) v. UltraTech Cement Lt…

DCIT - CC - 1(4), Mumbai vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Mumbai

In the result appeals and Cross Objection of the assessee for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are partly

ITA 2871/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nishant ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra

Section 115Section 153CSection 32Section 35Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs.1412, 1413 2461 & 2462/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2012-13, 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) UltraTech Cement Ltd., v. DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) Ahura Centre, “B" Wing Pratishtha Bhavan, Old. C.G.O. Bldg., M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai 2nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 PAN: AAACL6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 2871, 2872 &2873/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) v. UltraTech Cement Lt…