CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd.

378 ITR 351High Court2015#2777 most cited

What is CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer cannot mechanically reopen assessment under Section 147 solely on information from the Investigation wing about accommodation entries without applying an independent mind to form a reason to believe. Such reassessment is unjustified where the assessee has made a full and true disclosure of material facts.

43

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. · Section 147 · Section 148 · income escaping assessment · reassessment beyond four years · reason to believe · borrowed satisfaction · tangible material · mechanical application of mind · investigation wing information · full and true disclosure · accommodation entries

Also reported as

128 DTR 217

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 151Section 143(1)Section 133(6)Section 139

Issues it is cited on

full and true disclosurematerial facts necessary for assessmenttrue and full disclosurefirst proviso to section 147principal officerbeyond four yearsincome escaping assessmentcreditworthiness of the creditornational faceless assessment centrekelvinatorborrowed satisfactionescapement of income

Judgments citing CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd.

G S BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6581/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] G.S.Buildwell Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito A-12, Swasthya Vihar, Ward-10(1) East Delhi, Delhi-110092. Delhi Pan-Aaccg1781H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri Rajesh Kr. Dhanistha, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.04.2026

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ator of India Ltd.: 320 ITR 561 (SC); - CIT vs. Eicher Ltd. 294 ITR 310(Del); - CIT vs. ForanerFranch 264 ITR 566 (SC) - Indian Oil Corporation 159 ITR 956(SC) - Associated Stone Industry Limited 224ITR 560 (SC) - CIT vs. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd378 ITR 351 (Del.) Further, it is apparent from reason recorded that the Ld AO has merely reproduced the report of investigation wing without discussing the contents and material which lead to form basis of appellant being beneficiary of accommodation entries. No material whatsoever was discussed or referred to in support of allegation. The Hon'ble Delhi Hig…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4252/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4205/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 214/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 With ITA No.4206/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 215/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 With ITA No.4207/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 216/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 With ITA No.4251/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 217/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 With ITA No.4252/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 218/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax O…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4251/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4205/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 214/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 With ITA No.4206/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 215/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 With ITA No.4207/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 216/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 With ITA No.4251/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 217/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 With ITA No.4252/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 218/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax O…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4207/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4205/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 214/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 With ITA No.4206/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 215/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 With ITA No.4207/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 216/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 With ITA No.4251/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 217/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 With ITA No.4252/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 218/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax O…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4206/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4205/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 214/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 With ITA No.4206/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 215/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 With ITA No.4207/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 216/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 With ITA No.4251/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 217/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 With ITA No.4252/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 218/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax O…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4205/DEL/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4205/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 214/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 With ITA No.4206/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 215/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 With ITA No.4207/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 216/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 With ITA No.4251/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 217/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 With ITA No.4252/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 218/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax O…

NARENDRA KACHRULAL ABAD,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, JALNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee partly allowed

ITA 866/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.866/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Narendra Kachrulal Abad, V The Income Tax Officer, Abad House, Nal Galli, S Ward-1, Jalna. Kadrabad, Jalna – 431203. Maharashtra. Pan: Acspa9531C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hari Krishan – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Renge –Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Aurangabadpassed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2009-10 Dated 30.03.2019, Emanating From Order U/S.143(3) R.W.S 147Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 03.11.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Concise Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…Investments Pvt. Ltd.(2018) 93 taxmann.com 153/167 DTR 290(Bom HC) o S.Narayana Vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 o ITO Vs. LakhmaniMerwal Das 103 ITR 437 o CIT V. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (2012 248 CTR 33 (Del)(HC) o CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co Ltd (2015) 128 DTR 217 (Del) (HC) o Pr. CIT vs. G. Pharma India Ltd. (2017) 384 ITR 147 (Del) (HC) o CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 300 (Del) (HC) Meenakshi Oversea's Pvt Ltd (2017) 395 ITR 677 CIT (Del) (HC) o CIT vs. Fair Invest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del) (HC) Sarthank Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110(Del.) (HC) o Pr. CIT vs. S…

BRAND INDIA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013
For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ercise of power.\nAventis Pharma Ltd. vs. ACIT (2010) 323 ITR 570 (Bom)\n(xiii) Other relied upon judgments on this issue: -\na) CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (2012) 248 CTR 33 (Delhi)(High Court).\nb) CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co Ltd (2015) 128 DTR 217 (Delhi)(HC)\nc) Pr. CIT v G. Pharma India Ltd.[2017] 384 ITR 147 (Delhi) (H C)\nd) CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 300 (Del.)(HC)\ne) CIT v/s Meenakshi Oversea's Pvt Ltd (2017) 395 ITR 677(Del) (HC)\nf) CIT vs. Fair Invest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del.)(HC)\n1.2 The\ninformation received from other authority cannot be considered…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 vs. M/S K.R. PULP AND PAPERS LTD.

ITA/529/2023HC Delhi31 May 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

For Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Ms. Monica BenjaminFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Jain and Mr. Manish Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 68Section 80I

…1996) 221 ITR 538, wherein it was held that false or misleading disclosures attract reopening jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act. 15. The Revenue also relies on the decision of this Court in CIT v. Multiplex Trading and Industrial Co. Ltd.: (2015) 378 ITR 351, wherein it was acknowledged that tangible material received after the conclusion of assessment proceedings regarding bogus entries can provide a valid basis for reopening the assessment. Similarly, in CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing P. Ltd.: (2015) 375 ITR 373 (Del), it was held that mere production of documents like PAN and bank…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 vs. M/S K.R. PULP AND PAPERS LTD.

ITA-529/2023HC Delhi31 May 2025
For Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Ms. Monica BenjaminFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Jain and Mr. Manish Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 68Section 80I

…1996) 221 ITR 538, wherein it was held that false or misleading disclosures attract reopening jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act. 15. The Revenue also relies on the decision of this Court in CIT v. Multiplex Trading and Industrial Co. Ltd.: (2015) 378 ITR 351, wherein it was acknowledged that tangible material received after the conclusion of assessment proceedings regarding bogus entries can provide a valid basis for reopening the assessment. Similarly, in CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing P. Ltd.: (2015) 375 ITR 373 (Del), it was held that mere production of documents like PAN and bank…

WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 528/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…T v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 (Delhi) (HC)  PCIT vs RMG Polyvinyl Ltd ITA 29/2017 & CM 1009/2017 DATED 07/07/2017  PCIT v. G & G Pharma India Ltd. [2017] 384 ITR 147 (Delhi)(HC)  CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. (2016) 378 ITR 351 (Delhi) (HC)  SABH Infrastructure vs ACIT WP(C) No. 1357/2016 DATED 25/09/2017  CIT v. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 300 (Delhi)(HC)  CIT v. Fair Invest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Delhi)(HC)  CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 220 (Delhi)(HC)  Sarthak Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Delhi)(HC)  C…

ACHLA MALHOTRA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-24(1), DELHI, DELHI

ITA 4252/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4205/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 214/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 With ITA No.4206/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 215/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 With ITA No.4207/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 216/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 With ITA No.4251/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 217/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 With ITA No.4252/Del/2025 along with C.O. No. 218/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Bhikshu Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax O…

ACIT, CENTRAL CRCLE-18, NEW DELHI vs. SHIMMER DEVELOPERS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1497/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 150Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.l497/Del/2018 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shimmer Developers Pvt. Ltd. ACIT, Vs. Central Circle-18, RZ-D-5, Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi - 110 045 New Delhi PAN No. AAKCS 1029 E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Shri Parash Biswal, Adv. And Assessee by Shri Deepanshu Mehta, Adv. Shri Surender Pal, CIT-D.R. Revenue by Date of hearing: 03.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 21.10.2024 ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM ; The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the R…

ITO, WARD- 4 , ROHTAK vs. STRATAGEM STOCK BROKER PVT. LTD., ROHTAK

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

ITA 7482/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember Ito, Ward 4, Vs. M/S. Stratagem Stock Broker Pvt. Ltd., Rohtak. H.No.122/8, Shivaji Colony, Rohtak (Haryana). (Pan: Aakcs2610R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Shri Parth Singhal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2024 Date Of Order : 18.10.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am : 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Rohtak [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 10.10.2017 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Original Return Of Income On 18.08.2009 Declaring An Income Of Rs.1,17,770/-. The Return Was Processed

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…y on the information supplied by the Investigation wing about the accommodation entries provided by the assessee to certain entities without applying his own mind was not justified. (A.Y. 2004-05, 2006-07) CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. (2015) 128 DTR 217 / 63 taxmann.com 170 (Delhi)(HC) and in the case of ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co (2010) 328 ITR 515 (SC) it was held that the opinion of DVO per se is not an information for the purpose of reopening assessment under section 147 of the Act. Similarly in the case of CIT v. Indo Arab Air Services (2016) 130 DTR 78/ 283 CTR 92 (Delhi)(HC) it was h…

SHAHNAZ HUSAIN,DELHI vs. JCIT SPECIAL RANGE -10, NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed

ITA 1966/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Malik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Munish Rajani, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1966/DEL/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shahnaz Husain, vs. JCIT Special Range-10, W-61, Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi New Delhi - 110048 (PAN : AABPH4011P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ashok Malik, Adv. REVENUE BY : Shri Munish Rajani, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 14.08.2024 Date of Order : 16.10.2024 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals/NFAC…

SHAHNAZ HUSAIN,DELHI vs. JCIT SPECIAL RANGE -10, NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed

ITA 1965/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Malik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Munish Rajani, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1966/DEL/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shahnaz Husain, vs. JCIT Special Range-10, W-61, Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi New Delhi - 110048 (PAN : AABPH4011P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ashok Malik, Adv. REVENUE BY : Shri Munish Rajani, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 14.08.2024 Date of Order : 16.10.2024 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals/NFAC…

M/S. JET SPEED REALTORS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 32 (1), MUMBAI

ITA 63/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…agement Limited vs. DCIT - ITA No. 1774/Mum/2022 vi. Maharashtra Oil Extraction (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2022] 139 taxmann.com 341 (Bombay) vii. Aroni Commercials Ltd. vs. DCIT [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) viii. CIT vs. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd [2015] 378 ITR 351 (Delhi) 10. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, argued that the assessee first time raising the issue that the pre-requisite under the First Proviso to section 147 are not satisfied before the Tribunal. The Ld.DR further argued that the party from whom the assessee had obtained loan has not responded to the notice issued under section 133(6) and, ther…

JET SPEED REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 32(1), MUMBAI

ITA 24/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…agement Limited vs. DCIT - ITA No. 1774/Mum/2022 vi. Maharashtra Oil Extraction (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2022] 139 taxmann.com 341 (Bombay) vii. Aroni Commercials Ltd. vs. DCIT [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) viii. CIT vs. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd [2015] 378 ITR 351 (Delhi) 10. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, argued that the assessee first time raising the issue that the pre-requisite under the First Proviso to section 147 are not satisfied before the Tribunal. The Ld.DR further argued that the party from whom the assessee had obtained loan has not responded to the notice issued under section 133(6) and, ther…

JET SPEED REALTORS ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 32 (1), MUMBAI

ITA 23/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…agement Limited vs. DCIT - ITA No. 1774/Mum/2022 vi. Maharashtra Oil Extraction (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2022] 139 taxmann.com 341 (Bombay) vii. Aroni Commercials Ltd. vs. DCIT [2014] 362 ITR 403 (Bombay) viii. CIT vs. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd [2015] 378 ITR 351 (Delhi) 10. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, argued that the assessee first time raising the issue that the pre-requisite under the First Proviso to section 147 are not satisfied before the Tribunal. The Ld.DR further argued that the party from whom the assessee had obtained loan has not responded to the notice issued under section 133(6) and, ther…

FARHA S. KADRI,BILIMORA vs. ITO, WARD-2, NAVSARI

In the result, the original ground No

ITA 331/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Farha S Kadri, I.T.O. 762, Bazar Street, Bunder Road, Ward-2, Vs. Bilimora (Gujarat)-396321 Navsari. Pan No. Annpk 8150 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…other sources, he cannot proceed for reassessment. To support such submission, the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloy Ltd. (2012) 248 CTR 33 (Del) and CIT Vs Multiplex Trading & Ind. Co. Ltd. (2015) 128 DTR 217 (Del). 8. The ld. AR further submits that the Assessing Officer has not disposed of the objection against the reopening, thus, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order in violation of principle laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in GKN Driveshaft (I) Ltd. 259 ITR 19 (SC). The ld. AR further submits that the entire cash deposit cannot be…

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3