CIT v. VAM Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd.

418 ITR 723High Court2019#2109 most cited

What is CIT v. VAM Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Revision under Section 263 by the Principal Commissioner is not permissible if the Assessing Officer has taken a plausible view. Once a plausible view is taken by the Assessing Officer, the Principal Commissioner cannot revise the assessment order.

55

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. VAM Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. · section 263 · revision under section 263 · plausible view · Assessing Officer · Principal Commissioner · revision of assessment order

Sections most often in play

Section 263Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 68Section 115BBESection 154

Issues it is cited on

section 274(1)section 263(1)revision under section 263section 120rectification u/s 154section 144arevision u/s 263doctrine of mergerrectification under section 154section 54fsection 56(2)(viib)interest u/s 234a

Judgments citing CIT v. VAM Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd.

Dristi Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. Pr. CIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 3813/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B ”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3813 /DEL/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dristi Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Vs Pr. CIT, CH. No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Ghaziabad. RDC, Rajnagar, Ghaziabad. PAN- AAECD4670Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Akhilesh Kumar Adv. & Shri Pushkar Pandey, Adv. Department represented by Shri Shankar Lal Verma, Sr. DR Date of hearing 29.05.2023 Date of pronouncement 03.08.2023 O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The assessee has come in appea…

Shri Gautam Sett, Hooghly vs. P.C.I.T.-8, Kolkata Now P.C.I.T.-5, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 367/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 3Section 50C

…ase of the assessee finds support from the several decisions of various High Courts namely Smt. Renuka Philip vs. ITO reported in [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Mad), decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vam Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All). In both the above decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts has held that when the appeal is pending before the Commissioner(appeals), the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act 5 I.T.A. No.367/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Gautam Sett is not available to the Ld. PCIT. Accordingly, we are inclined to quash the order passed u/s 26…

M\S. Lexico Ceramics, Rajkot vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

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

ITA 1/RJT/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2015-15 M/S Lexico Ceramics, C/O Kalpesh S. Doshi & Co., Vs Principal Commissioner Of Chartered Accountants, Income-Tax-1, 1006-09, The Spire-2, Near Sheetal Rajkot Park Brts Stop, 150 Ft. Ring Road, Rajkot-360005 Pan : Aaefl 8870 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed, Am :

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (through web-based video conferencing platform) ] BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2015-15 M/s Lexico Ceramics, C/o Kalpesh S. Doshi & Co., Vs Principal Commissioner of Chartered Accountants, Income-tax-1, 1006-09, The Spire-2, Near Sheetal Rajkot Park BRTS Stop, 150 Ft. Ring Road, Rajkot-360005 PAN : AAEFL 8870 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, AR Revenue by : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/04/2023 घो…

Suresh Agarwal, Kolkata vs. PCIT, Kolkata-9, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 510/KOL/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133(6)Section 263Section 54E

…ase of the assessee finds support from the several decisions of various High Courts namely Smt. Renuka Philip vs. ITO reported in [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Mad), decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vam Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All). In both the above decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts has held that when the appeal is pending before the Commissioner(appeals), the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act is not available to the Ld. PCIT. Accordingly, we are inclined to quash the order passed u/s 263 of the Act.” Considering the facts of the case in the light of the…

Prabhu Kanimozhi, Erode vs. PCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the order passed by the Commissioner dated 14

ITA 350/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate-Erode) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 40A(3)Section 68Section 69B

…ppeal before the CIT(A), that the same was heard and that the order was awaited, making the revisionary order void ab initio in view of sec.263 (1)( c) of the Act. [Relying on the jurisdictional Madras High Court decision cited in 409 ITR 567(Mad) and also on 418 ITR 723 (All)]. 4) When the Assessing Officer takes one of the two views permissible in law (i.e.,) taxing the stock difference u/s.28, it cannot be treated as erroneous only for the reason that PCIT does not agree with that view. [Reliance is placed on ITA No.204/lnd/2019; 189 Taxman 436 (Del); 194 Taxman 504 (Del); 295 ITR 282 (SC); 243 ITR 83 (SC).] 5…

M/S Results Investments Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Ward 5(3), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 399/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. Ramakrishnan (C.A)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

…appeal is pending before Ld. CIT(A). Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Smt. Renuka Philip vs. ITO (409 ITR 567) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in CIT vs. VAM Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (418 ITR 723). The assessee assailed the revision on merits also on the ground that the assessee was engaged in the business of making investment as was evident from its Memorandum / Articles of Association and accordingly, it had to ensure that all its funds generated revenue. Putting money into fixed deposits was one of the modes of making investment. 7. Ho…

Shri Chandubhai Ramjibhai Kaqthiriya, Jasdan, Dist. Rajkot-364490 vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 70/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Gaurang Khakhar, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…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 2017-18 Chandubhai Ramjibhai Pr. CIT, Kaqthiriya, 49 Motisheri, Rajkot-1 Juna Pipalia, Vs (Respondent) Jasdan, Rajkot-364490 PAN: BWRPK2156F (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Gaurang Khakhar, Ld. A.R. Revenue by: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 06-03-2023 Date of pronouncement : 14-03-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2017-18, aris…

Jupax Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO Ward 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, ground of appeal raised by the assessee assessment order allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 165/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Jupax Distributors Pvt. Ltd., A.C.I.T., Circle-4,Surat. 58A, Raja Basant Roy Road, (Old A.O.: Ito, Ward 12(2), Vs. Kolkata-700029. Kolkata (Wb) Pan No. Aaacj 6952 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Physical hearing) Jupax Distributors Pvt. Ltd., A.C.I.T., Circle-4,Surat. 58A, Raja Basant Roy Road, (Old A.O.: ITO, Ward 12(2), Vs. Kolkata-700029. Kolkata (WB) PAN No. AAACJ 6952 F Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Appellant represented by Shri Ramesh Malpani, CA Respondent represented by Shri Ashok B Koli, (CIT-DR) Date of hearing 23/12/2022 Date of pronouncement 27/02/2023 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This app…

M/S. Meet Buildcon Partnership Firm, Rajkot vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 64/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-D.R
Section 133ASection 144Section 263Section 69A

…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 2017-18 M/s. Meet Build Con Pr. CIT, Partnership Firm, Rajkot-1 Office No. 105, Rajpath Vs (Respondent) Avenue, 150 Feet Ring Road, Rajkot-360005 PAN: ABAFM0506G (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri R.K. Doshi, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 06-02-2023 Date of pronouncement : 22-02-2023 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2…

Rasna Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr.CIT, -3, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 50/AHD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 50/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2016-2017 Rasna Private Limited, The Pr.C.I.T.-3, Atlanta Tower, Vs. Ahmedabad. Opp. Sears Tower, Panchvati, Gulabtekra, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aaacw4408M

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, अहमदाबाद"यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 50/AHD/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2016-2017 Rasna Private Limited, The Pr.C.I.T.-3, Atlanta Tower, Vs. Ahmedabad. Opp. Sears Tower, Panchvati, GulabTekra, Ahmedabad-380015. PAN: AAACW4408M (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.F. Jain, A.R Revenue by : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT. D.R सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date of Hearing : 01/12/2022 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 21/12/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED,…

H B Exports, New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 806/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 50Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘H’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 806/DEL/2021 [A.Y 2013-14] M/s H.B. Exports Vs. The P.C.I.T - 12 BN – 96, West Shalimar Bagh New Delhi Delhi PAN: AAAFH 4938 A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv Shri Madhur Aggarwal, Adv Shri Shailesh Gupta, CA. Department By : Shri M. Baranwal, CIT- DR Date of Hearing : 21.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement : .11.2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order…

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

…ce in closing stock is the subject matter of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. PCIT is bad in law. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vam Resorts & Hotels (P) Ltd. (418 ITR 723) and the decision of 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…

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

…ce in closing stock is the subject matter of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. PCIT is bad in law. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vam Resorts & Hotels (P) Ltd. (418 ITR 723) and the decision of 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…

Remy Diamonds Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 5, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3900/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3898 To 3900/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Principal Commissioner Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Of Income Tax-5 Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5481 To 5483/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-5(3)(1) Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Room No.573, Aayakar Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Bhavan, M. K. Road, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr2195R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hiren Vepari Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Hiren VepariFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 147Section 263

…r section 263 and not touched the merit of issue/claim disallowed by AO which is subject matter of appeal before the Id. CIT. A.Y. 2008-09 to 2010-11 Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. 11. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in case of M/s. Vam Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (418 ITR 723) observations on this issue as under;- When an appeal is pending before Commissioner (Appeals), exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 by Commissioner would be barred. 12. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Smt. Renuka Phillip (101 taxmann.com 119) had observed on this issue as under: - “However, we are not examining the merits of the…

Remy Diamonds Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 5, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3899/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3898 To 3900/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Principal Commissioner Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Of Income Tax-5 Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5481 To 5483/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-5(3)(1) Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Room No.573, Aayakar Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Bhavan, M. K. Road, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr2195R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hiren Vepari Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Hiren VepariFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 147Section 263

…r section 263 and not touched the merit of issue/claim disallowed by AO which is subject matter of appeal before the Id. CIT. A.Y. 2008-09 to 2010-11 Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. 11. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in case of M/s. Vam Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (418 ITR 723) observations on this issue as under;- When an appeal is pending before Commissioner (Appeals), exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 by Commissioner would be barred. 12. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Smt. Renuka Phillip (101 taxmann.com 119) had observed on this issue as under: - “However, we are not examining the merits of the…

Remy Diamonds Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 5, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3898/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3898 To 3900/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Principal Commissioner Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Of Income Tax-5 Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5481 To 5483/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-5(3)(1) Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Room No.573, Aayakar Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Bhavan, M. K. Road, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr2195R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hiren Vepari Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Hiren VepariFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 147Section 263

…r section 263 and not touched the merit of issue/claim disallowed by AO which is subject matter of appeal before the Id. CIT. A.Y. 2008-09 to 2010-11 Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. 11. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in case of M/s. Vam Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (418 ITR 723) observations on this issue as under;- When an appeal is pending before Commissioner (Appeals), exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 by Commissioner would be barred. 12. The Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Smt. Renuka Phillip (101 taxmann.com 119) had observed on this issue as under: - “However, we are not examining the merits of the…

Jagabandhu Das, Kolkata vs. PCIT, Burdwan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/KOL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54B

…ase of the assessee finds support from the several decisions of various High Courts namely Smt. Renuka Philip vs. ITO reported in [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Mad), decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vam Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All). In both the above decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts has held that when the appeal is pending before the Commissioner (appeals), the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act is not available to the Ld. PCIT. Accordingly, we are inclined to quash the order passed u/s 263 of the Act. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allo…

M/S. R M Tradelink, Rajkot vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 68/RJT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Sept 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 206CSection 263Section 40Section 69C

…once the proceedings are before Ld. CIT(Appeals) in respect of certain issues, then the same issue again cannot be re-agitated by taking recourse to proceedings under section 263 of the Act as held in the case of CIT v. Vam Resorts and Hotels Private Limited 418 ITR 723 (Allahabad) and in the case of Smt. Renuka Philip v. ITO 409 ITR 567 (Madras) where it is not held that when an appeal is pending before Commissioner (Appeals), exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 by Principal Commissioner would be barred. Thirdly, it is a well-settled law that every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of Assessin…

Rabi Pal, Bankura vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Bankura

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 193/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 69A

…ase of the assessee finds support from the several decisions of various High Courts namely Smt. Renuka Philip vs. ITO reported in [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Mad), decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vam Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All). In both the above decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts has held that when the appeal is pending before the Commissioner(appeals), the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act is not available to the Ld. PCIT. Accordingly, we are inclined to quash the order passed u/s 263 of the Act. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allow…

Think and Learn Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 418/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Think & Learn Private Limited, Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, 4/1, 6Th Floor, Tower D, Ibc Bengaluru. Knowledge Park, Bannerghatta Main Road, Opposite Fire Station, Bengaluru – 560 029. Pan : Aaect 0931 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 24.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.03.2022 Of The Principal Cit – 3 (Pcit), Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1962 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’) In Relation To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Providing Online Learning Platform In The Name Of “Byju” For Kindergarten To 12Th Standard Students & Other Related Services. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2017-18 Declaring Total Income Of Page 2 Of 10

For Appellant: Shri. T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 245RSection 245R(2)(i)Section 263Section 40Section 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/s. Think and Learn Private Limited, Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 3, 4/1, 6th Floor, Tower D, IBC Bengaluru. Knowledge Park, Bannerghatta Main Road, Opposite Fire Station, Bengaluru – 560 029. PAN : AAECT 0931 A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 24.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. V…