CIT v. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons.

282 ITR 457High Court2006#9631 most cited

What is CIT v. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons. authority for?

The CIT can revise an assessment order under Section 263 for issues not forming part of the assessee's appeal to the appellate authority, even if other parts of the order were appealed. This is because the doctrine of merger does not apply to those unappealed issues.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons · Section 263 · doctrine of merger · revisionary powers · unappealed issues · Commissioner's jurisdiction · CIT(A) · assessee's appeal · Section 35B deduction

Judgments citing CIT v. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons.

Yash Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT 27(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3217/MUM/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Yash Developers, Dcit-27(3), 1St Flr Anand, 7Th Road, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Maryland Apartment, D.K. Vs. Station Complex, Sandhu Marg, Chembur, Vashi-400703 Mumbai-400071. Pan No. Aaafy 6171 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Mandar Vaidya, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Harmesh Lal, Dr : Date Of Hearing 23/02/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/03/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Mandar Vaidya, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Harmesh Lal, DR
Section 154

…e jurisdiction. A similar issue arose before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in issue arose before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in issue arose before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ratilal Bacharilal & Sons 2 the case of Ratilal Bacharilal & Sons 282 ITR 457 82 ITR 457 (page 32 of case law compilation) wherein after (page 32 of case law compilation) wherein after (page 32 of case law compilation) wherein after applying the doctrine of merger theory, the Hon'ble applying the doctrine of merger theory, the Hon'ble applying the doctrine of merger theory, the Hon'ble High Court held that since the deduct…

M/S Uma Glass Works, Agra vs. Pr.CIT.-1, Agra

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2014-15 and

ITA 18/AGR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.17 & 18/Agra/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम M/S Uma Glass Works Pcit, 22, Near Industrial Estate, Vs. Agra-1, Firozabad - 283203 Uttar Pradesh.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…f the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Arbuda Mills Ltd., (231 ITR 50). Reliance was also place on the following decisions for the above proposition. i) Smt. Renuka Philip Vs ITO (409 ITR 567 (Mad)). ii) CIT Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal & Sons (282 ITR 457 (Bom)) iii) Parin Furniture Ltd. Vs. PCIT, ITA Ns.86 to 89/Rjt/2022 Dt: 20.07.2022 iv) Kathivaran Ananthalakshmi Vs. PCIT, ITA No.30/Chny/2022 Dt:3.8.2022 v) Rabi Pal Vs. ITO, ITA No.193/Kol/2022 Dt: 05.09.2022 vi) R.M.Tradelink Vs. PCIT, ITA No.68/Rjt/2022 Dt: 16-09-2022 I.T.A.Nos.17 & 18/Agra/2021/A.Ys.2014-15 & 2015-16 11. The Ld. Couns…

M/S Uma Glass Works, Firozabad vs. Pr.CIT.-1, Agra

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2014-15 and

ITA 17/AGR/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.17 & 18/Agra/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम M/S Uma Glass Works Pcit, 22, Near Industrial Estate, Vs. Agra-1, Firozabad - 283203 Uttar Pradesh.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…f the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shri Arbuda Mills Ltd., (231 ITR 50). Reliance was also place on the following decisions for the above proposition. i) Smt. Renuka Philip Vs ITO (409 ITR 567 (Mad)). ii) CIT Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal & Sons (282 ITR 457 (Bom)) iii) Parin Furniture Ltd. Vs. PCIT, ITA Ns.86 to 89/Rjt/2022 Dt: 20.07.2022 iv) Kathivaran Ananthalakshmi Vs. PCIT, ITA No.30/Chny/2022 Dt:3.8.2022 v) Rabi Pal Vs. ITO, ITA No.193/Kol/2022 Dt: 05.09.2022 vi) R.M.Tradelink Vs. PCIT, ITA No.68/Rjt/2022 Dt: 16-09-2022 I.T.A.Nos.17 & 18/Agra/2021/A.Ys.2014-15 & 2015-16 11. The Ld. Couns…

Aalidhara Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd, Surat vs. PCIT-1, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/SRT/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.94/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Alidhara Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit-1, Surat. Plot No.168, Udhyog Nagar Road, Udhna, Surat -394210. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacd8469M (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…merger:  RankaJewellers v. Addl. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 148 (Bom.) (HC).  CIT v. Ram Kishore Raj Kishore [2004] 135 Taxman 511 (All.) (HC) :  Aerens Infrastructure & Technology Ltd. v. CIT [2004] 271 ITR 15 (Delhi)(HC).  CIT v. RatilalBacharilal& Sons [2006] 282 ITR 457 (Bom.)(HC)  PCIT vs. Oil India Ltd. [103 taxmann.com] (Gun. HC)  Renuka Philip vs ITO, [101 taxmann.com 119), (Madras HC)  CIT vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority [107 taxmann.com 18] (Bombay)  CIT vs. Vam Resorts & Hotels [111 taxmann.com 62] (Allahabad). 5. In view of the above, your honour is requested not to draw any adverse inference.” 7.…

DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Godrej Industries, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 4339/MUM/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Godrej Industries Circle 14(1)(2) Pirojsha Nagar Eastern Vs. 470 Aayakar Bhavan, 4 Th Floor, Express High Way Vikhroli M.K. Marg, Mumbai-20 (E), Mumbai-400 070 .. Appellant Respondent Pan No. Aaecg2953R Revenue By .. Miss Vidisha Kalra, Cit Dr Shri Jitendra Jain, Ar Assessee By .. Date Of Hearing .. 23-03-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 07-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 44ASection 80H

…doctrine of merger theory that the limitation will be recognized from date of the original order in respect of points not subjected to appellate jurisdiction. A similar issue arose before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ratilal Bacharilal & Sons 282 ITR 457 (page 32 of case law compilation) wherein after applying the doctrine of merger theory, the Hon'ble High Court held that since the deduction u/s.35B of Rs. 563,350/- was not the subject matter of appeal, the CIT was justified in exercising jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act qua Rs. 563,350/- although deduction under 35B on Rs. 327,326/- was in appea…

The Azad Nagar, Cooperative Housing, Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 21, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 3881/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 50C

…1 Co.Op. Housing Societies question was open to be looked into by Commissioner. In our view, he has rightly exercised power under Section 263 of Act, 1961, by taking aforesaid view we find support from a decision in CIT Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons [(2006) 282 ITR 457 (Bom.)], wherein almost in similar circumstances, the Court said as under :- "........... At the instance of the assessee, the allowance on the sum of Rs. 5,63,350 could not have been the subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as the assessee was never aggrieved with that part of the order. In other words, so far…

Vallabhnagar Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 21, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 3659/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 50C

…1 Co.Op. Housing Societies question was open to be looked into by Commissioner. In our view, he has rightly exercised power under Section 263 of Act, 1961, by taking aforesaid view we find support from a decision in CIT Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons [(2006) 282 ITR 457 (Bom.)], wherein almost in similar circumstances, the Court said as under :- "........... At the instance of the assessee, the allowance on the sum of Rs. 5,63,350 could not have been the subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as the assessee was never aggrieved with that part of the order. In other words, so far…

Suvarna Nagar Co Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 21, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 3658/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 50C

…1 Co.Op. Housing Societies question was open to be looked into by Commissioner. In our view, he has rightly exercised power under Section 263 of Act, 1961, by taking aforesaid view we find support from a decision in CIT Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons [(2006) 282 ITR 457 (Bom.)], wherein almost in similar circumstances, the Court said as under :- "........... At the instance of the assessee, the allowance on the sum of Rs. 5,63,350 could not have been the subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as the assessee was never aggrieved with that part of the order. In other words, so far…

Vithalnagar Co Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 21, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 3656/MUM/2014[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 50C

…1 Co.Op. Housing Societies question was open to be looked into by Commissioner. In our view, he has rightly exercised power under Section 263 of Act, 1961, by taking aforesaid view we find support from a decision in CIT Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons [(2006) 282 ITR 457 (Bom.)], wherein almost in similar circumstances, the Court said as under :- "........... At the instance of the assessee, the allowance on the sum of Rs. 5,63,350 could not have been the subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as the assessee was never aggrieved with that part of the order. In other words, so far…

The Navyug Co Operative Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 21, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 3655/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 50C

…1 Co.Op. Housing Societies question was open to be looked into by Commissioner. In our view, he has rightly exercised power under Section 263 of Act, 1961, by taking aforesaid view we find support from a decision in CIT Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons [(2006) 282 ITR 457 (Bom.)], wherein almost in similar circumstances, the Court said as under :- "........... At the instance of the assessee, the allowance on the sum of Rs. 5,63,350 could not have been the subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as the assessee was never aggrieved with that part of the order. In other words, so far…

Jai Hind Co Op Hsg Soc Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 21, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 2363/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 50C

…1 Co.Op. Housing Societies question was open to be looked into by Commissioner. In our view, he has rightly exercised power under Section 263 of Act, 1961, by taking aforesaid view we find support from a decision in CIT Vs. Ratilal Bacharilal And Sons [(2006) 282 ITR 457 (Bom.)], wherein almost in similar circumstances, the Court said as under :- "........... At the instance of the assessee, the allowance on the sum of Rs. 5,63,350 could not have been the subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as the assessee was never aggrieved with that part of the order. In other words, so far…