Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

284 ITR 323Supreme Court of India2006#13 most cited

What is Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

1,842

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Goetze (India) Ltd v CIT · new claim by assessee · additional ground · revised return of income · section 139(5) · Assessing Officer powers · CIT(A) powers · ITAT powers · assessment proceedings · fresh claim · 284 ITR 323

Also reported as

157 Taxmann 1204 CTR 182157 Taxmann.com 1

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 115JBSection 37(1)Section 147Section 153ASection 143(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 139(5)book profitssection 115jrevenue expendituresection 115jbcapital expendituredisallowance under section 14asection 32section 254section 37(1)transfer pricing adjustmentliable to tax

Judgments citing Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

Dilip Kumar, Doranda Ranchi vs. DCIT Circle 1, Ranchi

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 233/RAN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurydilip Kumar, D.C.I.T., 4B, Dr. K.D. Choudhury Apartment, Circle-1, Vs. South Office Para, Doranda, Ranchi. Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Adlpk 4085 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 154Section 50Section 50C(2)Section 54

…e matter to the file of Assessing Officer directing him to examine the claim of assessee with regard to Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz (India) Ltd. Vs CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC). The relevant para of the ITAT order is extracted as under: Dilip Kumar Vs DCIT "3. It emerges from a perusal of the CIT(A)'s finding that the lower authorities have not made any reference to DVO u/s 50(C)(2) of the Act. Mr. Das vehemently contends that the assessee nowhere raised such a plea in the lower proceedings. I find no merit in Reve…

M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-8(1), Ltu-II, Chennai

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

ITA 2379/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Nathala Ravi Babu, CIT
Section 14A

…laim in the return of income, the AO had rightly denied the raised this claim in the return of income, the AO had rightly denied the same as the Hon’ble Supreme Cou same as the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goezte India Ltd Vs Goezte India Ltd Vs CIT (284 ITR 323) had prevented the AO from entertaining any new had prevented the AO from entertaining any new had prevented the AO from entertaining any new claim, which was otherwise not made in the return of income. The claim, which was otherwise not made in the return of income. The claim, which was otherwise not made in the return of income. The relevant f…

M/S. Merino Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 292/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A No.174/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata…………………….................................……Revenue Vs. M/S Merino Industries Ltd.…………....................................……...…..…..Assessee 5, Alexandra Court, 60/1, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata – 700020. [Pan: Aaacc9186C] I.T.A No.292/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Merino Industries Ltd …………………….…….......................…… Assessee 5, Alexandra Court, 60/1, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata – 700020. [Pan: Aaacc9186C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata.…….................................……....…........….. Revenue Appearances By: Shri Shyam Sundar Jha, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Prakash Nath Barnwal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 06, 2025 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Cross-Appeals, One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Against The Common Order Dated 09.10.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since The Facts & Issued Involved In Both The Appeals Are Identical & Both The Appeals Are Arising Out Of The Same

Section 2(22)Section 250Section 801A

…ction. He, therefore, disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee. 18. In first appeal, the ld. CIT(A), though, observed that the reliance of the Assessing Officer on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. Reported in 284 ITR 323 to hold that since the said claim was not in the return of income hence, such claim cannot be made during assessment proceedings, was misplaced. He, however, observed that as per the provisions of section 80A(5) of the Act, the assessee otherwise was required to make such claim in the return of income. He, however, held that otherwise there was n…

DCIT, Circle - 12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Merino Industries Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 174/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 2(22)Section 250Section 801A

…uction. He, therefore, disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee. 18. In first appeal, the ld. CIT(A), though, observed that the reliance of the Assessing Officer on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. Reported in 284 ITR 323 to hold that since the said claim was not in the return of income hence, such claim cannot be made during assessment proceedings, was misplaced. He, however, observed that as per the provisions of section 80A(5) of the Act, the assessee otherwise was required to make such claim in the return of income. He, however, held that otherwise there was n…

Bharat Utkarsh Sewa Sansthan, Janjgir-Champa vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee society is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 423/RPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.423/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Bharat Utkarsh Sewa Sansthan Bharat Utkarsh College Of Education C/O. R.C. Pandey, P.O-Sarkhon Naila, District: Janjgir Champa Pan: Aacab0445A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…d of appeal raised by the assessee society does not merit admission and, thus, rejected. 12 Bharat Utkarsh Sewa Sansthan Vs. ITO, Ambikapur Before parting, I may herein observe that the Hon’ble Apex Court in 22. the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC), had observed, that the A.O cannot allow a deduction other than that claimed by the assessee, except for, where the same had been raised based on a revised return of income filed by the latter. As in the present case before me, the assessee society had voluntarily disclosed gross income of Rs.14,32,822/- (supra) in its original return of inc…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax(E)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai A P M C, Mumbai

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

ITA 5613/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 131Section 139Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…x (Appeal) has erred in granting exemption u/s 11 of the Act to the assessee when the claim of exemption u/s 11 was not originally made in the ROI and the power to entertain such claim is not open to the authority of Ld. CIT(A) in the Judgment of Goetze India 284 ITR 323? 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in granting exemption u/s 11 of the Act to the assessee without considering that the objects and income received by the assessee section 2(15) are attracted and applicable, thereby violating the provisions of Section 2(15) of the I…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax(E)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai A P M C, Mumbai

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

ITA 5611/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 131Section 139Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…x (Appeal) has erred in granting exemption u/s 11 of the Act to the assessee when the claim of exemption u/s 11 was not originally made in the ROI and the power to entertain such claim is not open to the authority of Ld. CIT(A) in the Judgment of Goetze India 284 ITR 323? 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in granting exemption u/s 11 of the Act to the assessee without considering that the objects and income received by the assessee section 2(15) are attracted and applicable, thereby violating the provisions of Section 2(15) of the I…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CC-3(2), Central Range-3, Mumbai, Air India Building, Nariman Point vs. Aarti Durgs Limited, Sion (E)

In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3071/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar & Shri Vipul JainFor Respondent: Dr. K. R. Subash &
Section 139Section 14ASection 2(24)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3071/MUM/2023 (A.Y. 2014-15) ACIT-CC 3(2), v/s. Aarti Drugs Ltd. 1913, 19th Floor, Air India बनाम Plot No. 9 D, 3rd Floor, Building, Nariman Point, Mahendra Industrial Mumbai-400021 Estate, Road No. 29, Sion East, Mumbai-400022 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACA4410D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Assessee by : Shri S. S. Nagar & Shri Vipul Jain Revenue by : Dr. K. R. Subash & Shri Ram Krishn Kedia Date of Hearing 31.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement…

DCIT CC 3(2), Central Range-3, Mumbai, Air India Building, Nariman Point vs. Aarti Durgs Limited, Sion (E)

In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3070/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar & Shri Vipul JainFor Respondent: Dr. K. R. Subash &
Section 139Section 14ASection 2(24)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3070/MUM/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) ITA No. 3071/MUM/2023 (A.Y. 2014-15) ITA No. 3068/MUM/2023 (Α.Υ. 2015-16) ACIT-CC 3(2), v/s. Aarti Drugs Ltd. 1913, 19th Floor, Air India बनाम Plot No. 9 D, 3rd Floor, Building, Nariman Point, Mahendra Industrial Mumbai-400021 Estate, Road No. 29, Sion East, Mumbai-400022 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACA4410D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Assessee by : Shri S. S. Nagar & Shri Vipul Jain Revenue by : Dr. K. R. Subash & S…

Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya, Kota vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the ground no

ITA 936/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…he regular return nor in the return filed u/s 153A. Therefore even though the claim of agriculture income is verifiable from the documents filed but the same is not allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetz India Ltd. Vs. CIT 284 ITR 323. 7. The assessee filed detailed submission before Ld. CIT(A) on the remand report of AO (PB 30-36). Reference was also made to the order of Hon’ble Settlement Commission in Salaf Group cases where the additional agriculture income not shown in the return but offered before the Hon’ble Commission was accepted. However, the Ld. CIT(A) at Para 4.6 o…

Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya, Kota vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the ground no

ITA 935/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…he regular return nor in the return filed u/s 153A. Therefore even though the claim of agriculture income is verifiable from the documents filed but the same is not allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetz India Ltd. Vs. CIT 284 ITR 323. 7. The assessee filed detailed submission before Ld. CIT(A) on the remand report of AO (PB 30-36). Reference was also made to the order of Hon’ble Settlement Commission in Salaf Group cases where the additional agriculture income not shown in the return but offered before the Hon’ble Commission was accepted. However, the Ld. CIT(A) at Para 4.6 o…

Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya, Kota vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the ground no

ITA 934/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…he regular return nor in the return filed u/s 153A. Therefore even though the claim of agriculture income is verifiable from the documents filed but the same is not allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetz India Ltd. Vs. CIT 284 ITR 323. 7. The assessee filed detailed submission before Ld. CIT(A) on the remand report of AO (PB 30-36). Reference was also made to the order of Hon’ble Settlement Commission in Salaf Group cases where the additional agriculture income not shown in the return but offered before the Hon’ble Commission was accepted. However, the Ld. CIT(A) at Para 4.6 o…

Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya, Kota vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the ground no

ITA 933/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…he regular return nor in the return filed u/s 153A. Therefore even though the claim of agriculture income is verifiable from the documents filed but the same is not allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetz India Ltd. Vs. CIT 284 ITR 323. 7. The assessee filed detailed submission before Ld. CIT(A) on the remand report of AO (PB 30-36). Reference was also made to the order of Hon’ble Settlement Commission in Salaf Group cases where the additional agriculture income not shown in the return but offered before the Hon’ble Commission was accepted. However, the Ld. CIT(A) at Para 4.6 o…

Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya, Kota vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the ground no

ITA 932/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…he regular return nor in the return filed u/s 153A. Therefore even though the claim of agriculture income is verifiable from the documents filed but the same is not allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetz India Ltd. Vs. CIT 284 ITR 323. 7. The assessee filed detailed submission before Ld. CIT(A) on the remand report of AO (PB 30-36). Reference was also made to the order of Hon’ble Settlement Commission in Salaf Group cases where the additional agriculture income not shown in the return but offered before the Hon’ble Commission was accepted. However, the Ld. CIT(A) at Para 4.6 o…

Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya, Kota vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the ground no

ITA 931/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…he regular return nor in the return filed u/s 153A. Therefore even though the claim of agriculture income is verifiable from the documents filed but the same is not allowable in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetz India Ltd. Vs. CIT 284 ITR 323. 7. The assessee filed detailed submission before Ld. CIT(A) on the remand report of AO (PB 30-36). Reference was also made to the order of Hon’ble Settlement Commission in Salaf Group cases where the additional agriculture income not shown in the return but offered before the Hon’ble Commission was accepted. However, the Ld. CIT(A) at Para 4.6 o…

ACIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Hdfc Bank Ltd ( Merged Entity Hdfc Investments Limited ), Mumbai

ITA 2980/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4315 and 4316/MUM/2007 Assessment Years: 2002-03 and 2003-04 ITA Nos.3861 and 3862/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2004-05 and 2005-06 ITA Nos.5033/Mum/2010, 5442/Mum/2011, 2868/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2008-09 ITA Nos.2093, 5885, 2609, 2610 and 4983/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 ITA Nos.2665 and 2666/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2015-16 ITA Nos.1890, 1891, 1892, 1893 and 3717/Mum/2023 and Assessment Years: 2…

Hdfc Bank Limited( As Successor to Hdfc Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT- 2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2666/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate andFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4315 and 4316/MUM/2007 Assessment Years: 2002-03 and 2003-04 ITA Nos.3861 and 3862/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2004-05 and 2005-06 ITA Nos.5033/Mum/2010, 5442/Mum/2011, 2868/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2008-09 ITA Nos.2093, 5885, 2609, 2610 and 4983/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 ITA Nos.2665 and 2666/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2015-16 ITA Nos.1890, 1891, 1892, 1893 and 3717/Mum/2023 and Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2020-…

Hdfc Bank Limited (As Successor to Hdfc Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2665/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4315 and 4316/MUM/2007 Assessment Years: 2002-03 and 2003-04 ITA Nos.3861 and 3862/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2004-05 and 2005-06 ITA Nos.5033/Mum/2010, 5442/Mum/2011, 2868/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2008-09 ITA Nos.2093, 5885, 2609, 2610 and 4983/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 ITA Nos.2665 and 2666/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2015-16 ITA Nos.1890, 1891, 1892, 1893 and 3717/Mum/2023 and Assessment Year…

Hdfc Bank Ltd., (As Successor to Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3717/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate andFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4315 and 4316/MUM/2007 Assessment Years: 2002-03 and 2003-04 ITA Nos.3861 and 3862/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2004-05 and 2005-06 ITA Nos.5033/Mum/2010, 5442/Mum/2011, 2868/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2008-09 ITA Nos.2093, 5885, 2609, 2610 and 4983/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 ITA Nos.2665 and 2666/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2015-16 ITA Nos.1890, 1891, 1892, 1893 and 3717/Mum/2023 and Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 20…

ACIT-1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd., Delhi

ITA 2049/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

…HDFC Bank Ltd. ITA No.4315/MUM/2007 and Ors. AYs 2002-03 to 2020-21 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 4315 and 4316/MUM/2007 Assessment Years: 2002-03 and 2003-04 ITA Nos. 3861 and 3862/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2004-05 and 2005-06 ITA Nos. 5033/Mum/2010, 5442/Mum/2011, 2868/Mum/2012 Assessment Years: 2006-07 to 2008-09 ITA Nos. 2093, 5885, 2609, 2610 and 4983/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 ITA Nos. 2665 and 2666/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2015-1…