How many judgments cite CIT v. Mitesh Impex?

125 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Mitesh Impex (398 ITR 514), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Mitesh Impex come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153C, Section 153A, Section 147, Section 132, Section 132(4).

CIT v. Mitesh Impex

398 ITR 514High Court2017#835 most cited

What is CIT v. Mitesh Impex authority for?

The principle of taxing 'real income' means an assessee is not bound by a voluntary disallowance made under section 14A in the return of income if it was declared under a wrong belief, particularly when the Tribunal has adjudicated the matter in the assessee's favor. An assessee can resile from such a position to ensure only actual taxable income is assessed.

125

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,418 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Mitesh Impex · Pr. CIT v. UTI Bank Ltd. · 398 ITR 514 · Section 14A disallowance · voluntary disallowance in return · resiling from voluntary declaration · taxation of real income · assessee not bound by wrong belief · Gujarat High Court 2017 · expenses relating to exempt income

Also reported as

270 CTR 6646 Taxmann.com 30225 Taxmann 168

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153C Section 153A Section 147 Section 132 Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assets section 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 158ba section 150 unexplained jewellery section 70 beyond four years section 18 section 149(1)(b)statement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. Mitesh Impex

The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1129/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R

Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

…Tribunal reported in 31 taxmann.com 300. 28. The learned CIT-A after considering the facts in totality accepted the additional claim of the assessee by placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Miteshh Impex reported in 270 CTR 66. Thereafter, the ld. CIT-A allowed the weighted deduction under 35(2AB) of the Act by observing that the issue has been covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in case of Cadila Health Care P. Ltd. (supra). 29. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT-A the Revenue is in appeal before us. 30…

Hathway Investment Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle-12 (2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7105/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…disallowance u/s 14A can fall below the voluntary disallowance made by the assessee suo motu in return of income filed with the Revenue. The assessee has relied on decision of Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Principal CIT v. UTI Bank Limited (2017) 398 ITR 514(Guj) and decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Rupee Finance and Management Private Limited v. DCIT (2017) 57 ITR(Trib.) 205(Mumbai). We find merit in the contention of the assessee that once tribunal has adjudicated matter in assessee‟s favour then merely because disallowance was made in return of income voluntarily under a wrong belief , the…

Lions Umra Piplod Education Society, Surat vs. A.O. Circle-2, Exeption, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 197/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing In Virtual Court) Lions Umra Piplod Education Society, The Assessing Officer, Opp. Lake View Garden, C/O. Circle-2, Exemption, Vs. Shardayatan School, Piplod, Surat- Ahmedabad. 395007, Gujarat. Pan : Aaatl1289Q Appellant Respondednt

Section 10Section 10(23)(vi)Section 11Section 143(1)

…rcise their jurisdiction inherently vested in it. 12. The power of appellate authority has been explained by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Mitesh Impex 11 ITA No. 197/SRT/2021/AY.2017-18 Lions Umra Piplod Education Society (2014) 270 CTR 66 (Guj.) wherein the Hon'ble High Court by referring various decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court including in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC), Jute Corporation of India 187 ITR 688 (SC), wherein it was held that the CIT(A) as well as Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain and consider the additional claim and not mere additional…

Hathway Investment Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle-12 (2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in terms aforesaid

ITA 7106/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Smitha Nair

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…disallowance u/s 14A can fall below the voluntary disallowance made by the assessee suo motu in return of income filed with the Revenue. The assessee has relied on decision of Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Principal CIT v. UTI Bank Limited (2017) 398 ITR 514(Guj) and 5 आअसं. 7106/मुं/2019 (िन.व. 2012-13) decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Rupee Finance and Management Private Limited v. DCIT (2017) 57 ITR(Trib.) 205(Mumbai) . We find merit in the contention of the assessee that once tribunal has adjudicated matter in assessee‟s favour then merely because disallowance was made in return of income…

The Dy. CIT., Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Vishal Fabrics Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal preferred by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1820/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Nahta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Agarwal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…n made: Asian Paints Vs. DOIT, Mumbai 88 taxmann.com 677, and Himalaya Drug Co. Vs. DCIT, Bangalore, 48 taxmann.com 65 (2017). The ld. counsel for the assessee also put reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the cases of Mitesh Impex, 270 CTR 66. This decision propounds that when the taxability of the assessee is going to be effected, then it can raise a fresh plea before the appellate authorities. Taking a leaf from this reasoning, ITAT, Mumbai and Bangalore have propounded that fresh claim can be made even before the DRP. Thus, respectfully following these decisions, we uphold that in t…

Star Paper Mills Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 127/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri P. M .Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80ISection 92B

…1 I.T.A. No.127/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Star Paper Mills Limited आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri P. M .Jagtap, Vice-President (KZ) and Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No.127/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Star Paper Mills Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata (PAN:AAECS0759B) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 22.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement 26.10.2021 For the Appellant Shri Akkal Dudhewala, FCA For the Respondent Shri Gaurav Kanaujia CIT TP, & Shri Supriyo Pal, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R ORDER Per Shri A. T. Vark…

United Leasing & Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 27(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2763/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Sanjay Garg(Through Video Conferencing) United Leasing & Vs. Ito Industrial Ltd. Ward – 27(1) D-41, South Extension, New Delhi Part-Ii, New Delhi-49 Pan : Aaacu 0323 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Y. K. Sharma, C.A. Revenue By Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 23.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.10.2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am:

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) United Leasing & Vs. ITO Industrial Ltd. Ward – 27(1) D-41, South Extension, New Delhi Part-II, New Delhi-49 PAN : AAACU 0323 M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Y. K. Sharma, C.A. Revenue by Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 23.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 01.10.2021 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.02.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appe…

The DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S. Gujarat State Petronet Ltd., Gandhinagar

Accordingly. Thus, assessee’s claim is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 382/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar Sr. Adv. & Shri Parin Shah

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTING THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.381&382/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) DCIT Vs. M/s.Gujarat State Petronet Ltd. Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar E-18, GIDC Electronic Estate, 4th Floor, Block No. 14, Udhyog Nr. K-7 Circle, Sector-26, Bhavan Sector-11, Gandhinagar Gandhinagar, Gujarat-380026 Gujarat-382011 [PAN No. AABCG1812E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Shyam Prasad, Sr. DR Appellant by : Respondent by: Shri S. N. Soparkar Sr. Adv. & Shri Parin…

The DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S. Gujarat State Petronet Ltd., Gandhinagar

Accordingly. Thus, assessee’s claim is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 381/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar Sr. Adv. & Shri Parin Shah

Section 143(3)Section 14A

Hdfc Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5672/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Hdfc Bank Limited Acit-2(3)(1) Hdfc Bank House Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Mishra, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)

…offered by the assessee u/s 14A of the Act, the ld. A.R had relied on a host of judicial pronouncements. Our attention was specifically drawn by the ld. A.R. to the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of PCIT Vs. UTI Bank Limited (2017) 398 ITR 514 (Guj). It was submitted by the ld. A.R that the Hon‟ble High Court had upheld the order of the Tribunal that had vacated the entire disallowance made u/s 14A of the Act, despite the fact that the assessee before them had offered a suo motto disallowance of Rs.6.23 crores in its return of income. It was further submitted by the ld. A.R that involv…

Bharatbhai Balubhai Ghelani, Surat vs. DCIT, Circle1(3), Surat

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

ITA 704/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Bharatbhai Balubhai Ghelani Dcit, Circle-1(3), B-103, Royal Residency, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs Mahalaxmi Mandir, Majuragate, Surat-395001 Anand Mahal Road, Surat-395009 Pan : Aawpg 3437 H Assessee / Appellant Revenue /Respondent

Section 139(5)Section 254(1)Section 54Section 54B

…tional claim. To support his submission, the Ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz India Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC) and decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mitex Impex, 46 Taxmann.com 30 (Guj). 3. On the basis of aforesaid factual and legal submission, the Ld.AR for the assessee submits that the additional claim of the assessee may be admitted 2 Sh. Bharatbhai B Ghelani and the issue may restore to the file of Assessing Officer to consider the revised claim of assessee and grant appropriate relief to the assessee. 4. On th…

Shri Yagnesh D Vyas, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-4(2)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 147/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) [Through Virtual Court]

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shyam Prasad, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 4Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) [Through Virtual Court] ITA. No: 147/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Years: 2013-14) Yagnesh Dayabhai Vyas I.T.O, Ward-4(2)(5), (Prop. Premire Design) 10, Ahmedabad Chanrakant B/h Lal Bunglows, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380061 PAN No. ABHPV 1757F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Biren Shah, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Shyam Prasad, Sr. D.R. (आदेश)/ORDER Date of hearing : 28-04-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 16 -06-2021 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, J.M. 1. This appeal has bee…

Inox Leisure Ltd., Baroda vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Baroda

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1924/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 391

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH (Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice President And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 1924 & 1925/Ahd/2018 Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 Inox Leisure Ltd., The ACIT, 2nd Floor, ABS Towers, Circle-1(1)(2), Old Padra Road, Vs Vadodara Vadoara (Respondent) PAN: AAACI6063J (Appellant) Revenue by: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. And Shri Parin Shah, A.R. Date of hearing : 04-01-2021 Date of pronouncement : 27-01-2021 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- These two a…

Smt. Vijayamma Syamprakash Vaidyan, Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2192/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2192/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt.Vijayamma Syamprakash Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Vaidyan, Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat. 832, Q-Tower, Ashirwad Palace, Near Jamna Nagar Bus Stand, Jivkornagar, Bhatar, Surat – 395007. [Pan: Akmps 7570 B] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2192/AHD/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt.Vijayamma Syamprakash Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Vaidyan, Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat. 832, Q-Tower, Ashirwad Palace, Near Jamna Nagar Bus Stand, Jivkornagar, Bhatar, Surat – 395007. [PAN: AKMPS 7570 B] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by Shri Mehul K.Patel – AR राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by Smt. AnupamaSingla – Sr.D…

M/S. Jindal World Wide Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabadq

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

ITA 2316/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh) (Through Virtual Court)

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 40

…revised return. 6. During the course of appellate proceeding, Ld. Counsel has submitted that the issue of admitting additional ground of appeal was adjudicated in favour of the assessee by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mitesh Impex (2014) 46 Taxmann.com 30. 7. Ld. Counsel has also submitted that the additional ground of appeal are required to be adjudicated in view of the decision of Hon’ble Ahmedabad ITAT in DCIT vs. Adani Gas Ltd. in ITA No. 775/Ahd/2014 & Ors. Vide order dated 17/10/2018. 8. The ld. Counsel has further submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC vs. CIT (1…

DCIT, Ltu-2, Kolkata vs. M/S Century Plyboards (I), Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objections of assessee are allowed

ITA 2149/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…1 ITA No. 2149/Kol/2019 & C.O. No. 22/Kol/2020 M/s Century Plyboards (I) Ltd. A.Y. 2014-15 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")"ी पी. एम.जगताप,उपा"य" एवं "ी ए.ट". वक!,"या"यक सद$य) [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Circle-2, LTU, Kolkata Vs. M/s Century Plyboards (I) Ltd. (PAN: AABCC 1682 J) Appellant Respondent & C.O. No. 22/Kol/2020 In ITA No.2149/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s Century Plyboards (I) Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-2, LTU, Kolkata (PAN: AABCC 1682 J) Cross Objec…

Jiten Bhavanji Vora, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 7(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6670/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2020AY 2016-17

Section 132Section 271A

…on merits." The High Court after considering various case laws held that the claim though not made in Original Return of Income can be raised for first time before the CIT(A). (iv) Following said decision, Gujarat High Court in Pr CIT v UTI Bank Ltd [2017] 398 ITR 514 (Guj.)(HC) [ Pgl27 - 129] after considering Supreme Court in Goetze (India)Ltd v CIT(2006) 284 ITR 323(SC)held as under [Pg 128]: "6. Regarding a claim contrary to the disclosures in the return, the Tribunal relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. (supra) to observe that the purpose of assessmen…

The Addl.CIT, Range-1, Baroda vs. Gujarat Fluorochemeicals Ltd, Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 548/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

…en made; Asian Paints Vs. DCIT, Mumbai 88 taxmann.com 677, and Himalaya Drug Co. Vs. DCIT, Bangalore, 48 taxmann.com 65 (2017). The ld.counsel for the assessee also put reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the cases of Mitesh Impex, 270 CTR 66. This decision propounds that when the taxability of the assessee is going to be effected, then it can raise a fresh plea before the appellate authorities. Taking a leaf from this reasoning, ITAT, Mumbai and Bangalore have propounded that fresh claim can be made even before the DRP. Thus, respectfully following these decisions, we uphold that in t…

Gujarat Flurochemicals Limited, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1), Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

Gujarat Flurochemicals Limited, Baroda vs. The Addl. CIT, Range-1, Baroda

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 116/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediasr. No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhas Bains, CIT-DR and Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR