CIT v. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

340 ITR 66High Court2012#978 most cited

What is CIT v. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. authority for?

A reassessment order cannot be upheld if the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment under Section 147 are furnished to the assessee only after the completion of the reassessment, or are not furnished at all. The assessee has a fundamental right to be provided with these reasons to file objections.

110

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. · Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. · Section 147 · Section 148 · reopening of assessment · reassessment proceedings · reasons recorded · furnishing of reasons · notice under section 148 · void ab initio · income escaping assessment · objection to reasons

Also reported as

21 Taxmann.com 5321 Taxmann 53

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 151Section 68Section 69ASection 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

income escaping assessmentreopening of assessmentescapement of incomesection 151reason to believenotice under section 148tangible materialreassessment proceedingsspeaking orderfirst appealsection 148unexplained money

Judgments citing CIT v. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

Dcitcc6.2, Mumbai vs. Top Class Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee i

ITA 974/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, Ld. A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Ld. CIT DR
Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…oceeds to assess the income, M/s. Top Class Capital Markets Private Limited which according to him has escaped assessment. In fact, non- furnishing of reasons would make an assessment order bad as held by this court in CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (2012) 340 ITR 66 (Bom.). Further, in fact, partial furnishing of reasons will also necessarily meet the same fate i.e. render the assessment order on reopening the notice bad. 15.6 We further observe that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Trend Electronics (2015) 379 ITR 456 (Bombay) also reminded that this Court (Mumbai High Court) in CIT Vs Vides…

Top Class Capital Markets Private Limited, Bombay Mutual Building, Fort vs. ACIT Central Circle 6 (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee i

ITA 709/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…econd look to his reasons recorded before he proceeds to assess the income, which according to him has escaped assessment. In fact, non- furnishing of reasons would make an assessment order bad as held by this court in CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (2012) 340 ITR 66 (Bom.). Further, in fact, partial furnishing of reasons will also necessarily meet the same fate i.e. render the assessment order on reopening the notice bad. 15.6 We further observe that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Trend Electronics (2015) 379 ITR 456 (Bombay) also reminded that this Court (Mumbai High Court) in CIT Vs Videsh…

Jagannath Sambhaji Satav, Pune vs. ITO Ward 12(4), Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 607/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Digambar SurwaseFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 250

…assessment was completed without following without providing an copy of reasons recorded and without following the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of GKN Driveshaft India Ltd (2003) 259 ITR 19(SC) and in case of Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd (2012) 21 Taxmann 53. Accordingly, it is liable to be quashed. 6. On facts and Circumstances of case and in low. Learned CITIAI APAC erred in confirming assessment completed without issuing a valid notice under set 1432) of the Income Tax Act 1963 in accordance the provisions of Act und as held by various judicial pronouncements. The notice issued on public holiday…

Bhagwatikripa Paper Mills Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

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

ITA 926/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 194HSection 69C

…he Apex Court of the country. The relevant citations and decisions are quoted below in support :- (1) GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (2003) 259 ITR (19) 10 Bhagwatipripa Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India (2) CIT Vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd 340 ITR 66 – Bombay High Court Reasons are to be supplied before completion of assessment. Failure to do so renders the assessment invalid. (3)L.Sohanraj & Ors Vs. DCIT (2010) 322 ITR 213 (Karnataka High Court) As the Assessing Officer failed to supply the reasons recorded for issuing notice u/s 148, the assessment orders were set-aside. Ground No.1 Under th…

Sukh Darshan Singh, Delhi vs. ITO Ward.43(2), Delhi

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

ITA 2233/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sukh Darshan Singh Income Tax Officer H.No.100 War-43(2) Kakrola Village Vs. Delhi New Delhi-110078 PAN-AVVPS0975Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri S.R. Senapati, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07/05/2024 Date of Pronouncement 17/05/2024 ORDER PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], date…

Monika Chakarvarty, Kota vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Circle

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 413/JPR/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jan 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 412 & 413/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2017-18 Monika Chakarvarty Prop. M/s Vipin Medicals, Nayapura, Kota. cuke Vs. DCIT Circle, Kota LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AELPC 3801 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Sidharth Ranka (Adv.), Shri Sorabh Harsh (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Anup Singh (Ad

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth Ranka (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…therefore, in our considered view, the reassessment order in these circumstances of the case, cannot be upheld. For reaching this conclusion, we draw strength from the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd (2012) 340 ITR 66 wherein Hon’ble Bombay High Court had categorically held that since the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment were not furnished to the assesse till the completion of the assessment then reassessment order cannot be upheld and thus dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. Even in the case of CIT vs Trend Electronics reported in (2015)…

Monika Chakarvarty, Kota vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Kota

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 412/JPR/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jan 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth Ranka (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…therefore, in our considered view, the reassessment order in these circumstances of the case, cannot be upheld. For reaching this conclusion, we draw strength from the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd (2012) 340 ITR 66 wherein Hon’ble Bombay High Court had categorically held that since the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment were not furnished to the assesse till the completion of the assessment then reassessment order cannot be upheld and thus dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. Even in the case of CIT vs Trend Electronics reported in (2015)…

Tahera Abida Ghori, Hyderabad vs. Duputy Commissioner of Income Tax -2, International Taxation, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 777/HYD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Dec 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 148

…rew the attention of the Bench to Para 7.10 of the order of the learned CIT (A) where the learned CIT (A) has observed as under: 12. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd reported in (2012) 340 ITR 66 (Bom.) and the decision in the case of CIT vs. trend Electronics (2015) 379 ITR 456 (Bom) and various other decisions filed in the paper book, learned AR submitted that when the reasons were not supplied to the assessee before completion of the assessment or when there is inordinate delay in supply of the reasons despite asking for the same, such…

Shri Saroop Hari, Hoshiarpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward- 4, Hoshiarpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing no

ITA 10/ASR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 10/Asr/2021 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sh. Saroop Hari Vs. ITO, Ward-4, S/O. Swaran Singh, VPO Hoshiarpur Nadali via Bhunga, Distt. Hoshiarpur (Respondent) [PAN:-ABVPH3525R] (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. J.S. Bhasin, Adv Respondent by Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr DR. Date of Hearing 31.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 09.11.2023 ORDER Per: Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax…

Parametric Trading Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-4(1), Indore

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 84/IND/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S.Parametric Trading A.C.I.T., Pvt.Ltd., Circle 4(1), 205, Sujata Chambers, 2Nd Indore. Floor, Abhichand Gandhi Vs. Marg,Off Katha Bazar Masjid (W), Mumbai (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aagca4207J Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Shailesh Parmar, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.06.2023

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151

…relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High in the case of New Era Shipping Limited vs. CIT, 430 ITR 431 (Bom). He has also relied upon the following decisions :- (a) CIT vs. Trend Electronics, (379 ITR 456). (b) CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited, (340 ITR 66) The ld. Authorized Representative has also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of River Valley Meadows and Townships P.Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT, (2022) 284 Taxman 536 (Bom)(H.C.) and submitted that notice Page 6 of 25 Prametric Trading Co.P.Ltd.,Indore 7 A.Y.2011-12 issued u/s 148 without mandatory approval u/s 151(2)…

Shri S. Subash Chand Nahar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-II(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 700/CHNY/2022[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.700/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri S. Subash Chand Nahar, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.6/1, Nahar Drive, Income, Maharani Chinnamba Road, Vs. Central Circle-Ii(1), Alwarpet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaepn-6258-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar & Shri I. Dinesh, Advocates : Shri Ar. V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 : 31.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar & Shri I. Dinesh
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153A

…mstances, we submit that the assessment framed by the ld. A.O without providing us a copy of reasons recorded is an invalid assessment. In this respect we place our reliance on the ratio laid down by the Honorable Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. VSNL 340 ITR 66(Bom). In this case, it has been held that if A.O fails to provide copy of reasons recorded till completion of assessment, reassessment is invalid. It has also been held by the Honorable Delhi ITAT in the case of sureshchandra vs. ITO 44 (1) (Delhi-ITAT) (2015) IT No. 3061/2012 (unreported) that failure to comply with the procedure prescribed in :-…

Tata Motors Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7543/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…reasons recorded before he proceeds to assess the income, which according to him, has escaped Assessment. In fact, non furnishing of reasons would make an Assessment Order bad as held by this Court in CIT v. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2012] 21 taxmann.com 53/340 ITR 66. In fact, partial furnishing of reasons will also M/s. Tata Motors Ltd necessarily meet the same fate i.e. render the Assessment Order on re- opening notice bad. Therefore, on the above ground itself, the question as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law as it is covered by the decision of this Court in Videsh Sanchar Nig…

Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai vs. The Tata Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7359/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…reasons recorded before he proceeds to assess the income, which according to him, has escaped Assessment. In fact, non furnishing of reasons would make an Assessment Order bad as held by this Court in CIT v. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. [2012] 21 taxmann.com 53/340 ITR 66. In fact, partial furnishing of reasons will also M/s. Tata Motors Ltd necessarily meet the same fate i.e. render the Assessment Order on re- opening notice bad. Therefore, on the above ground itself, the question as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law as it is covered by the decision of this Court in Videsh Sanchar Nig…

Income Tax Officer-6(4), Lucknow vs. Shri Zarrar Hussain, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 89/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Years:2011-12

Section 143Section 148

…he assessee and after relying on number of case laws, decided the issue in favour of the assessee. For the sake of completeness, the relevant findings of learned CIT(A) are reproduced below: a. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. - 340 ITR 66 "In the instant case, the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment though repeatedly asked by the assessee were furnished only after completion of the assessment. The Tribunal following the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Fomento Resorts & Hotels Ltd., IT Appeal No. 71 of 2006, dated 27-11-2006, has held that though th…

ACIT, Ncc7(1), Chennai vs. M/S Prabha Engineers, Chennai

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 944/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Nahar (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV. Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194ASection 2Section 40Section 80I

…(103 Taxmann.com 201). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) against this decision stood dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which is reported at 262 Taxman 16. Similar was stated to be the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (340 ITR 66) as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in PCIT V/s Jagat Talkies Distributors (398 ITR 13). Considering the same, Ld. CIT(A) held the order to be illegal, invalid and void ab initio. The finding that the reasons were not supplied to the assessee despite his specific notice was rendered after perusal of case records. It was observe…

Banwari Lal Pareek, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 135/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jul 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Ashok K Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 148

…therefore, in our considered view, the reassessment order in these circumstances of the case, cannot be upheld. For reaching this conclusion, we draw strength from the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd (2012) 340 ITR 66 wherein Hon’ble Bombay High Court had categorically held that since the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment were not furnished to the assesse till the completion of the assessment then reassessment order cannot be upheld and thus dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. Even in the case of CIT vs Trend Electronics reported in (2015)…

ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. M/S K.R. Pulp & Papers Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 5064/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…P & H) 2. CIT vs., Supreme Polypropolene (P.) Ltd., 35 taxmann.com 215 (Del.) 3. Pr. CIT vs., Rakam Money Matters (P) Ltd., ITA.No.778/Del./2015 Dated 13.10.2015. 4. Sabh Infrastructure Ltd., vs., ACIT 398 ITR 198 (Del.0 5. CIT vs., Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd., 340 ITR 66 (Bom.) 25 ITA.No.5064/Del./2017 M/s. K.R. Pulp and Papers Ltd., New Delhi. 6.4. He accordingly submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) is fully justified in quashing the re-assessment proceedings. 7. So far as the merits of the case is concerned, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that assessee has discharged the burden of proof by filing th…

Prannay Sureka, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 61, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 497/KOL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 80G

…ons to the assessee is invalid and has to be quashed. In defense of the arguments the Ld. A.R relied on the series of decisions namely: i) GKN Driveshafsts (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) ii) CIT vs. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. reported in (2012) 340 ITR 66 (Bom HC) iii) CIT vs. Janak Shantilal Mehta reported in (2021) 124 taxmann.com 516 (Mad HC) iv) CIT vs. National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. (2020) 115 taxmann.com 244 (Bom) Finally the Ld. A.R. prayed before the bench that assessment order so framed by the AO may kindly be quashed by setting aside the order of Ld. CIT(A). 5. The Ld. D.R…

Janak K. Mehta, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-36, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 337/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh BandiFor Respondent: Ms. Kranti Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 336 & 337/MUM/2021 (A.Ys: 2010-11 & 2009-10) Janak J. Mehta v. Commissioner of Income-tax (A) -36 502, Amrapali, Telly Gally Income Tax Office Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400069 Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E), Mumbai -400051 PAN: AAGPM4205M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Shailesh Bandi Department by : Ms. Kranti Yadav Date of Hearing : 09.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 16.11.2021 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These two appeal are filled by the assessee…

Janak J. Mehta, Mumbai vs. CIT - 36, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 336/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh BandiFor Respondent: Ms. Kranti Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 336 & 337/MUM/2021 (A.Ys: 2010-11 & 2009-10) Janak J. Mehta v. Commissioner of Income-tax (A) -36 502, Amrapali, Telly Gally Income Tax Office Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400069 Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E), Mumbai -400051 PAN: AAGPM4205M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Shailesh Bandi Department by : Ms. Kranti Yadav Date of Hearing : 09.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 16.11.2021 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These two appeal are filled by the assessee…