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.

How many judgments cite Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT?

1,842 judgments on BharatTax cite Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (284 ITR 323), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 115JB, Section 37(1), Section 147, Section 153A.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (284 ITR 323)

Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue in I

ITA 5396/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. P.C. Chhotoray, Spl. Counsel, [D/R]

Section 10Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…imed vide revised computation of income filed during the course of assessment proceedings vide letter dated 12/11/2008. 47.1. The AO was of the firm belief that the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323 (SC), squarely apply and as the said loss was not claimed vide revised return of income, the AO denied the claim of loss. 48. When the matter was agitated before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) accepted the view taken by the AO without realizing the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has not put any fetter on the powers of the First I.T.A. No. 5…

Chiramal Kunjavoo Chakunny George, Trichur vs. The ITO Ward 2(2), Thrissur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 587/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhchiramal Kunjavoo Chakunny The Income Tax Officer George Ward - 2(2), Thrissur Chiramal Kunjavoo House Kizhakumpattukara Vs. Nehru Bazar, East Fort P.O. Trichur 680005 [Pan: Acupg7573J] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 54F

…ion 251(1)(a) w.e.f. 01.06.2001 as the corresponding statutory expression ‘he may set aside’ stands omitted. Learned counsel further submits that the assessee has filed his additional submissions before the CIT(A) in light of Goetze (India) Ltd. v CIT [(2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC)] as well which has not been adjudicated on merits. 3. Be that as it may, once we restore the assessee’s instant case back to the Assessing Officer, we make it clear that the taxpayer shall indeed be at liberty to plead and prove all the facts within three effective opportunities of hearing at his own risk and responsibility in consequential…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 171/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 40A(3)

…rovisions of section 153A/153C are not made for the benefit of the assessee. Return filed in response to notice u/s 153A/153C is not substitute of revised return for the assessee to claim such benefit. Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs CIT (284 ITR 323) ruled that a fresh claim before the assessing officer can be made only by filing of Revised Return and not otherwise. Therefore, whatever claim the assessee has not made while filing the return u/s 139(1)/139(4) of the Act, he cannot make fresh claim by filing the return u/s 153A/153C of the Act and reduce the taxable income originally declared.…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 170/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 40A(3)

…rovisions of section 153A/153C are not made for the benefit of the assessee. Return filed in response to notice u/s 153A/153C is not substitute of revised return for the assessee to claim such benefit. Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs CIT (284 ITR 323) ruled that a fresh claim before the assessing officer can be made only by filing of Revised Return and not otherwise. Therefore, whatever claim the assessee has not made while filing the return u/s 139(1)/139(4) of the Act, he cannot make fresh claim by filing the return u/s 153A/153C of the Act and reduce the taxable income originally declared.…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 169/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 40A(3)

…rovisions of section 153A/153C are not made for the benefit of the assessee. Return filed in response to notice u/s 153A/153C is not substitute of revised return for the assessee to claim such benefit. Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs CIT (284 ITR 323) ruled that a fresh claim before the assessing officer can be made only by filing of Revised Return and not otherwise. Therefore, whatever claim the assessee has not made while filing the return u/s 139(1)/139(4) of the Act, he cannot make fresh claim by filing the return u/s 153A/153C of the Act and reduce the taxable income originally declared.…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 158/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 40A(3)

…rovisions of section 153A/153C are not made for the benefit of the assessee. Return filed in response to notice u/s 153A/153C is not substitute of revised return for the assessee to claim such benefit. Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs CIT (284 ITR 323) ruled that a fresh claim before the assessing officer can be made only by filing of Revised Return and not otherwise. Therefore, whatever claim the assessee has not made while filing the return u/s 139(1)/139(4) of the Act, he cannot make fresh claim by filing the return u/s 153A/153C of the Act and reduce the taxable income originally declared.…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 157/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 40A(3)

…rovisions of section 153A/153C are not made for the benefit of the assessee. Return filed in response to notice u/s 153A/153C is not substitute of revised return for the assessee to claim such benefit. Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs CIT (284 ITR 323) ruled that a fresh claim before the assessing officer can be made only by filing of Revised Return and not otherwise. Therefore, whatever claim the assessee has not made while filing the return u/s 139(1)/139(4) of the Act, he cannot make fresh claim by filing the return u/s 153A/153C of the Act and reduce the taxable income originally declared.…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 156/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 40A(3)

…rovisions of section 153A/153C are not made for the benefit of the assessee. Return filed in response to notice u/s 153A/153C is not substitute of revised return for the assessee to claim such benefit. Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs CIT (284 ITR 323) ruled that a fresh claim before the assessing officer can be made only by filing of Revised Return and not otherwise. Therefore, whatever claim the assessee has not made while filing the return u/s 139(1)/139(4) of the Act, he cannot make fresh claim by filing the return u/s 153A/153C of the Act and reduce the taxable income originally declared.…

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are disposed off as under:-

ITA 155/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 153 To 155/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ackpa6762B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 आदेश/Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 153 to 155/CHD/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The ACIT, बनाम Central Circle-II, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ACKPA6762B अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( PHYSICAL HERING ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR सुनवा…

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are disposed off as under:-

ITA 154/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 153 To 155/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ackpa6762B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 आदेश/Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 153 to 155/CHD/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The ACIT, बनाम Central Circle-II, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ACKPA6762B अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( PHYSICAL HERING ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR सुनवा…

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are disposed off as under:-

ITA 153/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 153 To 155/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ackpa6762B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 आदेश/Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 153 to 155/CHD/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The ACIT, बनाम Central Circle-II, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ACKPA6762B अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( PHYSICAL HERING ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR सुनवा…

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 22(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3579/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 35

…ame was rejected. He prayed that this issue may be remitted back to Assessing Officer. In this regard, he submitted that even the issue under consideration is first time claimed before the Assessing Officer and as per the decision of Goetze India Ltd. vs. CIT 284 ITR 323, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that such claims can be entertained by the appellate authorities and Assessing Officer may not have power to entertain the fresh claims. By relying on the above decision, he prayed that the issue may be remitted to Assessing Officer to verify lawful claim of the assessee and allow the same. 30. On the other hand, ld. D…

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 24(2) New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3578/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 35

…ame was rejected. He prayed that this issue may be remitted back to Assessing Officer. In this regard, he submitted that even the issue under consideration is first time claimed before the Assessing Officer and as per the decision of Goetze India Ltd. vs. CIT 284 ITR 323, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that such claims can be entertained by the appellate authorities and Assessing Officer may not have power to entertain the fresh claims. By relying on the above decision, he prayed that the issue may be remitted to Assessing Officer to verify lawful claim of the assessee and allow the same. 30. On the other hand, ld. D…

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. JCIT Range 24 New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3577/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 35

…ame was rejected. He prayed that this issue may be remitted back to Assessing Officer. In this regard, he submitted that even the issue under consideration is first time claimed before the Assessing Officer and as per the decision of Goetze India Ltd. vs. CIT 284 ITR 323, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that such claims can be entertained by the appellate authorities and Assessing Officer may not have power to entertain the fresh claims. By relying on the above decision, he prayed that the issue may be remitted to Assessing Officer to verify lawful claim of the assessee and allow the same. 30. On the other hand, ld. D…

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. Addl CIT Rang 24 New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeal being ITA No

ITA 3576/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 35

…ame was rejected. He prayed that this issue may be remitted back to Assessing Officer. In this regard, he submitted that even the issue under consideration is first time claimed before the Assessing Officer and as per the decision of Goetze India Ltd. vs. CIT 284 ITR 323, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that such claims can be entertained by the appellate authorities and Assessing Officer may not have power to entertain the fresh claims. By relying on the above decision, he prayed that the issue may be remitted to Assessing Officer to verify lawful claim of the assessee and allow the same. 30. On the other hand, ld. D…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sew Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1717/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.K. ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Smt. Mamata Choudhary

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…:1: ITA Nos. 1717 to 1720/Hyd/2017 & IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SPECIAL BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE JUSTICE (Retd.) C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT, SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1717 to 1720 & 1722/Hyd/2017 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2012-13 and 2014-15 Vs. M/s. SEW Infrastructure Deputy Commissioner of Limited, Income Tax, 6-3-871, Snehlata, Central Circle – Greenland Roads, 2(2), Hyderabad. Begumpet, Hyderabad. PAN : AADCS4061P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.K. Chaitanya, Senior Advocate and Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate. Revenue by: Smt. Ma…

M/S Shriram Investments vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax III Chennai

C.A. No.-006274-006274 - 2013Supreme Court04 Oct 2024

Bench: The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (For Short, ‘Cit (Appeals)’). By The Order Dated 21St July 1993, The Cit (Appeals) Dismissed The Appeal On The Ground That In View Of Section 139(5) Of The It Act, The Revised Return Filed On 29Th October 1991 Was Barred By Limitation. Digitally Signed By Ashish Kondle Date: 2024.10.04 16:03:01 Ist Reason: Signature Not Verified

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)(a)Section 254

…2024 INSC 760 Civil Appeal No.6274 of 2013 Page 1 of 7 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6274 OF 2013 M/s. Shriram Investments … Appellant versus The Commissioner of Income Tax III Chennai … Respondent J U D G M E N T ABHAY S. OKA, J. FACTUAL ASPECTS 1. The appellant-assessee filed a return of income on 19th November 1989 under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘IT Act’) for the assessment year 1989-90. On 31st October 1990, the appellant filed a revised r…

Munni Devi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur

ITA 678/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT D/R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250Section 54B

…t is now settled law that A.O. should pass correct assessment as per law and cannot take benefit of any mistake committed by Ld. A.O. moreso for which claim made before A.O. was found correct. The decision of Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd.'s case [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC) is a short one rendered in the context of the order of the Tribunal as regards exercise of powers of rectification under section 254. The decision has also been understood in a number of decisions of the Tribunal that the decision could not refer to a case where a claim was made during the course of assessment. Even granting that the Assessi…

Iifl Samasta Finance Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1054/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(7)Section 270A(8)Section 40Section 43

…ITA No.1054/Bang/2024 IIFL Samasta Finance Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1054/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 IIFL Samasta Finance Limited 110/3, Lalbagh Main Road Krishnappa Layout, Delhi Bangalore 560 027 Vs. DCIT Circle-6(1)(1) Bangalore RESPONDENT PAN NO: AAACC4577H APPELLANT Appellant by Respondent by Sri H.V. Gowthama, A.R. Sri Chinmay Anand Jain, D.R. Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 03.07.2024 27.09.2024 ORDER PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal at th…

Paradip Port Authority, Jagatsinghpur vs. DCIT, Circle1(1), Cuttack

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

ITA 210/CTK/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Sept 2024AY 2005-06

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 260Section 263

…return of income filed by him. The assessee had not filed the revised return of income claiming exemption of long term capital gain u/s 10(38) of the Act. The CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd Vs CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC) and was of the view that the assessee cannot make a claim which is not supported by a revised return of income. He therefore held that the AO rightly dismissed the application of the assessee u/s 154 of the Act. Aggrieved. the assessee went in appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata. The Hon'ble ITAT held that, "I have heard the rival submi…

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

Chiramal Kunjavoo Chakunny George, Trichur vs. The ITO Ward 2(2), Thrissur

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 22(2), Delhi

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 24(2) New Delhi, Delhi

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. JCIT Range 24 New Delhi, Delhi

Subros Limited, Delhi vs. Addl CIT Rang 24 New Delhi, Delhi

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sew Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad

M/S Shriram Investments vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax III Chennai

Munni Devi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur

Iifl Samasta Finance Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Bangalore

Paradip Port Authority, Jagatsinghpur vs. DCIT, Circle1(1), Cuttack