CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd.

198 ITR 297Supreme Court of India1992#61 most cited

What is CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. authority for?

A court's pronouncement derives its scope and color from the specific questions involved in the case, thus, due regard must always be given to the questions framed before the court when interpreting its judgment.

814

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sun Engineering Works · 198 ITR 297 · Supreme Court 1992 · judgment interpretation · scope of decision · questions framed · judicial precedent · Section 147 · reassessment · income escaping assessment

Also reported as

64 Taxmann 442107 CTR 209

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(1)Section 14A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(viii)section 56(viii)section 45(5)(c)section 155(16)section 23(1a)section 104section 45(5)(b)section 145b(1)section 194lakeyman insurancesection 160section 23(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd.

M/S Religare Capital Markets Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…is improper to read a part of a judgment de hors the context in which the judgment is rendered and the controversy in dispute. Reliance is placed in this regard on the decision of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Sun Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. 198 ITR 297, wherein the Hon‘ble apex Court held as under (pg 320): ―Such an interpretation would be reading that judgment totally out of context in which the questions arose for decision in that case. It is neither desirable nor permissible to pick out a word or a sentence from the judgment of this Court, divorced from the context of the question under cons…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Mahendra B Gandhi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5310/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negi

Section 143(3)Section 147

…ch case i. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Padmasundara Rao (Decd.) and Ors. v State of Tamil Nadu. Civil Appeal No 2226 of 1997, order dated 13 03.2002 ii. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ClT Vs Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd reported in 198 ITR 297. iii. The Hon’ble I TAT. Mumbai Bench ‘G’ [Tird Member], in the case of M/s. Grindwell Norton Ltd. vs. DCIT [2004] 91 ItD 412 [MUM] [TM] iv. Hon’ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of Kanchan FerroMet ITA No.1552/Mum/2017 order dated 05.06.2017 has discussed judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in NK Proteins and held as under. 6 The Learned Counsel of the…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2283/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" [BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/CHNY/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [PAN AABCT 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2282/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" [BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/CHNY/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [PAN AABCT 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2281/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" [BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/CHNY/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [PAN AABCT 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2280/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" [BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/CHNY/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [PAN AABCT 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क"…

ACIT Central Circle, Agra vs. D.S. India Jewelmart P Ltd, Mathura

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 276/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…hreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297( para37) 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR had submitted that the legal grounds raised by the assessee is not born out on record and the ld.DR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (ITA No. 1060 of 2014). Further, it was submitted that the order passed u/s. 153D by JCIT was merely an administ…

DCIT Central Circle, Agra vs. Lt. Shri Mradul Garg, Mathura

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 272/AGR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…hreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297( para37) 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR had submitted that the legal grounds raised by the assessee is not born out on record and the ld.DR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (ITA No. 1060 of 2014). Further, it was submitted that the order passed u/s. 153D by JCIT was merely an administ…

Ashok Kumar Agarwal, Mathura vs. DCIT Central Circle, Agra

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 269/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…hreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297( para37) 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR had submitted that the legal grounds raised by the assessee is not born out on record and the ld.DR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (ITA No. 1060 of 2014). Further, it was submitted that the order passed u/s. 153D by JCIT was merely an administ…

D.S. India Jewelmart P Ltd, Mathura vs. ACIT Central Circle, Agra

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 268/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…hreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297( para37) 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR had submitted that the legal grounds raised by the assessee is not born out on record and the ld.DR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (ITA No. 1060 of 2014). Further, it was submitted that the order passed u/s. 153D by JCIT was merely an administ…

Saurabh Agarwal, Mathura vs. DCIT Central Circle, Agra

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 263/AGR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…hreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297( para37) 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR had submitted that the legal grounds raised by the assessee is not born out on record and the ld.DR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (ITA No. 1060 of 2014). Further, it was submitted that the order passed u/s. 153D by JCIT was merely an administ…

Lt. Shri Mradul Garg, Mathura vs. DCIT Central Circle, Agra

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 260/AGR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…hreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297( para37) 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR had submitted that the legal grounds raised by the assessee is not born out on record and the ld.DR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Ultratech Cement Ltd. (ITA No. 1060 of 2014). Further, it was submitted that the order passed u/s. 153D by JCIT was merely an administ…

Parminder Kaur Bedi, Punjab vs. ITO, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 96/JPR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka (Advocate)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH ’SMC’, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jkWo] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 96/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2008-09. cuke Smt. Parminder Kaur Bedi, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Prop, Cap-A-Pie Beauty Parlour, Ward 1(2), Sunny Enclave, Above Honey gym, Kota. Mohali, Punjab. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AFYPB 2873 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Siddharth Ranka (Advocate) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt.…

The Jt. CIT, Range-4, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Mastek Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 514/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT- D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of these discussions, the reliance placed on Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. (supra) is also equally misplaced and devoid of legally sustainable merits. In any case, as is noted by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442 (SC), "It is neither desirable nor permissible to pick out a word or a sentence from the judgment of this Court, divorced from the context of the question under consideration and treat it to be the complete "law" declared by this Court. The judgment must be read as a whole and the observations from the judgment have to be considered…

Mastek Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt.CIT, Rang4, Ahmedabad

ITA 172/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT- D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of these discussions, the reliance placed on Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. (supra) is also equally misplaced and devoid of legally sustainable merits. In any case, as is noted by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442 (SC), "It is neither desirable nor permissible to pick out a word or a sentence from the judgment of this Court, divorced from the context of the question under consideration and treat it to be the complete "law" declared by this Court. The judgment must be read as a whole and the observations from the judgment have to be considered…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Mastek Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1852/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT- D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of these discussions, the reliance placed on Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. (supra) is also equally misplaced and devoid of legally sustainable merits. In any case, as is noted by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442 (SC), "It is neither desirable nor permissible to pick out a word or a sentence from the judgment of this Court, divorced from the context of the question under consideration and treat it to be the complete "law" declared by this Court. The judgment must be read as a whole and the observations from the judgment have to be considered…

Mastek Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, (OSD) - 1, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

ITA 1188/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT- D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of these discussions, the reliance placed on Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. (supra) is also equally misplaced and devoid of legally sustainable merits. In any case, as is noted by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442 (SC), "It is neither desirable nor permissible to pick out a word or a sentence from the judgment of this Court, divorced from the context of the question under consideration and treat it to be the complete "law" declared by this Court. The judgment must be read as a whole and the observations from the judgment have to be considered…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Asr Engineering and Projects Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 226/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings". 13. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works Pvt Lt (198 ITR 297) and in the case of Chettinad Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in (200 ITR 320) on the point that fresh claim of deductions cannot be made in reassessment proceedings. In the present case, the proceedings are in the nature of reassessment proceedings because the original assessments were concluded earlier for most of the years.The return in…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Asr Engineering and Projects Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 225/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings". 13. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works Pvt Lt (198 ITR 297) and in the case of Chettinad Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in (200 ITR 320) on the point that fresh claim of deductions cannot be made in reassessment proceedings. In the present case, the proceedings are in the nature of reassessment proceedings because the original assessments were concluded earlier for most of the years.The return in…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Asr Engineering and Projects Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 224/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings". 13. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works Pvt Lt (198 ITR 297) and in the case of Chettinad Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in (200 ITR 320) on the point that fresh claim of deductions cannot be made in reassessment proceedings. In the present case, the proceedings are in the nature of reassessment proceedings because the original assessments were concluded earlier for most of the years.The return in…