What is CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry authority for?

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot enhance an assessment by introducing a new source of income or by changing the head of income during appellate proceedings.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry?

278 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (44 ITR 891), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 153A, Section 148, Section 263, Section 69A.

CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (44 ITR 891)

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. The Nizam Sugars Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 625/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.Phanindra for Shri A.V.Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kiran, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 43Section 43B

…s to whether such a disallowance could be made in Section 251(1)(a) proceedings for the first time is found to have been decided in assessee’s favour and against the department in CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) :- 5 -: ITA Nos. 625 & 1642/Hyd/2019 44 ITR 891 (SC). We therefore decline Revenue’s additional substantive ground in foregoing terms. 7. These two Revenue’s appeals are dismissed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th July, 2021 (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 19-07-2021 TNMM :- 6 -: ITA Nos. 625…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. The Nizam Sugars Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 1642/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.Phanindra for Shri A.V.Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kiran, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 43Section 43B

…s to whether such a disallowance could be made in Section 251(1)(a) proceedings for the first time is found to have been decided in assessee’s favour and against the department in CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) :- 5 -: ITA Nos. 625 & 1642/Hyd/2019 44 ITR 891 (SC). We therefore decline Revenue’s additional substantive ground in foregoing terms. 7. These two Revenue’s appeals are dismissed. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th July, 2021 (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 19-07-2021 TNMM :- 6 -: ITA Nos. 625…

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 652/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 80l

…wIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 650, 651 & 652/H/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Tanvi Foods (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, (previously known as Ward – 2(4), Tanvi Foods (India) Pvt. Hyderabad. Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN – AACCT 6543J (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey Date of hearing: 25/03/2021 Date of pronouncement: 12/05/2021 O R D E R PER L.P. Sahu, AM: These three appeals filed by the assesse…

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 651/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 80l

…wIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 650, 651 & 652/H/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Tanvi Foods (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, (previously known as Ward – 2(4), Tanvi Foods (India) Pvt. Hyderabad. Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN – AACCT 6543J (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey Date of hearing: 25/03/2021 Date of pronouncement: 12/05/2021 O R D E R PER L.P. Sahu, AM: These three appeals filed by the assesse…

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 650/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 251(1)(a)Section 80l

…wIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 650, 651 & 652/H/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Tanvi Foods (India) Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, (previously known as Ward – 2(4), Tanvi Foods (India) Pvt. Hyderabad. Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN – AACCT 6543J (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey Date of hearing: 25/03/2021 Date of pronouncement: 12/05/2021 O R D E R PER L.P. Sahu, AM: These three appeals filed by the assesse…

M/S Ginni Goldlimited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 673/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…nsidered by the Assessing Officer. The learned counsel for the assessee also placed reliance on the following decisions:- i. CIT vs Sardari Lal & Co. 120 Taxman 595 (Del.)(FB) ii. CIT vs Union Tyers 107 Taxman 447 (Del) iii. CIT vs Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry 44 ITR 891 (SC) iv. CIT vs Rai Bahadur Hardutrey Motilal Chamaria 66 ITR 443 (SC) v. CIT, Thrissur vs. B.P. Sharafudin 252 Taxman 326 (Ker) vi. Bikran Singh vs DCIT 82 Taxmann.com 230(Del.) vii. Ram Infrastructure Ltd. Vs JCIT, Jalgaon, 10 18. The learned DR, on the other hand, heavily relied on the order of the learned CIT(A). 19. We have considered the r…

The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1956/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…(1993) 199 ITR 445 (Cal), has held as follows: , has held as follows:- 8 Assessment Year: 2013-14 The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd. The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd. “In CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry In CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry[1962] 44 ITR 891, the Supreme Court held that in , the Supreme Court held that in enhancing the assessment for any year, the AAC cannot travel outside the record, that is to enhancing the assessment for any year, the AAC cannot travel outside the record, that is to enhancing the assessment for any year, the AAC cannot travel outside the record, that is to say, the…

Saravjit Bhatia, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Faridabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7155/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anil Chaturvedi(Through Video Conference) A.Y. : 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 251(2)Section 32Section 68Section 72

…fficer termed the same as commission on the sale of land. The Ld. AR has relied on the various case laws more preciously that of Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry V. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 342 (Bom) (confirmed by the Apex Court in CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (Hon'ble Supreme Court) wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court while dealing with the powers of the CIT(A) held that CIT (A) was not empower to enhance an income on an issue which was not the subject matter of the assessment. The ratio laid down in the judgment of full Bench of Delhi High Court in the case of Sardari Lal & Co. (supra) is also re…

Sri Binoy Kumar Singh, Daltonganj vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Ranchi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 195/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 Jul 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2015-16

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

…assessment order. Instead, the Assessing Officer termed the same as commission on the sale of land. The Ld. AR has relied on the various case laws more preciously that of Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry Vs. CIT reported in 34 ITR 342 (confirmed by the Apex Court in 44 ITR 891) wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court while dealing with the powers of the CIT(A) held that CIT(A) was not empower to enhance an income on an issue which was not the subject matter of the assessment. The ratio laid down in the judgment of full Bench of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co. reported in 251 ITR 864 is also relev…

Sugota Industries Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1459/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 251(1)Section 251(1)(a)

…er has not considered the entry of Rs. 5,85,000 from the point of view of its taxability and therefore the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction, in an appeal under s. 31 of the Act, to enhance the assessment.” CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry 44 ITR 891 (SC) “There is no doubt that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner can "enhance the assessment". It is admitted also by the assessee that within the four corners of the sources processed by the Income-tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner can enhance the assessment. This power must, at least, fall within the words "enhance the assessmen…

M/S Ad2Pro Media Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the 14 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 490/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia & Shri P.K.Gadale(Ita Nos.490 To 503(Bang)/2019) (Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S Ad2Pro Media Solutions Pvt.Ltd., No.10, 2Nd Floor, Bannerghatta Road, J.P.Nagar-Iii Phase, Bangalore-560078 Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (International Taxation) Circle-1(1), Bmtc Building, Koramangala, Bangalore-560095 Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Vandana Sagar, CIT-DR

Section 201Section 201(1)Section 9

…he following decisions of various courts in support of its contentions: (i) Saheli Synthetics (P.) Ltd. vs CIT [2008] 302 ITR 126 (Gujarat); (ii) CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443; (iii) CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC); 5.5 With regard to the opinion of the CIT A that the payments are of composite nature and liable to be treated as Royalty, the Appellant submits that Learned CIT(A) artificially divided the agreement entered between the Appellant and AMS1, USA in to two parts, as one for providing consultancy services and another for subscribing customer dat…

Pneumax Pneumatic India P.Ltd, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4203/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 251(2)Section 271

…p the issue of enhancement of the income liable to tax stated that this office has no jurisdiction to enhance the income of the appellant. The reliance was placed on the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of “CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallanji Mistry 44 ITR 891 SC’! and the law laid down by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of “CIT Vs. Sardarilal & Co. (2001) 251 ITR 864 Delhi" and sought the filing of the notice issued to the appellant u/s 251(2) qua enhancement of its income liable to tax. 10. The reliance being placed by the appellant on the authorities of the Hon'ble Apex Court and Hon'ble Delhi H…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Mylan Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Sh. YVST Sai, D.R

Section 251Section 28Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 68

…ibunals have held that CIT(A) does not have the power to question the taxability of income from a new source, which was not considered by the AO. In support of this submission, he placed reliance on the following other decisions: 1. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, 44 ITR 891 (SC) 2. Sardarilal & co., 251 ITR 364 (Delhi) 3. Bikram singh, 48 ITR 689 4. Hari Mohan Sharma in ITA No. 2953/Del/2018 5. B.P. Sheraffudin, 23 SOT 227 (2008) 17.1 Further, he also submitted that CIT(A) cannot enhance an assessment unless the assessee has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. He submitted that no enhancement notice w…

Mylan Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2335/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Sh. YVST Sai, D.R

Section 251Section 28Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 68

…ibunals have held that CIT(A) does not have the power to question the taxability of income from a new source, which was not considered by the AO. In support of this submission, he placed reliance on the following other decisions: 1. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, 44 ITR 891 (SC) 2. Sardarilal & co., 251 ITR 364 (Delhi) 3. Bikram singh, 48 ITR 689 4. Hari Mohan Sharma in ITA No. 2953/Del/2018 5. B.P. Sheraffudin, 23 SOT 227 (2008) 17.1 Further, he also submitted that CIT(A) cannot enhance an assessment unless the assessee has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. He submitted that no enhancement notice w…

Tata Moters Limited (Formerly Known As Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT, Cir..-2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3333/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Tata Motors Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Tata Income Tax-2(1), Engineering & Locomotive Aayakar Bhavan Company Limited M.K. Marg, Mumbai – 400 Bombay House, 24 020 Homi Mody Street Hutatma Chowk Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaact2727Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Tata Motors Limited Income Tax-2(1), (Formerly Known As Tata Aayakar Bhavan Engineering & Locomotive M.K. Marg, Mumbai – Company Limited 400 020 Bombay House, 24 Homi Mody Street Hutatma Chowk Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaact2727Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…ther on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was within his authority in enhancing the assessment of the assessee by Rs. 1,55,000 for the assessment year 1952-53 ?" 6. In CIT vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 9SC): TC7R.576, it was held by this Court that in an appeal filed by the assessee the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has no power to enhance the assessment by discovering new sources of income not mentioned in the return of the assessee or considered by the Income- tax Officer in the order appealed against. In that case, the assesee had received…

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1067/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

…/2017 51 a) Vijay Arjundas Luthra Vs. DCIT in ITA Nos.535/PUN/2013 & 1354/PUN/2016, relating to assessment years 2004-05 & 2005-06 and ITA No.21/PUN/2015, relating to assessment year 2004-05, order dated 16.08.2017 b) CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) c) CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) d) DCIT Vs. Sandvik Information Technology AB (2017) 80 taxmann.com 295 (Pune-Trib.) 42. The Ld. DR in reply to the arguments of assessee vis-a-vis grounds of appeal No.2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 stated that allegations of assessee were that there were two transactions. However,…

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1066/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

…/2017 51 a) Vijay Arjundas Luthra Vs. DCIT in ITA Nos.535/PUN/2013 & 1354/PUN/2016, relating to assessment years 2004-05 & 2005-06 and ITA No.21/PUN/2015, relating to assessment year 2004-05, order dated 16.08.2017 b) CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) c) CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) d) DCIT Vs. Sandvik Information Technology AB (2017) 80 taxmann.com 295 (Pune-Trib.) 42. The Ld. DR in reply to the arguments of assessee vis-a-vis grounds of appeal No.2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 stated that allegations of assessee were that there were two transactions. However,…

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1065/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

…/2017 51 a) Vijay Arjundas Luthra Vs. DCIT in ITA Nos.535/PUN/2013 & 1354/PUN/2016, relating to assessment years 2004-05 & 2005-06 and ITA No.21/PUN/2015, relating to assessment year 2004-05, order dated 16.08.2017 b) CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) c) CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) d) DCIT Vs. Sandvik Information Technology AB (2017) 80 taxmann.com 295 (Pune-Trib.) 42. The Ld. DR in reply to the arguments of assessee vis-a-vis grounds of appeal No.2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 stated that allegations of assessee were that there were two transactions. However,…

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1064/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

…/2017 51 a) Vijay Arjundas Luthra Vs. DCIT in ITA Nos.535/PUN/2013 & 1354/PUN/2016, relating to assessment years 2004-05 & 2005-06 and ITA No.21/PUN/2015, relating to assessment year 2004-05, order dated 16.08.2017 b) CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) c) CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) d) DCIT Vs. Sandvik Information Technology AB (2017) 80 taxmann.com 295 (Pune-Trib.) 42. The Ld. DR in reply to the arguments of assessee vis-a-vis grounds of appeal No.2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 stated that allegations of assessee were that there were two transactions. However,…

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, 70% of world profits are added in the hands of assessee under guise of Profit Split Method

ITA 1063/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.1062 To 1068/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(8)Section 92C(3)

…/2017 51 a) Vijay Arjundas Luthra Vs. DCIT in ITA Nos.535/PUN/2013 & 1354/PUN/2016, relating to assessment years 2004-05 & 2005-06 and ITA No.21/PUN/2015, relating to assessment year 2004-05, order dated 16.08.2017 b) CIT Vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (1962) 44 ITR 891 (SC) c) CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (1967) 66 ITR 443 (SC) d) DCIT Vs. Sandvik Information Technology AB (2017) 80 taxmann.com 295 (Pune-Trib.) 42. The Ld. DR in reply to the arguments of assessee vis-a-vis grounds of appeal No.2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 stated that allegations of assessee were that there were two transactions. However,…

CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry

What is CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. The Nizam Sugars Limited, Hyderabad

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. The Nizam Sugars Limited, Hyderabad

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

Tanvi Foods (India) Limited (Previously Known As Tanvi Foods(India) Pvt Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Hyderabad

M/S Ginni Goldlimited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

Saravjit Bhatia, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Faridabad

Sri Binoy Kumar Singh, Daltonganj vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Ranchi

Sugota Industries Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-7(1), Kolkata

M/S Ad2Pro Media Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) Circle-1(1), Bangalore

Pneumax Pneumatic India P.Ltd, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Noida

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Mylan Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad

Mylan Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

Tata Moters Limited (Formerly Known As Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT, Cir..-2(1), Mumbai

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

M/S. Sava Healthcare Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune