Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

Mahindra Overseas Investment Company (Mauritius) Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax-CPC Bengaluru, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Smt. Renu Jauhrimahindra Overseas Vs. Acit, Circle -7(1)(1) Investment Company Aayakar Bhavan, Mk (Mauritius) Ltd, Road, Mumbai Ifs Court Bank Street, Tnenteight, Cybercity Mauritius Pan/Gir No. Aalcm8059M (Applicant) (Respondent)

…d. DR argued that even an additional ground cannot be entertained by Ld. CIT(A) since the assessee has not filed the revised return and supported his arguments by referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd Vs. CIT 2006, 284 ITR 323 (SC). 5. In this regard Ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee drawn our attention towards documents filed by the assessee before the revenue authorities which comprises of Return Of Income which is at paper book page No. 1 to 97 in the said return the entire facts are contained with regard to type of company, residential status, schedule of…

Todi Industries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 896/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-16) Todi Industries Pvt. Ltd. V/S. Ito-8(3)(2), Mumbai 1St Floor, Todi Estate, Sun बिधम Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mill Compound, Lower Road, Maharashtra- Parel (W), Maharashtra- 400020 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaact4620Q Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी

…wherein the co- ordinate bench has decided it in favour of the assessee. With regard to the question raised during the course of the hearing, regarding the applicability of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd v/s CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323, Ld. AR has made the following written submissions: “1.6 ...................................................... In this regard, at the outset the Appellant Assessee humbly submits that the ld. AO has not invoked the decision of Apex Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra). The ld. AO has acknowledged that Appellant Assessee has filed a revised retur…

DCIT, Cir-7(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Nse Clearing Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain: A.Y : 2016-17 Nse Clearing Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Exchange Plaza, Bandra Kurla Tax, Circle – 7(1)(1), Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai. (Respondent) Mumbai 400 051. Pan : Aaacn2642L (Appellant) : A.Y : 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Nse Clearing Limited Tax, Circle – 7(1)(1), Exchange Plaza, Bandra Kurla Mumbai. (Appellant) Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051. (Respondent) Pan : Aaacn2642L

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : A.Y : 2016-17 NSE Clearing Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Exchange Plaza, Bandra Kurla Tax, Circle – 7(1)(1), Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai. (Respondent) Mumbai 400 051. PAN : AAACN2642L (Appellant) : A.Y : 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner of Income Vs. NSE Clearing Limited Tax, Circle – 7(1)(1), Exchange Plaza, Bandra Kurla Mumbai. (Appellant) Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051. (Respondent) PAN : AAACN2642L Assessee by : Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Counsel & Shri Harsh…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- 3(4) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. The Shipping Corporation of India Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…core activities, and therefore, could not be assessed to tax. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, by relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Goetze India Ltd. v/s CIT, ITAs No.1751 & 1971/Mum/2024 (A.Ys. 2018-19) 4 reported in [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC), rejected the plea of the assessee on the basis that the assessee has not filed a revised return claiming deduction of interest income. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. At the outset, we find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court…

The Shipping Corporation of India, Mumbai vs. Dy Comm of Income Tax-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…income of Rs.84,01,13,062 constitutes profit from core activities, and therefore, could not be assessed to tax. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, by relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetze India Ltd. v/s CIT, reported in [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC), rejected the plea of the assessee on the basis that the assessee has not filed a revised return claiming deduction of interest income. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. At the outset, we find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court i…

Rolta India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

…that the additional claim can be made only by filing revised return of income and the 8 ITA No.2144/Mum/2023 - Rolta India Ltd. CIT(A) placed reliance in this regard on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz (India) Ltd. vs CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC) 12. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. During the course of hearing the ld. AR took the bench through the relevant documents with regard to the inadvertent error committed by the assessee by not claiming 200% of the Capital Expenditure incurred towards Scientific Research. The ld. AR also submitted that the amount whic…

National Stock Exchange of India Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax -Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2006-07

…ment proceedings by furnishing revised computation along with giving detailed working and explanation which is identical to preceding years. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC), whereby it was held that “nothing impinges on the power of the appellate authorities to entertain such a claim of the assessee”. 27.1. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers and Share Holders [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom), wherein it was held that assessee is…

Rhodianyl.Sas, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhrirhodianyl Sas V/S. Dcit, International Tax 25, Rue De Clinchy, Paris, बनाम Circle -4(1)(1), Mumbai France Air India Building, Outside India. Nariman Point, Mumbai Maharashtra-400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaicr6367G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

…020-21 Rhodianyl. SAS The Ld. DRP/ the LD.AO erred in rejecting claim of the Assessee to reduce capital gains as per the revised computation of total income by placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323. The Appellant therefore submits and prays that the Ld. AO be directed to consider the revised computation of total income filed during the course of scrutiny assessment. 5. Ground No. 5: Incorrect computation of addition to the total income Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erre…

Feedertech Pte Lyd, Nerul, Navi Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Nariman Point

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

…hat the AO does not have power to reduce the income declared by the assessee in the return. On further appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the decision of the AO by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz (India) Ltd. vs. CIT [284 ITR 323 (SC)]. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A). 3. Ground No.1 pertains to the legal issue of the AO passing the final assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act without issuing the draft assessment order as is required under section 144C of the Act. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a non-resid…

DCIT, Mum vs. Shelter Developers, Mum

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is

…re in the returns (as originally filed), as revenue expenditure. As a result, the objection now taken by the department cannot be countenanced. 11. Learned ASG had placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT [2006] 157 Тахтап 1/284 ITR 323 in support of the objection pressed before us that it is not open to entertain fresh claim before the ITAT. According to him, the decision in National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. (supra) merely permits raising of a new ground concerning the claim already mentioned in the returns and not an inconsistent or contrary plea or a new claim. We are not impre…