CIT v. Paul Brothers

216 ITR 548High Court1995#594 most cited

What is CIT v. Paul Brothers authority for?

Once a claim for deduction under section 80-IA or 80-IB is allowed in the initial assessment year and is not subsequently withdrawn, the revenue is estopped from denying the deduction for subsequent years on the same grounds.

164

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Paul Brothers · Paul Brothers 216 ITR 548 · section 80IA · section 80IB · initial assessment year · deduction subsequent years · estoppel · denial of deduction · withdrawal of relief · recurring deduction

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50CSection 80IBSection 14ASection 131Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

section 80ib(4)section 80ib(2)section 2(29ba)section 11binitial assessment yearsection 80ia(4)(i)section 36(l)(iii)section 36(l)section 80jdeduction under section 80iasection 80ibsection 80ia(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. Paul Brothers

M/S C and E Limited vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Kolkata 4 Kolkata

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

ITAT/135/2023HC Calcutta02 Aug 2023

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 801CSection 80I

…officer to deny the benefit of Section 80I of the Act to the assessee having allowed the benefit to the assessee in the preceding three years. The Hon’ble Division Bench held by virtue of 2 (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom) 3 (2013) 355 ITR 14 (Delhi) ITAT 135 of 2023 REPORTABLE Page 11 of 13 Section 80I (5) of the Act deduction under Section 80I of the Act is available to the assessee in respect of t…

Acc Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 800/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. DCIT (LTU) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. CIT – 3(4) v. M/s. ACC Limited 29th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Chai…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax-3(4), Mumbai-400005 vs. M/S. Acc Limited, Mumbai-400020

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 1171/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. DCIT (LTU) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. CIT – 3(4) v. M/s. ACC Limited 29th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Chai…

Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1018/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 32ASection 801ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Industry House, 18th Floor, 10, Camac Street, Kolkata - 700017 [PAN: AAACE6607L] …………… Appellant Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle – 1(4), Mumbai, 9th Floor, Old CGO Building, M K Road, Respondent ……………. Mumbai - 400020 Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle – 1(4), Mumbai, Room No. 902, Pratistha Bhavan, 9th Floor, Old CGO Building, Annexe, Mumbai – 400020 [PAN: AAACE6607L] …………… Appellant Vs M/s Essel Mining &…

Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Kolkatta vs. Dy CIT CC-1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 297/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2021 (A.Ys.2011-12 To 2013-14) Essel Mining & Vs. Dy. Cit, Cc-1(4) Industries Limited 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Industry House, 18Th Building, M.K. Road, Floor, 10 Camac Street, Mumbai - 400020 Kolkata – 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent Jcit, Cc-1(4) Vs. M/S Essel Mining & R. No. 902, Pratistha Industries Limited Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Industry House, 18Th Cgo Building, Annexe, Floor, 10, Cama Street, Mumbai – 400 020 Kolkata- 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Yohesh Thar &For Respondent: Biswanath Das
Section 132(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153C

…u/s 801A for the subsequent year ie. AY 2013-14 under appeal, unless the deduction granted in initial year i.e. AY 2006-07 is withdrawn. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's Order in the case of Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the relevant excerpts of which are reproduced hereunder. "6. Either in section 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for subsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the assessment year 1980-81 was withdrawn, the Income Tax Officer could not withheld the relie…

Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Kolkatta vs. Dy CIT CC-1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 296/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2021 (A.Ys.2011-12 To 2013-14) Essel Mining & Vs. Dy. Cit, Cc-1(4) Industries Limited 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Industry House, 18Th Building, M.K. Road, Floor, 10 Camac Street, Mumbai - 400020 Kolkata – 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent Jcit, Cc-1(4) Vs. M/S Essel Mining & R. No. 902, Pratistha Industries Limited Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Industry House, 18Th Cgo Building, Annexe, Floor, 10, Cama Street, Mumbai – 400 020 Kolkata- 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Yohesh Thar &For Respondent: Biswanath Das
Section 132(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153C

…u/s 801A for the subsequent year ie. AY 2013-14 under appeal, unless the deduction granted in initial year i.e. AY 2006-07 is withdrawn. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's Order in the case of Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the relevant excerpts of which are reproduced hereunder. "6. Either in section 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for subsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the assessment year 1980-81 was withdrawn, the Income Tax Officer could not withheld the relie…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai vs. Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1549/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2021 (A.Ys.2011-12 To 2013-14) Essel Mining & Vs. Dy. Cit, Cc-1(4) Industries Limited 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Industry House, 18Th Building, M.K. Road, Floor, 10 Camac Street, Mumbai - 400020 Kolkata – 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent Jcit, Cc-1(4) Vs. M/S Essel Mining & R. No. 902, Pratistha Industries Limited Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Industry House, 18Th Cgo Building, Annexe, Floor, 10, Cama Street, Mumbai – 400 020 Kolkata- 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Yohesh Thar &For Respondent: Biswanath Das
Section 132(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153C

…u/s 801A for the subsequent year ie. AY 2013-14 under appeal, unless the deduction granted in initial year i.e. AY 2006-07 is withdrawn. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's Order in the case of Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the relevant excerpts of which are reproduced hereunder. "6. Either in section 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for subsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the assessment year 1980-81 was withdrawn, the Income Tax Officer could not withheld the relie…

Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1022/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2021 (A.Ys.2011-12 To 2013-14) Essel Mining & Vs. Dy. Cit, Cc-1(4) Industries Limited 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Industry House, 18Th Building, M.K. Road, Floor, 10 Camac Street, Mumbai - 400020 Kolkata – 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent Jcit, Cc-1(4) Vs. M/S Essel Mining & R. No. 902, Pratistha Industries Limited Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Industry House, 18Th Cgo Building, Annexe, Floor, 10, Cama Street, Mumbai – 400 020 Kolkata- 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Yohesh Thar &For Respondent: Biswanath Das
Section 132(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153C

…u/s 801A for the subsequent year ie. AY 2013-14 under appeal, unless the deduction granted in initial year i.e. AY 2006-07 is withdrawn. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's Order in the case of Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the relevant excerpts of which are reproduced hereunder. "6. Either in section 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for subsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the assessment year 1980-81 was withdrawn, the Income Tax Officer could not withheld the relie…

Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. Addl.CIT, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

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

ITA 504/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

…or changed on valid grounds. But without disturbing the relief granted in the initial year, the ITO cannot examine the question again and decide to withhold or withdraw the relief which has been already once granted.” 24. In the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held as under: “Either in s. 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for thesubsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the asst.yr. 1980-81 was withdrawn, the ITO could not have withheld the relief for the subsequent years.(Se…

Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. ACIT, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

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

ITA 503/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

…or changed on valid grounds. But without disturbing the relief granted in the initial year, the ITO cannot examine the question again and decide to withhold or withdraw the relief which has been already once granted.” 24. In the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held as under: “Either in s. 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for thesubsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the asst.yr. 1980-81 was withdrawn, the ITO could not have withheld the relief for the subsequent years.(Se…

Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

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

ITA 502/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

…or changed on valid grounds. But without disturbing the relief granted in the initial year, the ITO cannot examine the question again and decide to withhold or withdraw the relief which has been already once granted.” 24. In the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held as under: “Either in s. 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for thesubsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the asst.yr. 1980-81 was withdrawn, the ITO could not have withheld the relief for the subsequent years.(Se…

Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

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

ITA 501/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

…or changed on valid grounds. But without disturbing the relief granted in the initial year, the ITO cannot examine the question again and decide to withhold or withdraw the relief which has been already once granted.” 24. In the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held as under: “Either in s. 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for thesubsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the asst.yr. 1980-81 was withdrawn, the ITO could not have withheld the relief for the subsequent years.(Se…

Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Ankleshwar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch

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

ITA 500/AHD/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

…or changed on valid grounds. But without disturbing the relief granted in the initial year, the ITO cannot examine the question again and decide to withhold or withdraw the relief which has been already once granted.” 24. In the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held as under: “Either in s. 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for thesubsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the asst.yr. 1980-81 was withdrawn, the ITO could not have withheld the relief for the subsequent years.(Se…

Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Limited, Ankleshwar vs. The Dy.CIT, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

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

ITA 1935/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234B(3)Section 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

…or changed on valid grounds. But without disturbing the relief granted in the initial year, the ITO cannot examine the question again and decide to withhold or withdraw the relief which has been already once granted.” 24. In the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held as under: “Either in s. 80HH or in section 80J, there is no provision for withdrawal of special deduction for thesubsequent years for breach of certain conditions. Hence unless the relief granted for the asst.yr. 1980-81 was withdrawn, the ITO could not have withheld the relief for the subsequent years.(Se…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(3), Mumbai

Appeal is hereby dismissed as infructuous

ITA 6900/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2007-08
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…withdrawal of deduction u/s.80IA of the Act in the 6th year of its claim of the assessee. Reliance in this regard has been rightly placed by the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers reported in 216 ITR 548 (Bom). 8.6. It is a fact that the steam generated from the power plant is transferred for usage in manufacturing soda ash and salt. For this transfer of usage of steam from power plant to the chemical plant, the assessee had reflected sale of steam in the profit and loss account of power plant and claimed deduction u/s.80IA of the Act. The steam…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(3), Mumbai

Appeal is hereby dismissed as infructuous

ITA 8710/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2007-08
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…withdrawal of deduction u/s.80IA of the Act in the 6th year of its claim of the assessee. Reliance in this regard has been rightly placed by the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers reported in 216 ITR 548 (Bom). 8.6. It is a fact that the steam generated from the power plant is transferred for usage in manufacturing soda ash and salt. For this transfer of usage of steam from power plant to the chemical plant, the assessee had reflected sale of steam in the profit and loss account of power plant and claimed deduction u/s.80IA of the Act. The steam…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

Appeal is hereby dismissed as infructuous

ITA 9057/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2006-07
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…withdrawal of deduction u/s.80IA of the Act in the 6th year of its claim of the assessee. Reliance in this regard has been rightly placed by the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers reported in 216 ITR 548 (Bom). 8.6. It is a fact that the steam generated from the power plant is transferred for usage in manufacturing soda ash and salt. For this transfer of usage of steam from power plant to the chemical plant, the assessee had reflected sale of steam in the profit and loss account of power plant and claimed deduction u/s.80IA of the Act. The steam…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3178/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…t be denied in subsequent years. 1. RadhaSoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 60 Taxman 248/193 ITR 321 (SC) 2. CIT v. Western Outdoor Interactive (P) Ltd. [2012] 25 taxmann.com 340/210 Taxman 229 (Mag.)/349 ITR 309 (Bom.) 3. CIT v. Paul Brothers. [1995] 79 Taxman 378/216 ITR 548 (Bom.) 4. CIT v. Macbrout Engineering (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 219 /[2015] 232 Taxman 406 (Bombay) 5. CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd. [2010] 8 taxmann.com 129/327 ITR 570 (Delhi) 6. CIT v. Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Ltd. [2013] 34 taxmann.com 3/217 Taxman 288/355 ITR 14 (Delhi) 7. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 2 T…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…t be denied in subsequent years. 1. RadhaSoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 60 Taxman 248/193 ITR 321 (SC) 2. CIT v. Western Outdoor Interactive (P) Ltd. [2012] 25 taxmann.com 340/210 Taxman 229 (Mag.)/349 ITR 309 (Bom.) 3. CIT v. Paul Brothers. [1995] 79 Taxman 378/216 ITR 548 (Bom.) 4. CIT v. Macbrout Engineering (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 219 /[2015] 232 Taxman 406 (Bombay) 5. CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd. [2010] 8 taxmann.com 129/327 ITR 570 (Delhi) 6. CIT v. Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Ltd. [2013] 34 taxmann.com 3/217 Taxman 288/355 ITR 14 (Delhi) 7. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 2 T…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3176/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…t be denied in subsequent years. 1. RadhaSoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 60 Taxman 248/193 ITR 321 (SC) 2. CIT v. Western Outdoor Interactive (P) Ltd. [2012] 25 taxmann.com 340/210 Taxman 229 (Mag.)/349 ITR 309 (Bom.) 3. CIT v. Paul Brothers. [1995] 79 Taxman 378/216 ITR 548 (Bom.) 4. CIT v. Macbrout Engineering (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 219 /[2015] 232 Taxman 406 (Bombay) 5. CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd. [2010] 8 taxmann.com 129/327 ITR 570 (Delhi) 6. CIT v. Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Ltd. [2013] 34 taxmann.com 3/217 Taxman 288/355 ITR 14 (Delhi) 7. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 2 T…