How many judgments cite Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT?

95 judgments on BharatTax cite Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (457 ITR 647), spanning 2024 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 151, Section 147, Section 148A, Section 149, Section 144B.

Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

457 ITR 647High Court2023#1186 most cited

What is Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT authority for?

The amended Section 151 of the Income-tax Act, governing the sanction for reassessment proceedings under Sections 148 and 148A, applies to cases initiated under the new reassessment regime. The specified authority for granting such sanction becomes the Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General if more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Siemens Financial Services v Dy CIT · section 151 · section 148 · section 148A · amended section 151 · pre-amended section 151 · specified authority · sanction for reassessment · Principal Chief Commissioner · Principal Director General · more than three years

Also reported as

154 Taxmann.com 159

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 151 Section 147 Section 148A Section 149 Section 144B Section 250 Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 13a section 151(i)section 151(ii)within four years approval under section 151 section 282a(1)section 151(2)order under section 148a(d)section 151(1)specified authority sanctioning authority section 65a

Judgments citing Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

SACHIN MOHANLAL CHORDIA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), PUNE

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as we do not intend to adjudicate other grounds raised by the assessee

ITA 3281/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.3280 & 3281/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Sachin Mohanlal Chordia, V The Income Tax Officer, B-101, Isha Emerald, S. Ward-5(1), Pune. Bibwewdi, Kondhwa Road, Marketyard, Pune- 411037. Pan: Aanpc8554C Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Abhilash Hiran Revenue By Shri Amit Bobade & Shri Sanjay Dhivare (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 05/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30/03/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Bench : These Are Two Appeals Filed By Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) (Nfac) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 For Ay 2016-17, 2017-18 Passed On 22/10/2025 Emanating From Separate Assessment Orders U/S 147 Rws 144 Dated 11/05/2023 & 23/05/2023. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151oSection 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.3280 & 3281/PUN/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Sachin Mohanlal Chordia, V The Income Tax Officer, B-101, Isha Emerald, s. Ward-5(1), Pune. Bibwewdi, Kondhwa Road, Marketyard, Pune- 411037. PAN: AANPC8554C Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Abhilash Hiran Revenue by Shri Amit Bobade & Shri Sanjay Dhivare (Virtual) Date of hearing 05/03/2026 Date of pronouncement 30/03/2026 आदेश/ OR…

SACHIN MOHANLAL CHORDIA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), PUNE

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as we do not intend to adjudicate other grounds raised by the assessee

ITA 3280/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151oSection 250

SURAT GOODS TRANSPORT PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 16(2), MUMBAI

ITA 7556/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 154Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ाय पीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM I.T.A. No. 7556/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Surat Goods Transport Pvt. DCIT, Circle-16(2), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 3rd Floor, Viraj Impex House, 47 Mumbai-400020. Vs. PD Mello Road, Masjid Bunder (East), Mumbai-400009. PAN: AAACS5779B Assessee -अपीलाथ" / Appellant Revenue - ""थ" / Respondent : : Ms. Tisha bagh, Advocate & Assessee by Dhaval Shah, Advocate, AR Revenue by : Dr. Raghvendra P. Chambolkar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.02.2026 : Date of Pronoun…

RAJENDRAKUMAR SHRISHRIMAL,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3282/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3282/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rajendrakumar Shrishrimal, V The Income Tax Officer, 685/3, Anant Vashat, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Bibwewadi, Pune – 411037. Pan: Bjsps9226G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhilash Hiran Revenue By Shri Sadananda – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 11/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12/02/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 16.10.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 Read With Section 144B Of The I.T.Act, 1961 Dated 03.05.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…uding the decision rendered by the Bombay High Court in J M Financial & Investments Consultancy Services (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [W.P. No. 1050 of 2020, dated 04-04-2022] and Siemens Financial Services (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2023] 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bombay)/[2023] 457 ITR 647 / 2023 SCC On Line Bom 2822 ; the Madras High Court in Ramachandran Shivan v. ITO [W.P. No.8570 Of 2023, dated 4-3-2024]and other connected matters, decided on 04.03.2024 and the Orissa High Court in Ambika Iron and Steel (P.)Ltd. v. Pr. CIT [2023] 452 ITR 285 (Ori.)/2022 SCC On Line Ori 4162 and had noted that the question as to which is the spe…

MUKUNDA PANDIT CHAUGULE,PANDHURLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3194/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3194/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mukunda Pandit Chaugule, V The Income Tax Officer, 471A, Shimpi Lane, Pandurli S Nashik. B.O., Pandhurli, Nashik – 422502 Pan: Atepc5427G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Sadananda – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11/02/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 26.09.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The I.T.Act, 1961 Dated 20.04.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144BSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 151Section 151ASection 153CSection 250Section 69A

JIGNESH JANU ABGUL,THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-4(1), THANE

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

ITA 8083/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, CA & Shri Saiprasad GhoshFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik (SR DR)

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…(L) No. 3752 of 2024, which was disposed of vide order dated 27.02.2024. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, after considering the assessee’s petition and relying upon the judgment in Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT & Ors., reported in (2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom), held the impugned notice to be invalid and quashed the same. The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court are reproduced below: “2. Counsel states that in this petition the issue of improper sanction having been obtained has been raised among other grounds. It was raised during the hearing as well. Counsel states that…

KRISHNA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 36(1), DELHI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 166/DEL/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 166/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Mrs. Krishna, Vs Income Tax Officer, G-2/57, Sector-11, Rohini, Ward-36(1), New Delhi-110085 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aijpd1120H Assessee By: Sh. Manish Kumar, Ca & Sh. Gaurav Bhujel, Ar Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1082534866(1) Dated 12.11.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151

…xtends the time limits for completion of specified tasks up to March 31, 2021, itself becomes irrelevant because of the nature of the challenge in these writ petitions. 15. In Siemens Financial Services [Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, (2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom); 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2822; (2023) 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom).] , the Division Bench of the 10 Krishna Bombay High Court concluded, in substantially similar facts and circumstances, that the amended section 151 and not the preamended section 151 would apply. For reasons set out above, I concur with the conclusion in Siemens Financial Services…

SAHIL GARG,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-43(6), DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 76/DEL/2026[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Sahil Garg, Income Tax Officer, G-930, Dsiidc Industrial Ward-43(3), Area, Narela, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Awxpg9338G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Sandeep Goel, Adv. Department By Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr

Section 13ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 29A

…xtends the time limits for completion of specified tasks up to March 31, 2021, itself becomes irrelevant because of the nature of the challenge in these writ petitions. 15. In Siemens Financial Services [Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, (2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom); 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2822; (2023) 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom).] , the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court concluded, in substantially similar facts and circumstances, that the amended section 151 and not the preamended section 151 would apply. For reasons set out above, I concur with the conclusion in Siemens Financial Services [Siemens F…

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4597/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Shri Mani Jain a/w Shri Prateek

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…No. 4595 to 4597/MUM/2025 the end of the A.Y. 2017-18 should have been approved by CCIT level officer rather than a PCIT. 7.3. The appellant has cited the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of "Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. reported in 457 ITR 647 dated 25.08.2003 in her support. However, the information in the public domain shows that in the said decision in 'Siemens (supra) cited by the appellant has been set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC)/[2024] 301 Taxman 238 (SC)/[2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC)[03-10-2024] there…

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4596/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ing beyond three years from the end of the A.Y. 2017-18 should have been approved by CCIT level officer rather than a PCIT. 7.3. The appellant has cited the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of "Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. reported in 457 ITR 647 dated 25.08.2003 in her support. However, the information in the public domain shows that in the said decision in 'Siemens (supra) cited by the appellant has been set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC)/[2024] 301 Taхтап 238 (SC)/[2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC)[03-10-2024] there…

KALPANA RAMESH JAIN,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4595/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Shri Mani Jain a/w Shri Prateek

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 68

ACIT, CIRCLE 24(1) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NILKAMAL CRATES & CONTAINERS, MUMBAI

ITA 3763/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Ghumare, AdvFor Respondent: C.O. No. 146/Mum/2025 in I.T.A. No. 3763/Mum/2025

Section 132Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(1)(ii)

…4 for AY 2016-17 (26.08.2024), wherein a similar issue was came up and decided following the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT [2023] 457 ITR 647. It was the prayer that the notice issued under section 148A(d) and section 148 of the Act, after obtaining the approval of Pr.CIT who was not the specified authority to do so, whereas, in present case, the approval should have been granted by the Pr.CCIT or Pr. Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General as per clause-(ii) of sect…

MR. HARIVIJAY PRALHAD JOSHI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 3(3), PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2297/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2297/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Mr.Harivijay Prahlad Joshi, V The Income Tax 3 & 4, Megh Terrace 55 S Officer, Rambaug, Colony, Behind Ward-3(3), Pune. Chaitanya Health Club, Kothrud, Pune – 411038. Pan: Aappj9257M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Piyush Bafna Revenue By Smt Neha Thakkar – (Virtual) On Rotation Duty Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2018-19 Dated 14.11.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 250(6)

…assessment year, Sanctioning Authority under section 151(ii) of the Act should be the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax ("PCCIT") and not the PCIT. Mr. Gandhi says, as held in Siemens Financial Services (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2023]154 taxmann.com 159/457 ITR 647 (Bom.) , the sanction is invalid and 6 ITA No.2297/PUN/2025 [A] consequently, the order and the consequent notice under section 148A(d) and section 148, respectively, of the Act should be quashed and set aside. 3. In view of these facts and circumstances, we do not see any reason to just grant Rule and keep the matter pending. 4. As held in S…

BABU LAL PATWARI ,UTTARAKHAND vs. DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(), UTTARAKHAND

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

ITA 60/DDN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Chaterjee, CIT DR

Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…i High Court had referred to the earlier decisions including the decision rendered by the 9 Bombay High Court in J M Financial & Investments Consultancy Services (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [W.P. No. 1050 of 2020]; Siemens Financial Services (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2023] 457 ITR 647 (Bom) and Vidyadhar Shetty v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 28(1)(1), Mumbai &Ors. [W.P. No. 10849 of 2024]; the Madras High Court in Ramachandran Shivan v. ITO [W.P. No.8570 of 2023] and the Orissa High Court in Ambika Iron and Steel (P.) Ltd. v. Pr. CIT [2023] 452 ITR 285 (Ori.) and had noted that the question as to which is the specified authority…

INDERJYOT SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 44(1), DELHI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 8758/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 8758/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Inderjyot Singh, Vs Income Tax Officer, 6/2, Dlf Indl. Area, Moti Nagar, Ward-44(1), New Delhi-110015 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abyps9796E Assessee By: Sh. Rajesh Dureja, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.01.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, New Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1082168393(1) Dated 30.10.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Dureja, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151

…xtends the time limits for completion of specified tasks up to March 31, 2021, itself becomes irrelevant because of the nature of the challenge in these writ petitions. 15. In Siemens Financial Services [Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, (2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom); 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2822; (2023) 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom).] , the Division Bench of the 10 Inderjyot Singh Bombay High Court concluded, in substantially similar facts and circumstances, that the amended section 151 and not the preamended section 151 would apply. For reasons set out above, I concur with the conclusion in Siemens Financial…

ROHIT GOEL,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-20, DELHI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 8320/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 8320/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Rohit Goel, Vs Dcit, The Tax Chambers, Central Circle-20, Advocates & Legal Advisors, New Delhi-110055 C-177, Defence Colony, Lgf, New Delhi-110024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amvpg5611Q Assessee By: Ms. Swati Talwar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.01.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2017-18 Arises Against The Cit(A)-27, New Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2024-25/1073465261(1) Dated 19.02.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Ms. Swati Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151

…limits for completion of specified tasks up to March 31, 2021, itself becomes irrelevant because of the nature of the challenge in these writ petitions. 10 Rohit Goel 15. In Siemens Financial Services [Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, (2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom); 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2822; (2023) 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom).] , the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court concluded, in substantially similar facts and circumstances, that the amended section 151 and not the preamended section 151 would apply. For reasons set out above, I concur with the conclusion in Siemens Financial Services [Siemens F…

AJAY NAGPAL ,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-48(1), DELHI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 8145/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 8145/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Ajay Nagpal, Vs Income Tax Officer, 15/10, East Patel Nagar, Ward-48(1), New Delhi-110008 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpn9871D Assessee By: Sh. Pranav Yadav, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.01.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1081608419(1) Dated 09.10.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Pranav Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151

…xtends the time limits for completion of specified tasks up to March 31, 2021, itself becomes irrelevant because of the nature of the challenge in these writ petitions. 15. In Siemens Financial Services [Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, (2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom); 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2822; (2023) 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom).] , the Division Bench of the 10 Ajay Nagpal Bombay High Court concluded, in substantially similar facts and circumstances, that the amended section 151 and not the preamended section 151 would apply. For reasons set out above, I concur with the conclusion in Siemens Financial Serv…

M/S PADMA POLYCHEM PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. NFAC, ASSESSMENT UNIT ITD, DELHI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 5301/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Amitabh Shuklaita No. 5301/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S Padma Polychem Pvt. Ltd., Vs Cit(A)/Nfac, 528/1, Karkari Road, Vishwash Delhi Nagar, Delhi-110032 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcp4479A Assessee By : Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Adv. & Sh. Akshay Gupta, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15, Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1077228877(1) Dated 19.06.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 151

…xtends the time limits for completion of specified tasks up to March 31, 2021, itself becomes irrelevant because of the nature of the challenge in these writ petitions. 15. In Siemens Financial Services [Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, (2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom); 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2822; (2023) 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom).] , the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court concluded, in substantially similar facts and circumstances, that the amended section 151 10 Padma Polychem Pvt. Ltd. and not the preamended section 151 would apply. For reasons set out above, I concur with the conclusion in Siemens…

PUNYA STHALI TIRTH TRUST,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO WARD (EXEMPTION) WARD 2(4), DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5713/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2017-18 Punya Sthali Tirth Trust, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Gang Nahar Road, Ward (Exemption) - 2(4), Muradnagar, Delhi Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aabtp8479P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 13ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 29A

…xtends the time limits for completion of specified tasks up to March 31, 2021, itself becomes irrelevant because of the nature of the challenge in these writ petitions. 15. In Siemens Financial Services [Siemens Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, (2023) 457 ITR 647 (Bom); 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2822; (2023) 154 taxmann.com 159 (Bom).] , the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court concluded, in substantially similar facts and circumstances, that the amended section 151 and not the preamended section 151 would apply. For reasons set out above, I concur with the conclusion in Siemens Financial Services [Siemens F…

TOYOTA BOSHOKU CORPORATION,JAPAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2463/DEL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kashish Gupta, CA

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…otices will also have to go." ITA Nos. 2462 & 2463/Del/2024 Toyota Boshoku Corporation [emphasis added] 15. In a latter decision in Siemens Financial Services (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax: 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 2822/[2023] 154 taxmann.com 159/457 ITR 647 (Bombay), the Bombay High Court reiterated the said view in the following words: "24. As per section 151 of the Act, the "specified authority" who has to grant his sanction for the purposes of section 148 and section 148A is the Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or where there is no Principal Chief Commissioner or Princip…

Showing 1–20 of 95 · Page 1 of 5