CIT v. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation

305 ITR 137High Court2008#1182 most cited

What is CIT v. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation authority for?

When no specific statutory period of limitation exists, proceedings under Section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, particularly for payments to non-residents, must be initiated within a reasonable period of four years. This limitation also applies to consequential penalty proceedings under Section 271C.

96

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation · 305 ITR 137 · Section 201 limitation · Section 201(1) reasonable time · Section 201(1A) limitation · assessee in default non-resident · penalty Section 271C limitation · four years limitation · no statutory limitation · TDS proceedings

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 201Section 271CSection 273BSection 120(4)(b)Section 124(3)Section 127
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 201(3)assessee in defaultpenalty proceedings initiatedsection 273section 201(1)section 201section 201(1a)section 273bsection 20section 195section 19non-resident

Judgments citing CIT v. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation

The ACIT (Int. Taxa), Vadodara vs. M/S. Allscripts (India) Pvt.Ltd., Baroda

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 41/AHD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Mutha, A.R
Section 194ISection 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 41/Ahd/2021 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) The ACIT (Intl. Taxn), Vadodara Vs. M/s. Allscripts (India) Pvt. Room No. 202, 2nd Floor, GEB Ltd., 10th – 11th Floor, Building, Race Course Circle, Atlantis Heights, Vadodara-390007 Dr. Vikram Sarabhai Road, Vadodara-390023 [PAN No.AACCM2641J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R. Respondent by : Shri Nikhil Mutha, A.R. Date of Hearing 06.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 12.10.2022 O R D E R P…

Adabala Manmohan, Visakhapatnam vs. The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 135/VIZ/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.135/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-12) Mr. Adabala Manmohan, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-International Taxation, Pan: Vpnao 1959 G Visakhapatnam. (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 2Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(2)Section 234B

…ation of time for initiating the proceedings u/s 201/201(1A) and held that 4 years is the reasonable time forinitiating proceedings u/s 201/201(1A). While holding so, the Hon’ble High Court has relied on the decision of CIT Vs. NHK Japan Broadcasting Limited [305 ITR 137] and the CIT Vs. Hutchison Essar Telecom. Limited [323 ITR 330], Further, Hon’ble Delhi High Court has considered amendment made to Section 201 of the Act vide Finance Bill, 2009 and viewed that the Parliament did not make any amendment to the time limits for the non residents which indicates that the Parliament has accepted the judicial pronounc…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Intl Taxn) Circle-1(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Coffeeday Enterprises Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 2931/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Muzzaffar Hussain, CIT (D.R)
Section 195

…at the Commissioner has to pass an order within a reasonable time and what is a reasonable time limit depends on the facts of that particular case. 10.7 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation reported in [(2008) 305 ITR 137 (Delhi)] had held that the order passed u/s 201 of the I.T.Act beyond four years was not reasonable and had quashed the same as barred by limitation. Similar view was taken by the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. reported in [(2012) 345 ITR 552 (HP)]. As mentioned earlier, the learned DR submi…

The Director of Income Tax vs. The Executive Engineer

ITA/166/2011HC Karnataka24 Aug 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 231Section 260Section 260A

…e lakh as in this case, then the same would be barred by limitation as held in the case of M/S MAHENDRA & MAHENDRA, (2002) 122 TTJ (MUM) (SB) 577 and the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT VS. NHK JAPAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, (2008) 305 ITR 137? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was correct in proceeding to lay down the period of limitation for initiation of proceedings under Section 201(1) of the Act when the legislation has specifically omitted such period prescribed under the earlier Section 231 of the Act and Section 201(3) of the Act proviso clearly provide that in respect…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Circle - 2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Infosys Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1687/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri H Padamchand Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Misra, JCIT (DR)
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s Infosys Ltd., (TDS), Circle-2(1), 44 & 97A, Electronic City, Bengaluru. Hosur Road, Bengaluru-560 010. PAN – AAACI 4798 L APPELLANT RESPONDENT CO No.58/Bang/2019 Assessment year : 2010-11 M/s Infosys Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, 44 & 97A, Electronic City, (TDS), Circle-2(1), Hosur Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 010. PAN – AAACI 4798 L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri P…

The Tata Power Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) (TDS) (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1695/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhanthe Tata Power Co. Ltd. Income Tax Officer Corporate Center, (International Taxation)-Tds (2) Block „B‟, 5Th Floor, 34, Air India Building, Sant Tukaram Road, Vs. Mumbai - 21 Carnac Bunder, Mumbai-400 009

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Samaiya, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 195Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…d by the competent authority within a period of 4 years. In order to fortify his aforesaid contention the ld. A.R had drawn support from the judgments of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in viz. (i) CIT, Delhi XVII Vs. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (2008) 305 ITR 137 (Del); (ii) CIT Vs. Hutchinson Essar Telecom Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 230 (Del); and (iii) Vodafone Essar Mobiles Services Ltd. Vs. Union of India. Also, support was drawn by the ld. A.R from the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT (TDS) Vs. Anagram Wellington Assets Management Co. Ltd. (2016) 389 ITR 654 (Guj). In the bac…

Sutherland Global Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT International Taxation II(2), Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1795/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1795 & 1141/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1210/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Raghavan Ramabadran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, JCIT
Section 200Section 201Section 201(3)

…nnot be construed as reasonable one. 3. On the contrary, Dr. S. Pandian, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the CIT(Appeals) came to a conclusion on the basis of the judgment of Delhi High Court in NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (2008) 305 ITR 137 that the two years period has to be taken from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable. Since no limitation was prescribed under Section 201 of the Act, according to the Ld. D.R., the delay of four years period was held to be reasonable by the 4 I.T.A. No.1795 & 1141/Chny/17 I.T.A. No.1210/Chny/16 CIT(Appeals),…

Sutherland Global Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1141/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1795 & 1141/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1210/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Raghavan Ramabadran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, JCIT
Section 200Section 201Section 201(3)

…nnot be construed as reasonable one. 3. On the contrary, Dr. S. Pandian, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the CIT(Appeals) came to a conclusion on the basis of the judgment of Delhi High Court in NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (2008) 305 ITR 137 that the two years period has to be taken from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable. Since no limitation was prescribed under Section 201 of the Act, according to the Ld. D.R., the delay of four years period was held to be reasonable by the 4 I.T.A. No.1795 & 1141/Chny/17 I.T.A. No.1210/Chny/16 CIT(Appeals),…

Sutherland Global Services Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1210/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1795 & 1141/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1210/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Raghavan Ramabadran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, JCIT
Section 200Section 201Section 201(3)

…nnot be construed as reasonable one. 3. On the contrary, Dr. S. Pandian, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the CIT(Appeals) came to a conclusion on the basis of the judgment of Delhi High Court in NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (2008) 305 ITR 137 that the two years period has to be taken from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable. Since no limitation was prescribed under Section 201 of the Act, according to the Ld. D.R., the delay of four years period was held to be reasonable by the 4 I.T.A. No.1795 & 1141/Chny/17 I.T.A. No.1210/Chny/16 CIT(Appeals),…

ITO (Exemptions), New Delhi vs. Career Launcher Education Foundation, New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal for AY 2011-12 of the assessee and the learned assessing officer are allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 3307/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh K. Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Munish Kumar Gupta, CIT
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2Section 80

…see was withdrawn. Therefore, the order passed by the learned adjudicating authority after the considerably long time is not valid. To support his proposition the learned authorised representative relied upon the decision of the honourable Delhi High Court in 305 ITR 137 CIT vs NHK Japan broadcasting Corp. 7. Against this, the learned departmental representative submitted that delay in adjudicating the whole issue is resting on the shoulder of the assessee. He referred to page number 1 of the order of the CIT – exemption wherein he has mentioned the complete chronology of events wherein the delay is solely rests…

M/S. Career Launcher Education Foundation, New Delhi vs. ITO (E0, New Delhi

Accordingly, appeal for AY 2011-12 of the assessee and the learned assessing officer are allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 2371/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh K. Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Munish Kumar Gupta, CIT
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2Section 80

…see was withdrawn. Therefore, the order passed by the learned adjudicating authority after the considerably long time is not valid. To support his proposition the learned authorised representative relied upon the decision of the honourable Delhi High Court in 305 ITR 137 CIT vs NHK Japan broadcasting Corp. 7. Against this, the learned departmental representative submitted that delay in adjudicating the whole issue is resting on the shoulder of the assessee. He referred to page number 1 of the order of the CIT – exemption wherein he has mentioned the complete chronology of events wherein the delay is solely rests…

Adani Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT TDS Circle, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1805/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1805/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri V. R. Chokshi, A.R
Section 206CSection 206C(7)Section 6A

…in respect of ‘tax deduction at source’. The reference was made to the decision of the co-ordinate bench in Raymond Woollen Mills Lted. Vs. ITO 57 ITD 536 (Mum); CIT vs. Hutchison Essar Telecom Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 230 (Del); NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation 305 ITR 137 (Del); State Bank of India vs. ACIT 106 ITD 589 (Mum) for the proposition that a period of four years was perceived as reasonable time limit by such judicial precendents. Thus such order under s. 206C of the Act cannot ITA No. 1805/Ahd/17 [Adani Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT TDS] A.Y. 2009-10 - 5 - be passed after the expiry of four years from the e…

Addala Chanti, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 887/HYD/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt Neeju Gupta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 272A(2)(C)Section 272A(2)(c)Section 285

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA. No.887/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Addala Chanti, vs. Addl. CIT, D. No. 8-2-296/82/F/C-43, Range-13, 2nd Floor, Plot No.C-43, Road No.11, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Film Nagar, Hyderabad-033. Hyderabad. PAN: ACXPA 5104 G (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee: Sri S. Rama Rao For Revenue : Smt Neeju Gupta, DR Date of Hearing : 16/5/2019 Date of Pronouncement : 24/5/2019 ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, JM. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)- 9, Hyderabad dat…

M/S. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd ( Earlier Known As Indian Rayon and Industries Ltd and Now Amalgamated With Grasim Industries Limited)), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (International Taxation)-2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 671/MUM/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri S.H. Usmani
Section 195(1)Section 195(2)Section 201Section 201(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.671/Mum./2018 (Assessment Year : 2006–07) M/s. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd. (Earlier known as Indian Rayon And Industries Ltd. and Now Amalgamated with Grasim Industries Ltd.) ……………. Appellant A–4, Aditya Birla Centre S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai 400 030 PAN – AAACI1747H v/s Income Tax Officer (I.T) ……………. Respondent Ward–2(3)(2), Mumbai ITA no.836/Mum./2018 (Assessment Year : 2006–07) Income Tax Officer (I.T) ……………. Appellant Ward–2(3)(2), Mumbai v/s M/s. Aditya Birla Nuv…

Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 412/DEL/2015[2007-08 (F.Y.- 2006-07)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2019

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishivodafone Mobile Services Ltd, Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-51(1), Essar Mobile Services Ltd), New Delhi Circle Office, C-48, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacs4457Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sparsh Bhargava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 191Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)Section 3

…erted by Finance (No. 2) Act 2009 w.e.f. April 1, 2010, and therefore any action prior to April 1, 2010 cannot be governed by the section but may be governed by the law enunciated by the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court in NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (305 ITR 137). 2.6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that the TDS officer has incorrectly interpreted the cut off date as provided in proviso to section 201(3) of the Act as the cut off date for both initiation of proceedings and completion of such proceedings thereby implying that revenue…

Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-57(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 937/KOL/2015[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2004-2005

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 936 & 937/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd. -Vs- Ito(Tds), Wd-57(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaeca 7340 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Banerjee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…herein they had affirmed the special bench decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd reported in 122 ITD 216 (Mum.) (SB) and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation reported in 305 ITR 137 (Del). Accordingly he argued that the issue is to be decided in favour of the assessee. In response to this, the ld DR vehemently supported the order of the ld CITA and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court supra. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. There is no dispute that the as…

Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO (TDS) WD-57(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 936/KOL/2015[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A Nos. 936 & 937/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2004-05 Aarambh Advertising & Marketing Ltd. -Vs- Ito(Tds), Wd-57(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaeca 7340 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Banerjee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…herein they had affirmed the special bench decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd reported in 122 ITD 216 (Mum.) (SB) and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation reported in 305 ITR 137 (Del). Accordingly he argued that the issue is to be decided in favour of the assessee. In response to this, the ld DR vehemently supported the order of the ld CITA and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court supra. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. There is no dispute that the as…

Tech Mahindra Ltd. (Ca Satyam Asp Pvt. Ltd. Since Merged With Tech Mahindra Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ITO (International Taxation) - 1, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed only on the ground of limitation

ITA 5283/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K Pradhantech Mahindra Limited (Ca Satyam Asp Pvt. Ltd. Since Merged With Tech Mahindra Limited) ……………. Appellant Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder Mumbai 400 001 Pan – Aaacm3484F V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent I.T. Circle–1, Mumbai Assessee By : Shri Karthik Natrajan Revenue By : Shri M.V. Raj Guru

For Appellant: Shri Karthik NatrajanFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Raj Guru
Section 195Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

…at in the absence of specific limitation period in the said provision, the Assessing Officer has to initiate proceeding within a reasonable period. Relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v/s NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation, [2008] 305 ITR 137 (Del.), the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that reasonable period for initiation of proceeding under section 201 of the Act was held to be four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. He submitted, if the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision is applied to the facts of the assessee’s case, the order passed under sectio…

Monarch Dyestuff Industries & Exports Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Jt.CIT, Range-2(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 397/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 269SSection 269TSection 271DSection 271ESection 274

…, according to the ld.counsel for the assessee, there is no time limit prescribed under statute for passing penalty order under section 271D, but must be passed within a reasonable time. On the strength of following decisions: • NHK Japan Broadcasting Corpn., 305 ITR 137 (Del); • CIT Vs. Hutchison Essar Telecom Ltd., 323 ITR 230 (Del); • ITO Vs. Vishal Fabrics P.Ltd., ITA No.448/A/2007; • Leela Ship Recycling P.Ltd., ITA No.2011/Ahd/2015; • H.Ajitbhai & Co., Vs. ACIT, 45 ITD 262 (Ahd) He contended that where no time limit has been prescribed in the Income Tax Act, for taking action by the authorities, then Hon’b…

Win Cable & Datacom P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (TDS) 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 3635/MUM/2016[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: S/Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm) I.T.A. No. 3635/Mum/2016(Assessment Year 2001-02)

Section 191Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…Court which are on the same principle and as to whether in the absence of any time limit the proceedings under Sections 201 and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 could be initiated at any Income Tax v/s NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation reported in (2008) 305 ITR 137 (Delhi), the Delhi High Court upheld the view of the Tribunal and dismissed the Revenue's Appeal [Commissioner of Income Tax v/s Hutchison Essar Telecome Ltd. reported in (2010) 323 ITR 230 (Delhi)]. 31 In the case of NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (supra), the Honourable Mr. Justice Madan b. Lokur (as His Lordship then was) speaking for the…