Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel

362 ITR 492High Court2014#1246 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel authority for?

Section 124(3) of the Income-tax Act, which restricts an assessee from objecting to an Assessing Officer's jurisdiction, applies only to disputes concerning territorial jurisdiction as conferred by Section 120(1) or (2). It does not apply to objections regarding the Assessing Officer's inherent jurisdiction to frame an assessment.

91

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel · Section 124(3) · Section 124 · Section 120 · territorial jurisdiction · inherent jurisdiction · objection to AO jurisdiction · validity of jurisdiction · assessment procedure · Assessing Officer

Also reported as

42 Taxmann.com 540225 Taxmann 411

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 153ASection 132Section 144BSection 151ASection 124(3)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 115whsection 115wfsection 124(3)(a)section 144(b)section 115wdsection 115wesection 124(3)section 124section 120section 153cofsection 127(2)(a)section 153aof

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel

M/S. Hillview Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 1758/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/S. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aadch3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1760 & 1761/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 M/S. Magnolia Ecopower Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaicm9358C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1762/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Chetan Orchardes Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aadcc7086L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस.एस. िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/s. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/DC, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [PAN:AADCH3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आय…

Rakshit Estates Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3615/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandrarakshit Estates Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hsiidc Limited. Building, Vanijya Nikunj, Plot No. 11, Basement, J 2.1, Udhyogvihar, Phase-V, Sector 83, Gurgaon, Haryana Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Aagcr0135G Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Ramesh Chander, Adv Revenue By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/10/2025

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…1 Rakshit Estates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘B’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rakshit Estates Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, HSIIDC Limited. Building, Vanijya Nikunj, Plot No. 11, Basement, J 2.1, UdhyogVihar, Phase-V, Sector 83, Gurgaon, Haryana Gurgaon, Haryana PAN: AAGCR0135G Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Ramesh Chander, Adv Revenue by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 29/10/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal i…

Bms Tradewings Pvt. Ltd., Jagdalpur vs. ACIT-1(1), Raipur

In the result appeal of the assessee stands allowed, in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 539/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 539/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…t. Ltd. in ITA no. 79/RPR/2020 vide order dt. 24.01.2024, relevant finding at para no. 13.  Ashok Devichand Jain vs Union of India (2023) 452 ITR 43 (Born.).  Peter Vaz vs CIT (2021) 436 ITR 616 (Born.), relevant para no. 44.  CIT vs Ramesh D. Patel (2014) 362 ITR 492 (Guj.). Jurisdiction wrongly assumed. Consequent assessment order illegal and unsustainable. Reliance on: -  Ashok Devichand Jain vs. Union of India (2023) 452 ITR 43 (Bom.).  Pr. CIT vs Shree Shoppers Ltd. ITAT no. 39 of 2023 dated 15.03.2023 of Calcutta High Court 9 BMS Tradewings Pvt. Ltd., Jagdalpur vs. ACIT-1(1), Raipur No notice u/s 143…

Sanand Sankardas, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Int. Tax Ward 4(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1102/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 144C(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 195Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1102/M/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mr. Sanand Sankardas, B-03 Om Siv Society, Datar Colony, Ashok Nagar Road, Bhandup (E), Mumbai-400042. PAN: BORPS0620C (Appellant) Vs. Income Tax Officer Int. Tax, Ward 4(2)(1), Room No. 632, Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400051. (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by Revenue by Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : Shri Aditya Ramachandran, A.R. : Shri Krishna Kumar, D.R. : 19.06.2025 : 27.06.2025 ORDER Per : Raj Kumar Chauh…

Hemendra Ramji Vira, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2472/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 56Section 68

…e past held the field on the aforesaid issue. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Peter Vaz (supra) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540/225 Taxman 411/362 ITR 492 (Gujarat), had held, that as Section 124 of the Act pertains to territorial jurisdiction vested with an AO under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 120, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 which places an embargo on an assessee to raise an objection as regards the validity of the jurisdiction of an A.O would get…

Hemendra Ramji Vira, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2471/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 56Section 68

…e past held the field on the aforesaid issue. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Peter Vaz (supra) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540/225 Taxman 411/362 ITR 492 (Gujarat), had held, that as Section 124 of the Act pertains to territorial jurisdiction vested with an AO under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 120, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 which places an embargo on an assessee to raise an objection as regards the validity of the jurisdiction of an A.O would get…

Hemendra Ramji Vira, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2470/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 56Section 68

…e past held the field on the aforesaid issue. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Peter Vaz (supra) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540/225 Taxman 411/362 ITR 492 (Gujarat), had held, that as Section 124 of the Act pertains to territorial jurisdiction vested with an AO under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 120, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 which places an embargo on an assessee to raise an objection as regards the validity of the jurisdiction of an A.O would get…

Hemendra Ramji Vira, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2469/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 56Section 68

…e past held the field on the aforesaid issue. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Peter Vaz (supra) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540/225 Taxman 411/362 ITR 492 (Gujarat), had held, that as Section 124 of the Act pertains to territorial jurisdiction vested with an AO under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 120, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 which places an embargo on an assessee to raise an objection as regards the validity of the jurisdiction of an A.O would get…

Hemendra Ramji Vira, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2468/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 56Section 68

…e past held the field on the aforesaid issue. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Peter Vaz (supra) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540/225 Taxman 411/362 ITR 492 (Gujarat), had held, that as Section 124 of the Act pertains to territorial jurisdiction vested with an AO under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 120, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 which places an embargo on an assessee to raise an objection as regards the validity of the jurisdiction of an A.O would get…

Hemendra Ramji Vira, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2467/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2013-14
Section 127(2)Section 132Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 56Section 68

…e past held the field on the aforesaid issue. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Peter Vaz (supra) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540/225 Taxman 411/362 ITR 492 (Gujarat), had held, that as Section 124 of the Act pertains to territorial jurisdiction vested with an AO under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 120, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 which places an embargo on an assessee to raise an objection as regards the validity of the jurisdiction of an A.O would get…

Hemendra Ramji Vira, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6405/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 56Section 68

…e past held the field on the aforesaid issue. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Peter Vaz (supra) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540/225 Taxman 411/362 ITR 492 (Gujarat), had held, that as Section 124 of the Act pertains to territorial jurisdiction vested with an AO under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 120, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 which places an embargo on an assessee to raise an objection as regards the validity of the jurisdiction of an A.O would get…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jubilant Enpro Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3615/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandrarakshit Estates Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hsiidc Limited. Building, Vanijya Nikunj, Plot No. 11, Basement, J 2.1, Udhyogvihar, Phase-V, Sector 83, Gurgaon, Haryana Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Aagcr0135G Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Ramesh Chander, Adv Revenue By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/10/2025

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…1 Rakshit Estates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘B’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rakshit Estates Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, HSIIDC Limited. Building, Vanijya Nikunj, Plot No. 11, Basement, J 2.1, UdhyogVihar, Phase-V, Sector 83, Gurgaon, Haryana Gurgaon, Haryana PAN: AAGCR0135G Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Ramesh Chander, Adv Revenue by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 29/10/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal i…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Avo Carbon Holding Llc, Usa

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 1760/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/S. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aadch3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1760 & 1761/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 M/S. Magnolia Ecopower Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Narne Income Tax/Dc, Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Manikonda, Central Circle 1(2), Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aaicm9358C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1762/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Chetan Orchardes Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 51, Park View Street, Near Gandhi Income Tax/Dc, Road, Alwarthirunagar, Tiruvallur, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai 600 087. Chennai. [Pan:Aadcc7086L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 153A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस.एस. िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1758 & 1759/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17 M/s. Hillview Renewable Power Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Private Limited, (Studio N) Sy No. 70, Income Tax/DC, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [PAN:AADCH3040D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आय…

Dolphin Promoters and Builders, Raipur vs. Addl.CIT, Range-1, Raipur

ITA 58/RPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 58/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal & Vimal KumarFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 68Section 801B(10)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 58/RPR/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dolphin Promoters and Builders, v Addl. CIT, Range-1, A-1, Near Sai Mandir, Devendra Nagar s C R Building, Civil Lines, Road, Sai Nagar, Raipur, C.G.-492001 Raipur, C.G.- 492001 PAN: AAEFD2588E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) . . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal & Vimal Kumar Agrawal, CA’s राज" क…

Madurai Tuticorin Expressways Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle - 5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all three appeals of the assesssee, i

ITA 1143/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad "ी रवीश सूद, माननीय "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मधुसूदन साव"डया, माननीय लेखा सद"य SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1143/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2015-16) The Ookal Farmers Service VS. ITO, Cooperative Society Limited, Ward-1, Warangal. Warangal. PAN: AACAT0993J (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1144/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) The Ookal Farmers Service VS. ITO, Cooperative Societ…

Cyient Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above observation

ITA 913/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.913/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Ankit Jain Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Agwpa4459K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A(1)Section 292CSection 69

…foresaid issue. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Peter Vaz & Ors. Vs, CIT & Ors. (2021) 436 ITR 616(Bom) and the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramesh D. Patel [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540/225 Taxman 411/362 ITR 492 (Gujarat), had held that as Section 124 of the Act pertains to territorial jurisdiction vested with an AO under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 120, therefore, the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 124 which puts a restriction on an assessee to object to the validity of the jurisdiction of an A.O would get triggered only in a…

Inmobi Technology Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeals filed by assessee for AY

ITA 303/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A Nos. 303 & 839/Bang/2022

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya, Sr. Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A Nos. 303 & 839/Bang/2022 Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 APPELLANT M/s. InMobi Technology Services Pvt. Ltd., 7th Floor, Block Delta, B Block, Embassy Tech Square, Kadubeesanahalli, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore - 560 103. PAN: AACCI7117F RESPONDENT The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 3(1)(1), Vs. Bangalore. Assessee by : Shri Chaitanya, Sr. Advocate a/w. Shri L. Bharath, CA Revenue by : Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 22-04-2024 Date of…

DCIT Central Circle-01, Delhi vs. Dl Heera Bhai Jewellery Arcade Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 61/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi26 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT [AS (Third Member)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 154

…xiii) Pavitra Realcon (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2017] 87 taxmann.com 142 (Del. Trib.) (xiv) ACIT v. M/s. N.S. Software, ITA No.3161/Del/2016 (Del. Trib.) (xv) ACIT v. Empire Casting Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.4018/Del/2011 (Del. Trib.) (xvi) Abhay Kumar Shroff v. CIT [2007 ] 290 ITR 114 (Jharkhand HC) (xvii) Fragrance Constructions v. ACIT, ITA No.2311/Del/2013 & Ors. (Del. Trib.) (xviii) CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Del. HC) 18. Per contra, Ld. Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue strongly contested the submissions of the assessee. He submitted, undoubtedly the assessment order has been passed u/s 143(3) of th…

Dl Heera Bhai Jewellery Arcade Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-1, New Delhi

ITA 951/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi26 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT [AS (Third Member)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 154

…xiii) Pavitra Realcon (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2017] 87 taxmann.com 142 (Del. Trib.) (xiv) ACIT v. M/s. N.S. Software, ITA No.3161/Del/2016 (Del. Trib.) (xv) ACIT v. Empire Casting Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.4018/Del/2011 (Del. Trib.) (xvi) Abhay Kumar Shroff v. CIT [2007 ] 290 ITR 114 (Jharkhand HC) (xvii) Fragrance Constructions v. ACIT, ITA No.2311/Del/2013 & Ors. (Del. Trib.) (xviii) CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Del. HC) 18. Per contra, Ld. Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue strongly contested the submissions of the assessee. He submitted, undoubtedly the assessment order has been passed u/s 143(3) of th…

Addl CIT R G 7(1), Mumbai vs. Novartis India Ltd ( Formerly Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd. ), Mumbai

ITA 6772/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

…ecision of non- jurisdictional High Court is neither binding decision for another High Court nor for Courts or Tribunals outside its territorial jurisdiction. Instead the Hon'ble Tribunal relied on the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Ramesh D Patel (362 ITR 493) (Guj) wherein it was held that the provisions of sec. 124 of the IT Act are clearly concerning with territorial jurisdiction of the officer and has not relevance in so far as the inherent jurisdiction for passing an assessment order of assessment u/s.153 of the Act is concerned, when no such an authorisation u/s.132 was issued or requisition u/s…