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a claim for deduction under section 80-IA or 80-IB is allowed in the initial assessment year and is not subsequently withdrawn, the revenue is estopped from denying the deduction for subsequent years on the same grounds.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

DCIT 10(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jyothy Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 7280/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhacit-10(2)(1) Vs. M/S Jyothy Laboratories R. No. 216-A, Aayakar Ltd., Ujala House, Ram Bhavan, M.K. Road, Krishna Mandir Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Kondivita, Andheri (East) Mumbai - 400059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl3167F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: J.D. Mistry, Priyanka Jain &For Respondent: Achal Sharma
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(29)(BA)Section 80I

…ment years, therefore the action of the Assessing Officer to deny the claim in the instant assessment year is untenable. In support, reliance has also been placed on the principle laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom.), which has been subsequently reiterated and applied by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Simple Food Products (P) Ltd. (supra). 9. The learned D.R. has not joined issue with the respondent-assessee on factual matrix, but pointed out that the Assessing Officer has denied the claim in the instant year on a justified basis. The learned D.…

D.C.I.T., Circle-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Karb Associates Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2256/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 80I

…he initial/first year in AY 2003-04 has been allowed after due verification by the AO and was also allowed in AY 2004-05 and 2005-06. While allowing the appeal of the assessee , the Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decisions in the case of Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548, Simple Food Product Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 27,28,29,31,36,37 & 39/2010 (Nagpur) & Dinshaw Frozen Food Ltd. in ITA No. 32 of 2003, Nagpur dated 29.09.2007 wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Courts that once the deduction is allowed in the initial year then the revenue cannot deny the same in the subsequent years. 5. After hearing the rival pa…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5318/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2011-12
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43B

…efit allowed in earlier year cannot be denied in subsequent years. 1. RadhaSoami Satsang v. Commissioner of Income Tax [1992]193 ITR 321 (SC)/[1991] 100 CTR 267 (SC) 2 CIT v. Western Outdoor Interactive (P) Ltd. [349 ITR 309] [BOMBAY] 3 CIT v. Paul Brothers. [216 ITR 548] [BOMBAY] 4. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Macbrout Engineering (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 219 (Bombay)/[2015] 232 Taxman 406 (Bombay) 5. CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd. [327 ITR 570] [DELHI] 6. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Ltd. [2013]355 ITR 14 (Delhi)/[2013] 260 CTR 253 (Delhi) 7. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Indus…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4835/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2010-11
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43B

…efit allowed in earlier year cannot be denied in subsequent years. 1. RadhaSoami Satsang v. Commissioner of Income Tax [1992]193 ITR 321 (SC)/[1991] 100 CTR 267 (SC) 2 CIT v. Western Outdoor Interactive (P) Ltd. [349 ITR 309] [BOMBAY] 3 CIT v. Paul Brothers. [216 ITR 548] [BOMBAY] 4. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Macbrout Engineering (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 219 (Bombay)/[2015] 232 Taxman 406 (Bombay) 5. CIT v. Modi Industries Ltd. [327 ITR 570] [DELHI] 6. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Ltd. [2013]355 ITR 14 (Delhi)/[2013] 260 CTR 253 (Delhi) 7. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Indus…

Barclays Bank Plc, Mumbai vs. CIT (International Taxation)-Range-1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 827/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 263Section 37

…ot be initiated. Therefore, it does not hold that in all cases, and, particularly where the issues in the revision are different from those in the appeal, proceedings under s. 263 would be invalid during the pendency of an appeal. 7. The decisions reported in 216 ITR 548(Bom) CIT v Paul Brothers and 216 ITR 833(Bom) Saraf Bandhu P Ltd in favour of assessee based on principles of merger holding restriction on the scope of the proceedings u/s 263 were passed before the Apex Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Shri Arbuda Mills Ltd. (supra). 8. The Apex Court in the case CIT vs Jayakumar Patil in 236 ITR 469(SC) a…

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

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1867/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 44ASection 80I

…h Chunder Vs CIT 358 ITR 521 (Mad),  CIT Vs Satellite Engineering Ltd (113 ITR 208 Gujarat),  PCIT Vs Maps Enzymes Ltd [2019] 111 taxmann.com 73 (Gujarat High Court),  Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Ltd Vs CIT (123 ITR 669) (Gujarat),  CIT Vs Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548 Bombay). 24 ITA Nos1849 & 1867/AHD/2014 (A.Y. 08-09) Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd. 18. On the other hand the ld Sr DR for the revenue submits that the assessee tried to make both the project separately by entering in to agreement with GIDC with retrospective effect from 12.03.2007. The assessee has made agreement with GIDC only after the cl…

Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd., Bharuch vs. The Dy.CIT., Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1849/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 44ASection 80I

…h Chunder Vs CIT 358 ITR 521 (Mad),  CIT Vs Satellite Engineering Ltd (113 ITR 208 Gujarat),  PCIT Vs Maps Enzymes Ltd [2019] 111 taxmann.com 73 (Gujarat High Court),  Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Ltd Vs CIT (123 ITR 669) (Gujarat),  CIT Vs Paul Brothers (216 ITR 548 Bombay). 24 ITA Nos1849 & 1867/AHD/2014 (A.Y. 08-09) Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd. 18. On the other hand the ld Sr DR for the revenue submits that the assessee tried to make both the project separately by entering in to agreement with GIDC with retrospective effect from 12.03.2007. The assessee has made agreement with GIDC only after the cl…

Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

ITA 534/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…iram Agarwalia v/s. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 4 (Gau) Bridge & Building Construction Co. P. Ltd. AYs: 2012-13 to 2014-15 v. CIT v/s. Shiv Sagar Estate (2002) 257 ITR 59 (SC) vi. UOI v/s. SatishPannalal Shah (2001) 249 ITR 221 (SC) vii. CIT v/s. Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom. - Nag.) Looking to nature of business and accepted past record we are requested before Hon’ble Bench, the addition so made by ld AO and sustained by ld CIT(A) may kindly be deleted and accept the income as declared and oblige. 3] As regards ground of appeal No. 3 of assessee's appeal relating to addition of Rs 2,00,000/- in respect of cash…

Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

ITA 533/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…iram Agarwalia v/s. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 4 (Gau) Bridge & Building Construction Co. P. Ltd. AYs: 2012-13 to 2014-15 v. CIT v/s. Shiv Sagar Estate (2002) 257 ITR 59 (SC) vi. UOI v/s. SatishPannalal Shah (2001) 249 ITR 221 (SC) vii. CIT v/s. Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom. - Nag.) Looking to nature of business and accepted past record we are requested before Hon’ble Bench, the addition so made by ld AO and sustained by ld CIT(A) may kindly be deleted and accept the income as declared and oblige. 3] As regards ground of appeal No. 3 of assessee's appeal relating to addition of Rs 2,00,000/- in respect of cash…

DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 375/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…iram Agarwalia v/s. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 4 (Gau) Bridge & Building Construction Co. P. Ltd. AYs: 2012-13 to 2014-15 v. CIT v/s. Shiv Sagar Estate (2002) 257 ITR 59 (SC) vi. UOI v/s. SatishPannalal Shah (2001) 249 ITR 221 (SC) vii. CIT v/s. Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom. - Nag.) Looking to nature of business and accepted past record we are requested before Hon’ble Bench, the addition so made by ld AO and sustained by ld CIT(A) may kindly be deleted and accept the income as declared and oblige. 3] As regards ground of appeal No. 3 of assessee's appeal relating to addition of Rs 2,00,000/- in respect of cash…

DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 374/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…iram Agarwalia v/s. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 4 (Gau) Bridge & Building Construction Co. P. Ltd. AYs: 2012-13 to 2014-15 v. CIT v/s. Shiv Sagar Estate (2002) 257 ITR 59 (SC) vi. UOI v/s. SatishPannalal Shah (2001) 249 ITR 221 (SC) vii. CIT v/s. Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom. - Nag.) Looking to nature of business and accepted past record we are requested before Hon’ble Bench, the addition so made by ld AO and sustained by ld CIT(A) may kindly be deleted and accept the income as declared and oblige. 3] As regards ground of appeal No. 3 of assessee's appeal relating to addition of Rs 2,00,000/- in respect of cash…

Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 10(1), Kolkata

ITA 2116/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 144

…iram Agarwalia v/s. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 4 (Gau) Bridge & Building Construction Co. P. Ltd. AYs: 2012-13 to 2014-15 v. CIT v/s. Shiv Sagar Estate (2002) 257 ITR 59 (SC) vi. UOI v/s. SatishPannalal Shah (2001) 249 ITR 221 (SC) vii. CIT v/s. Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom. - Nag.) Looking to nature of business and accepted past record we are requested before Hon’ble Bench, the addition so made by ld AO and sustained by ld CIT(A) may kindly be deleted and accept the income as declared and oblige. 3] As regards ground of appeal No. 3 of assessee's appeal relating to addition of Rs 2,00,000/- in respect of cash…

Bangalore Raju Mudaliar Mohan, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 10(1), Bangalore

In the result appeals filed by both the years under consideration stands allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandar, AdvocateFor Respondent: (DR)
Section 10BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…s Western Outdoor Interactive Pvt.Ltd., (supra) as under: “5. On the other hand, Mr. Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-assessee submitted that in view of the decision of this court in the matter of CIT v. Paul Bros. [1995] 216 ITR 548 and Direct Information (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2011] 203 Taxman 70, the issue is no longer open to debate. In the above case, it Page 12 of 14 ITA Nos. 108 & 109/Bang/2020 is held that once a benefit of deduction was extended in respect of a provision for a particular number of years then unless the benefit is withdrawn for the first year it cannot be…

Bangalore Raju Mudaliar Mohan, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 10(1), Bangalore

In the result appeals filed by both the years under consideration stands allowed

ITA 108/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandar, AdvocateFor Respondent: (DR)
Section 10BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…s Western Outdoor Interactive Pvt.Ltd., (supra) as under: “5. On the other hand, Mr. Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-assessee submitted that in view of the decision of this court in the matter of CIT v. Paul Bros. [1995] 216 ITR 548 and Direct Information (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2011] 203 Taxman 70, the issue is no longer open to debate. In the above case, it Page 12 of 14 ITA Nos. 108 & 109/Bang/2020 is held that once a benefit of deduction was extended in respect of a provision for a particular number of years then unless the benefit is withdrawn for the first year it cannot be…

M/S Vimla Infrastructure (India) Private Limited, Raipur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Incometax-1, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/RPR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 18/Rpr/2021) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16)

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT.DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 80GSection 80I

…g plausible in law could not be disturbed under s.263 of the Act. For this proposition, following decisions have been relied upon: ITA No. 18/RPR/2021 (M/s. Vimla Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT) A.Y. 2015-16 - 8 - (a) CIT vs. Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom.HC) (b) Simple Food Products (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2017) 84 taxmann.com 239 (Bom.HC) (c) Manilal Dayatji & Company Vs. CIT in ITA No.32/RPR/2014 (Date Of Order : 09.03.2018) (1TAT Raipur) (d) K. Raheja IT Pork (Hyderabad) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA No.691/Hyd/2016 (Date of Order: 06.05.2021) (ITAT Hyderabad) 10.5 It is further contended that de…

ACIT Circle-16(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Farah Khan, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 4428/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Justice Shri P. P. Bhatt & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4428/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit-Circle-16(1), Ms. Farah Khan R. No. 439, 4Th Floor बिाम/ A-3501/3601 Oberoi Sky Heights Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road Lokhandwala Complex Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Andheri West, Mumbai-400 053 स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aadpk-0664-P (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue By : Dr. Shanteshwar Swami, Ld. Dr Assessee By : Shri Chetan Karia, Ld. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 29/06/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 29/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Shanteshwar Swami, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…ting aside the relief granted for the first AY in which claim was made and accepted, the AO cannot withdraw the relief for subsequent assessment years. Similar was the ratio in CIT v. Arts & Crafts Exports (2012) 246 CTR 463 (Bom); CIT v. Paul Brothers (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom), Direct Information (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2011) 203 Taxman 70 (Bom) which had taken the same view. Finally, the impugned additions / disallowances were deleted. Aggrieved as aforesaid the revenue is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 6. As is evident from record, the assessee is a creative artist. The assessee was engaged…

Shrimati Ravinder Bawa, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(3), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 703/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 69A

…udgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in case of K.N. Agarwal Vs. C.I.T 189 ITR 769 as well as decision of Allahabad High Court in case of C.I.T. 17 Vs Lata Sunderlal 96 ITR 310(All), the decision of the Bombay high court in case of C.I.T Vs. Paul Brothers 216 ITR 548, the judgment of the Calcutta high court in case of Russel properties Private Ltd. Vs. CIT 109 ITR 229 are also relevant. “Where assessment order is in accordance with law, it cannot be termed to be erroneous, C.I.T Vs. Ashoka Traders SLP Civil no. 2374-2375 of 1995 dismissed by the Supreme Court 212 ITR (ST) 369.” 23. It was submitted that the…

K.Raheja It Park (Hyderabad) Pvt.Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 691/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Laxmi Prasad Sahushri Assessment Year: 2011-12 K. Raheja It Park ` Dy. Commissioner Of (Hyderabad) Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aacck 1914G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta & Ms. Aarthi Sathe Revenue By Shri Yvst Sai Date Of Hearing: 18/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/05/2021

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta &
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…open for the department to challenge the same in subsequent years. These decisions are not discussed elaborately but are listed below for the purpose of record: a. CIT v. Tata Communications Internet Services Ltd. [251 CTR 290 (Del)] b. CIT Vs Paul Brothers [216 ITR 548(Bom)] c. Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries Ltd. v. CIT [123 ITR 669 (Guj)] d. CIT v. Western Outdoor Interactive (P.) Ltd. [254 CTR 593 (Bom)] e. lAC v. Hoechst India Ltd. [32 ITO 689 (Mum)] f. CIT v. Fateh Granite (P) Ltd. [314 ITR 32 (Bom)] g. CIT v. AR.J. Security Printers [264 ITR 276 (Del)] :- 15 -: K. Raheja IT Park (Hyderabad) Pv…

Virendra Singh Bhadauria, Jaipur vs. Pr. CIT-3, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 255/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 255/Jp/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Virendra Singh Bhadauriya, Cuke Pr.Cit-3, Vs. 71, Mansa Nagar, Shirsi Road, Jaipur. Jaipur-302012. Pan No.: Aaepb 0767 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Ms. Datyani Pandey (Adv) & Shri Rajiv Pandey (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 10/02/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 25/03/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit-3, Jaipur Dated 16/03/2020 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Jaipur Erred In:- Ground No.1:- In Holding That The Assessment Order Dt.26.12.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) By Assessing Officer To Be Erroneous In So Far As Is Prejudicial To Interest Of Revenue On Issues Of 2

For Appellant: Ms. Datyani Pandey (Adv) &For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54Section 54F

…hijit Bhandari CIT Vs. Escorts Ltd. 338 ITR 0435 (Del) CIT Vs. Deepak Mittal 324 ITR 411 (P & H) CIT Vs. Nirmal Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd. 309 ITR 0067(Guj) Gupta International Vs. ITO 002 ITR (Trib) 0428 (Del) Green World Co. 314 ITR 81 (SC) CIT Vs. Paul Bros. 216 ITR 548 CIT Vs. Gokul Das Exports 333 ITR 214 Smt. Anita Malpotra V/s. ITO (2007) 109 TTJ (ASR) 76 India Heritage Foundation’s Vs. Dy. Director of Income Tax 149 TTJ 908 (Bangalore) relevant para 11 page 915 of the order. EON Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 343 ITR 366 (Del) 5. On the other hand, the ld CIT-DR has relied on the order passed by the ld. Pr.CIT. 6.…

Antony Waste Handling Cell P.Ltd, Thane vs. Jt CIT RG 1, Thane

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 5566/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Michael Jerald, DR
Section 143(3)Section 8Section 80Section 80I

…n facts in the present years as compared to earlier years. Relying on the decision by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. Western Outer Interactive Pvt. Ltd., 349 ITR 309, Simple Products Food Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 84 taxmann.com, 239 and CIT v. Paul Brothers, 216 ITR 548, it is argued ITA Nos. 2056/Mum/2015 & Ors 9 M/s Antony Waste Handling Cell that once a deduction has been allowed to an assessee in the initial assessment years, the deduction cannot be disallowed in the subsequent years unless the deduction is so withdrawn from the initial years. It is further explained that the above decisions have been foll…