What is CIT v. Shivanand Electronics authority for?

The requirement to file an audit report along with the return of income for claiming specified deductions, such as under Section 80J or 80-IA, is directory and not mandatory. Such an audit report can be filed at any time before the assessment is framed or completed under Section 143(1).

How many judgments cite CIT v. Shivanand Electronics?

100 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Shivanand Electronics (209 ITR 63), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Shivanand Electronics come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(1), Section 139(1), Section 250, Section 44AB, Section 80IA, Section 119(2)(b).

CIT v. Shivanand Electronics (209 ITR 63)

Pratap Technocrats Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 225/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80J

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 225/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 cuke Pratap Technocrats Private Principal Commissioner of Limited Vs. Income Tax-1, Jaipur. B-21, Shakti Bhawan, Shivaji Godara Colony, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAICP 3621 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri R…

Jaihind Nagari Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Malegaon, Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 135/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.135/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Jaihind Nagari Sahkari Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Malegaon. Patsanstha Maryadit, Main Road, Raunaqabad, Malegaon, Nashik- 423203. Pan : Aaaaj8229M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanket Joshi Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Gawali Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’] Dated 28.11.2022 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That Appellant Is A Co- Operative Society Registered Under The Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Providing Credit Facilities To Its Members & Accepting The Deposits From Its Members. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali

Section 1Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80A(5)Section 80CSection 80P

…unal as well as the Hon’ble High Court by holding that even if the Form was filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it amounted to sufficient compliance. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking note of the judgment in CIT Vs. Shivanand Electronics (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bom), approved the view of the Hon’ble High Court having the effect that the requirement of filing Form 3AA was a necessary ingredient for claiming additional depreciation, but the timing of filing the Form was a directory requirement, which was fulfilled on filing it even during the course of assessment proceedings. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court…

Mahadevi Parameshwaridas Jindal Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3063/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Mahadevi Parameshwaridas Jindal Ito (Exemption)-2(1) Charitable Trust Mumbai 12A, 12Th Floor, Bakhtawar, Vs. 229, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021

For Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair

Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

…essee has not furnished any such order u/s. 119(2)(b) of the Act for condoning the delay in furnishing the audit report in Form 10B, rejected the assessee’s grounds of appeal. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the CIT vs. Shivanand Electronics [1994] 209 ITR 63 (Bom), which held that the assessee has to comply with the requirements casted upon by the legislature and cannot accept the ITO to ask for the same in case of claiming any benefit under the Act. The ld. CIT(A) also held that there was no mistake apparent from the intimation issued u/s. 143(1) of the Act and the same could have been rectified u/…

Canadian Speciality Vinyls, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 63(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 7612/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & M.Balaganeshassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Canadian Specialty Vinyls Ito Ward-63(4), Delhi 110055 49, Rani Janshi Road, Jhandewalan, New Delhi 110055 Vs. Pan Aagfc 0200 J

For Appellant: Shri Shaantanu Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Maimum Alam, Sr. DR

Section 2Section 801CSection 80I

…unal as well as the Hon'ble High Court by holding that even if the Form was filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it amounted to sufficient compliance. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking note of the judgment in CIT Vs. Shivanand Electronics (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bom), approved the view of the Hon'ble High Court having the effect that the requirement of filing Form 3AA was a necessary ingredient for claiming additional depreciation, but the timing of filing the Form was a directory requirement, which was fulfilled on filing it even during the course of assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court…

Sanjeev Agrawal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 71/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 4Section 5Section 6Section 90

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 71/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19. cuke Shri Sanjeev Agarwal, DCIT Central Circle-4, Vs. R-21, Raj Aangan, NRI Colony, Jaipur. Haddi Ghati Marg, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. AATPA 4920 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rohan…

Krishna Kaveri Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 24(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2881/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blekrishna Kaveri Cooperative V. Income Tax Officer-24(1)(1) Housing Society Limited Piramal Chamber Krishna Kaveri, Off Link Road Dr Ss Rao Marg, Parel Yamuna Nagar, Andheri (W) Mumbai- 400012 Mumbai-400053 Pan: Aaaak2142C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Piyush Chhajed & Shri Sumit Mantri Department Represented By : Shri. Saurabh Kumar Rai

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80P(2)(d)

…receipt is exempt and therefore, the primary onus was on the appellant to comply with the statutory requirements of making a valid claim under the Act, as held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shivanand Electronics 209 ITR 63 extracted hereunder: "When the Legislature casts a duty on the assessee claiming certain benefit, to comply with requirements which are associated with such benefit, the assessee cannot get the benefit without doing his part of the duty. 5 Krishna Kaveri Cooperative Housing Society Limited He cannot be allowed to say that it was for the ITO to as…

P. Kalaiselvi, Polur vs. ACIT, Vellore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 984/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Mar 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.984/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Ms.Palani Kalai Selvi, The Asst. Commissioner – No.2A, Old No.7, Of Income Tax, Abdul Sukkur St., Circle-1, Polur-606 608. Vellore. [Pan: Bcapk 5385 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.03.2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

…al delays in filing the audit report (appellant's delay 4.75 months), should not be visited with a penalty u/s 271B. 2.10 The AO misdirected himself by ignoring the decisions that Sec.44AB was only 'directory1 and NOT mandatory - CIT vs Sivananda electronics 209 ITR 63 (Bom); AO vs Rameshchandra & co 47 TTJ 887 (Indore); CBDT circular No.387 dt.6.7.84 -152 ITR 11 (ST) - Purpose of Sec.44AB; Bangalore Steel Distributors vs AO 49 ITD 668 (Bangalore); AO vs Saphire traders (p) ltd 66 TTJ 180 (Ahd) - RELYING ON THE OBJECTIVES OF 44AB AUDIT STATED IN CBDT CIRCULAR NO.387 dt.6.7.84. 2.11 The levy of penalty of Rs.1500…

Shri Rajkot Vishashrimali Jain Samaj, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 256/RJT/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.R. Sanghavi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 250Section 288

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT ] Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2020-21 Shri Rajkot Vishashrimali Income Tax Officer, Jain Samaj, Karanpara, Ward-1, Exemption, Prahlad Road, Vs Rajkot Rajkot-360001 (Respondent) PAN: AAATS9398H (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri G.R. Sanghavi, A.R. Revenue by: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 08-02-2023 Date of pronouncement : 13-03-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This assessee’s appeal for A.Y.…

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

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 268/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement 29Th Floor, Center-1 Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai-400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit - Ltu-1 V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai-400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…lete, assessee could not be made to suffer for it - Held, yes [Para 44] [In favour of assessee]” 74. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems Pvt. Ltd. 317 ITR 207, Bombay High Court in the case of CIT V. Shivanand Electronics 209 ITR 63, Uttrakhand High Court in the case of Sanjaykumar Bansal 219 Taxman 41 & Karnataka High Court in the case of Sutures India Pvt. Ltd. 125 Taxmann.com 226 has held that assessee company could file Form 10CCB even during assessment proceedings / appellate proceedings. Further, Hon'ble Madras High court in the case of CIT v. AKS Alloys (P.) Ltd [2012]…

Acc Ltd ( Formelry Known As the Associated Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addll CIT, (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6638/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement 29Th Floor, Center-1 Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai-400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit - Ltu-1 V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai-400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…lete, assessee could not be made to suffer for it - Held, yes [Para 44] [In favour of assessee]” 74. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems Pvt. Ltd. 317 ITR 207, Bombay High Court in the case of CIT V. Shivanand Electronics 209 ITR 63, Uttrakhand High Court in the case of Sanjaykumar Bansal 219 Taxman 41 & Karnataka High Court in the case of Sutures India Pvt. Ltd. 125 Taxmann.com 226 has held that assessee company could file Form 10CCB even during assessment proceedings / appellate proceedings. Further, Hon'ble Madras High court in the case of CIT v. AKS Alloys (P.) Ltd [2012]…

Acc Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

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

ITA 6082/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

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

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…led along with Return of Income as filing of such form is directory in nature. In support of such contention, Ld. AR has mainly relied upon following decisions: i) CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd (376 ITR 456) (SC) (ii) CIT v. Shivanand Electronics (209 ITR 63) (Bombay HC) (iii) CIT v. Sanjay Kumar Bansal [2013] 219 Taxman 41 (Uttarakhand) (iv) CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd. [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Kar.) 68. During the course of hearing, the Ld. DR has relied upon finding given by lower authorities and argued that deduction u/s.80IA cannot be allowed as such claim was not made in the Return of Inc…

Acc Ltd ( Formerly Known As the Associates Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

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

ITA 4669/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

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

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…led along with Return of Income as filing of such form is directory in nature. In support of such contention, Ld. AR has mainly relied upon following decisions: i) CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd (376 ITR 456) (SC) (ii) CIT v. Shivanand Electronics (209 ITR 63) (Bombay HC) (iii) CIT v. Sanjay Kumar Bansal [2013] 219 Taxman 41 (Uttarakhand) (iv) CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd. [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Kar.) 68. During the course of hearing, the Ld. DR has relied upon finding given by lower authorities and argued that deduction u/s.80IA cannot be allowed as such claim was not made in the Return of Inc…

Addl.C.I.T. Ltu, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 4556/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

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

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…led along with Return of Income as filing of such form is directory in nature. In support of such contention, Ld. AR has mainly relied upon following decisions: i) CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd (376 ITR 456) (SC) (ii) CIT v. Shivanand Electronics (209 ITR 63) (Bombay HC) (iii) CIT v. Sanjay Kumar Bansal [2013] 219 Taxman 41 (Uttarakhand) (iv) CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd. [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Kar.) 68. During the course of hearing, the Ld. DR has relied upon finding given by lower authorities and argued that deduction u/s.80IA cannot be allowed as such claim was not made in the Return of Inc…

Anju Agast Srivats, Bengaluru vs. Income-Tax Officer, (NFAC), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1158/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Ms. Anju Agast Srivats Vs The Income Tax Officer No. 303. Sobha Orchid Nfac, Delhi Jakkur, Bengaluru 560064 Pan – Afsps6930E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain J. Ca Revenue By: Shri Sankarganesh K., Addl Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.02.2023 O R D E R Per: George George K., J.M. This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Cit(A)/ Nfac, Delhi’S Order Dated 23.10.2022 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2018-19. 2. The Solitary Issue Raised Is Whether The Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Order Of The Assessing Officer (Ao) Wherein He Had Denied The Foreign Tax Credit (Ftc).

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain J. CAFor Respondent: Shri Sankarganesh K., Addl CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 250Section 90

…laim for benefit of tax relief was made by the appellant and therefore the primary onus was on the appellant to comply with the statutory requirements, as held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shivanand Electronics 209 ITR 63 as under: "When the Legislature casts a duty on the assesses claiming certain benefit, to comply with requirements which are associated with such benefit, the assessee cannot get the benefit without doing his part of the duty. He cannot be 3 Ms. Anju Agast Srivats allowed to say that it was for the ITO to ask him to do so. If the assessee does not…

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5704/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

…unal as well as the Hon'ble High Court by holding that even if the Form was filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it amounted to sufficient compliance. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking note of the judgment in CIT Vs. Shivanand Electronics (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bom), approved the view of the Hon'ble High Court having the effect that the requirement of filing Form 3AA was a necessary ingredient for claiming additional depreciation, but the timing of filing the Form was a directory requirement, which was fulfilled on filing it even during the course of assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court…

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5703/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

…unal as well as the Hon'ble High Court by holding that even if the Form was filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it amounted to sufficient compliance. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking note of the judgment in CIT Vs. Shivanand Electronics (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bom), approved the view of the Hon'ble High Court having the effect that the requirement of filing Form 3AA was a necessary ingredient for claiming additional depreciation, but the timing of filing the Form was a directory requirement, which was fulfilled on filing it even during the course of assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court…

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5702/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

…unal as well as the Hon'ble High Court by holding that even if the Form was filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it amounted to sufficient compliance. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking note of the judgment in CIT Vs. Shivanand Electronics (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bom), approved the view of the Hon'ble High Court having the effect that the requirement of filing Form 3AA was a necessary ingredient for claiming additional depreciation, but the timing of filing the Form was a directory requirement, which was fulfilled on filing it even during the course of assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court…

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5701/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

…unal as well as the Hon'ble High Court by holding that even if the Form was filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it amounted to sufficient compliance. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking note of the judgment in CIT Vs. Shivanand Electronics (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bom), approved the view of the Hon'ble High Court having the effect that the requirement of filing Form 3AA was a necessary ingredient for claiming additional depreciation, but the timing of filing the Form was a directory requirement, which was fulfilled on filing it even during the course of assessment proceedings. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court…

Krushi Vibhag Karmchari Vrund Sahakari Path Sanstha Maryadit, Wardha vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nagpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/NAG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Krushi Vibhag Karmchari Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Vrund Sahakari Pat Sanstha Wardha Maryadit Bajaj Building, Krushna Nagar, Wardha, Maharashtra – 442001 Pan: Aacak6196N Appellant Respondent

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 144Section 148Section 80Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

…unal as well as the Hon’ble High Court by holding that even if the Form was filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it amounted to sufficient compliance. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, taking note of the judgment in CIT Vs. Shivanand Electronics (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bom), approved the view of the Hon’ble High Court having the effect that the requirement of filing Form 3AA was a necessary ingredient for claiming additional depreciation, but the timing of filing the Form was a directory requirement, which was fulfilled on filing it even during the course of assessment proceedings. The 9 Krushi Vibhag Karmchari…

M/S Swiss Park Vanijya India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 162/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Kumar (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80Section 80A(5)Section 80I

…irectory and that if the audit report was filed at any time before the framing of the assessment, the requirement of the provisions of the Act should be held to have been met. Similar was the view of High Court of Bombay in CIT v. Shivanand Electronics [1994] 209 ITR 63 as well as various other decisions. 6. Considering the same, we would hold that the assessee was eligible to claim the deduction u/s 80-IA. We direct CPC, Bangalore to grant this deduction to the assessee. 7. The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order. Order pronounced on 07th September, 2022. (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा…

CIT v. Shivanand Electronics

What is CIT v. Shivanand Electronics authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Shivanand Electronics

Pratap Technocrats Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jaipur

Jaihind Nagari Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Malegaon, Nashik

Mahadevi Parameshwaridas Jindal Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai

Canadian Speciality Vinyls, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 63(4), New Delhi

Sanjeev Agrawal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

Krishna Kaveri Cooperative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 24(1)(1), Mumbai

P. Kalaiselvi, Polur vs. ACIT, Vellore

Shri Rajkot Vishashrimali Jain Samaj, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Exemption Ward-1, Rajkot

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

Acc Ltd ( Formelry Known As the Associated Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addll CIT, (Ltu), Mumbai

Acc Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

Acc Ltd ( Formerly Known As the Associates Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

Addl.C.I.T. Ltu, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

Anju Agast Srivats, Bengaluru vs. Income-Tax Officer, (NFAC), Bengaluru

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

DCIT, Hisar vs. M/S Synergy Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., Hisar

Krushi Vibhag Karmchari Vrund Sahakari Path Sanstha Maryadit, Wardha vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nagpur

M/S Swiss Park Vanijya India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru