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 367,368 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

Hcl Comnet Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1113/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmahcl Comnet Limited Vs. Dcit, 806, Sidharth, Circle-11(1), 96, Nehru Place, Room No. 416, New Delhi C.R.Building, Pan : Aach9667H New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HCL Comnet Limited Vs. DCIT, 806, Sidharth, Circle-11(1), 96, Nehru Place, Room No. 416, New Delhi C.R.Building, PAN : AACH9667H New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Shri Arpit Goel, CA Revenue by Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 05.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 10.05.2023 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The appeal has been filed by the Assessee against order dated 02.12.2016 passed in appeal no. 236/2016-17 for…

Vodafone India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed, in the terms aforesaid

ITA 6718/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 6718/Mum/2012 (िन.व. 2008-09) Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Known As ‘Vodafone Essar Limited’) Peninsula Corporate Park, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan:Aaach-5332-B बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 7(3), ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Mumbai. अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By :Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate With S/Shri Vibhu Jain & A.K.Jawadwala ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By :Shri Anand Mohan, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate with S/Shri Vibhu Jain and A.K.JawadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 40Section 80I

…ation in the nature of capital gain before the Assessing Officer. Since, the claim was not made in the return of income, the Assessing Officer did not entertain the claim of assessee in the light of decision rendered in the case of Goetze(India) Ltd. vs. CIT, 284 ITR 323. The ld. Departmental Representative fairly admitted that the DRP has failed to adjudicate the issue raised in ground No.11 of the present appeal. 4.2 In respect of ground No.13, the ld. Departmental Representative submits that DRP has granted substantial relief to the assessee, however, to the extent 6 the assessee failed to furnish supporting…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kostub Investment Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 2281/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…mmediately on appearance though had filed the paper book. As the cross objections being questions of law can very well be admitted by this appellate authority in the light of judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Geotze India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC). Accordingly, the delay is condoned and cross objections are taken up for adjudication on merits prior to the appeal as the same have raised pure questions of law. 6. Ground no. 1 of Cross Objections; It can be observed that following are the relevant dates and sequence of events which are canvassed by Ld Sr. Counsel for the assessee : 1st…

Vivek Agnihotri, Mumbai vs. ITO 16 (1)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 4493/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalevivek Agnihotri Vs. Ito – 16(1)(5), 1505/1506, Amarnath Aayakar Bhavan, Tower, Yari Road, M.K.Road, Versova, Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400061. Pan/Gir No. : Adypa6052B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.Ar Respondent By : Mr. Ankush Kapoor.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Prcommissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit)-16, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 50C

…al of return of income goes to show that the assessee did not disclosed the entire transaction in the return of income The assessee did not claim any exemption u/s 54 in the return of income. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Goetze India Ltd Vs. CIT [284 ITR 323] (SC) precludes entertainment of such deduction which is not claimed in the return of income This has resulted in underassessment of income of Rs.2,39,73,600/-. Vivek Agnihotri, Mumbai. Inview of the above, you are requested to show cause as to why the assesseement order dated 28.02.2015 should not be cancelled with a direction to the A.O.to pass…

DCIT, Central Circle - 3(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Kaushalya Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2544/KOL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.2543&2544/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata............................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Kaushalya Infra. Development Corp. Ltd.........…….....…..…..Respondent Hb-170, Sector-Iii, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700106. [Pan: Aacck1581F] Appearances By: Shri P. P Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: Both The Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Dated 28.09.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.2543/Kol/2018 For Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Original Assessment In The Case Of The Assessee Was Completed U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 31.12.2008. In The Said Assessment, The Claim Of Deduction U/S 80Ia(4) Of Rs.

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 801ASection 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘बी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A Nos.2543&2544/Kol/2018 Assessment years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 DCIT, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata............................................……Appellant vs. M/s Kaushalya Infra. Development Corp. Ltd.........…….....…..…..Respondent HB-170, Sector-III, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700106. [PAN: AACCK1581F] Appearances by: Shri P. P Barman, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of th…

DCIT, Central Circle - 3(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Kaushalya Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed

ITA 2543/KOL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.2543&2544/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 Dcit, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata............................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Kaushalya Infra. Development Corp. Ltd.........…….....…..…..Respondent Hb-170, Sector-Iii, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700106. [Pan: Aacck1581F] Appearances By: Shri P. P Barman, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 05, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: Both The Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Dated 28.09.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Since, Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Appeals, Hence These Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. The Appeal In Ita No.2543/Kol/2018 For Assessment Year 2006-07 Is Taken As Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Original Assessment In The Case Of The Assessee Was Completed U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 31.12.2008. In The Said Assessment, The Claim Of Deduction U/S 80Ia(4) Of Rs.

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 801ASection 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘बी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A Nos.2543&2544/Kol/2018 Assessment years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 DCIT, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata............................................……Appellant vs. M/s Kaushalya Infra. Development Corp. Ltd.........…….....…..…..Respondent HB-170, Sector-III, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700106. [PAN: AACCK1581F] Appearances by: Shri P. P Barman, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of th…

Al Kabir Polytecnic, Jamshedpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jamshedpur

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 59/RAN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi28 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.59/Ran/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Al Kabir Polytechnic..…………..…...…………….................……...…..….. Appellant Kabir Welfare Trust, Kapali Kabir Nagar, Mango, Jamshedpur. [Pan: Aaifa3884A] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur...………………..…….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sharwan Kumar Jha, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 01, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.08.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 251Section 254

…I.T.A. No.59/Ran/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Al Kabir Polytechnic IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.59/Ran/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Al Kabir Polytechnic..…………..…...…………….................……...…..….. Appellant Kabir Welfare Trust, Kapali Kabir Nagar, Mango, Jamshedpur. [PAN: AAIFA3884A] vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jamshedpur...………………..…….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sharwan Kumar Jha, Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. DR…

Suman Gupta, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2015

ITA 3860/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Ita Nos. 3860 & 3859/Mum/2018 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Smt. Suman Gupta, Dy. Cit Cc-4(2), 6Th New Harileela House, Air India Building, 19Th Mint Road, Fort, Vs. Floor, Room No. 1918, Mumbai-400 001. Nariman Point, Mumbai-21. Pan No. Ahqpg 0220 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bhupendra Karkhanis & Mr. Aakash Marthak & Mr. Vijay Bhatt, Ars Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 27/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Bhupendra Karkhanis &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…he return of income. revising the return of income. The settled legal position as emerges position as emerges from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Goetz India Ltd. Goetz India Ltd. from the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in v/s CIT, [2006] 284 ITR 323(SC) v/s CIT, [2006] 284 ITR 323(SC) and the decision of the Hon’ble and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Pruthvi Brokers and CIT v/s Pruthvi Brokers and Jurisdictional High Court in Shareholders Pvt. Ltd., [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) is that the Shareholders Pvt. Ltd., [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom Shareholders Pvt. Ltd.,…

Addl.CIT, Special Range-4, New Delhi vs. Idemitsu Lube India P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, Cross objection of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7256/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita Nos. 7255 & 7256/Del/2018 (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Acit Vs. Idemitsu Lube India P. Ltd. Special Range -4, 603, 6Th Floor, Erose New Delhi Corporate Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110 019 Pan No. Aabci 5684 A (Appellant) (Respondent) & Co Nos. 36 & 35/Del/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.7255 & 7256/Del/2018) (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Idemitsu Lube India P. Ltd. Vs. Acit 603, 6Th Floor, Erose Special Range -4, Corporate Tower, Nehru New Delhi Place, New Delhi-110 019 Pan No. Aabci 5684 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…sed return. We find that Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mitesh Impex reported in [2014] 46 taxman.com 30 (Gujarat) after considering the decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. (supra) and Goetze (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 and various other decisions has held that the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. is confined to the powers of the assessing officer and accepting the claim without revised return. It has further observed that when it comes to the power of Appellate Commissioner or Tribunal, they have jurisdiction to entertain a new groun…

Addl.CIT, Special Range-4, New Delhi vs. Idemitsu Lube India P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, Cross objection of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7255/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita Nos. 7255 & 7256/Del/2018 (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Acit Vs. Idemitsu Lube India P. Ltd. Special Range -4, 603, 6Th Floor, Erose New Delhi Corporate Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110 019 Pan No. Aabci 5684 A (Appellant) (Respondent) & Co Nos. 36 & 35/Del/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.7255 & 7256/Del/2018) (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14) Idemitsu Lube India P. Ltd. Vs. Acit 603, 6Th Floor, Erose Special Range -4, Corporate Tower, Nehru New Delhi Place, New Delhi-110 019 Pan No. Aabci 5684 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…sed return. We find that Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mitesh Impex reported in [2014] 46 taxman.com 30 (Gujarat) after considering the decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NTPC Ltd. (supra) and Goetze (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 and various other decisions has held that the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. is confined to the powers of the assessing officer and accepting the claim without revised return. It has further observed that when it comes to the power of Appellate Commissioner or Tribunal, they have jurisdiction to entertain a new groun…

M/S. Frick India Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 850/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2023AY 2010-11
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ome filed on 29.03.2011, in the revised computation of income filed during on 30.08.2011 and 09.11.2011. These claims were merely rejected by the lower authorities by appling the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323. 4.2. We find that in the recent Supreme Court decision rendered in the case of Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 443 ITR 250, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after considering the decision rendered in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. had reiterated that the decision in Goetze (India) Ltd. make it very clear that limitation period for considering a…

Frick India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1083/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2023AY 2009-10
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ome filed on 29.03.2011, in the revised computation of income filed during on 30.08.2011 and 09.11.2011. These claims were merely rejected by the lower authorities by appling the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323. 4.2. We find that in the recent Supreme Court decision rendered in the case of Wipro Finance Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 443 ITR 250, the Hon’ble Supreme Court after considering the decision rendered in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. had reiterated that the decision in Goetze (India) Ltd. make it very clear that limitation period for considering a…

Navneet Dutta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 67(1), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2299/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Vikram Kakar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Verma, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 24

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2299/Del./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Navneet Dutta, vs. ACIT, Circle 67 (1), Flat No.A – 104, Plot No.5 – A, New Delhi. Vishrantika Cooperative Group Housing Society, Sector 3, Dwarka, New Delhi – 110 078. (PAN : AHPPD1036K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Vikram Kakar, Advocate Shri Rajesh Mahana, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Sumit Kumar Verma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.03.2023 Date of Order : 12.04.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE…

The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-25(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 7245/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7245/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम The State Trading Corporation Of Acit India Ltd., Vs. Circle 25(1), Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan, C.R. Building, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Aaact0102F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 154Section 250

…Springs Ltd. as in this case the assessee had raised an additional ground before the Tribunal even though there was no claim made in the return of income. The Tribunal considering the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs. CIT, 284 ITR 323 admitted the additional grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. 8. We further observed that the Ld.CIT(Appeals) over looked the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT, [187 ITR 688] which was referred to by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the very same judgment on the powers of the appella…

St. John Freight Systems Pvt. Ltd., Tutucorin vs. DCIT, CC-1, Madurai

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2900/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे%ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"",एवं (ी अ"ण खोडिपया, माननीय लेखा सद) के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.188 & 2898 to 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2010-11 v. M/s.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, C-98, SIPCOT Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [PAN:AAACS 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant…

St. John Freight Systems Ltd., Tuticorin vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Madurai

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2899/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे%ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"",एवं (ी अ"ण खोडिपया, माननीय लेखा सद) के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.188 & 2898 to 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2010-11 v. M/s.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, C-98, SIPCOT Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [PAN:AAACS 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant…

St. John Freight Systems Ltd., Tuticorin vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Madurai

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 2898/CHNY/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे%ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"",एवं (ी अ"ण खोडिपया, माननीय लेखा सद) के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.188 & 2898 to 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2010-11 v. M/s.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, C-98, SIPCOT Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [PAN:AAACS 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant…

St. John Freight Systems Ltd., Tuticorin vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Madurai

In the result appeals filed in ITA Nos

ITA 188/CHNY/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.188 & 2898 To 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11 V. M/S.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., Of Income Tax, C-98, Sipcot Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [Pan:Aaacs 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Adv. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.03.2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे%ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"",एवं (ी अ"ण खोडिपया, माननीय लेखा सद) के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.188 & 2898 to 2900/Chny/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2007-08 to 2010-11 v. M/s.St.John Freight – The Dy. Commissioner- Systems Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, C-98, SIPCOT Complex, Central Circle-1, Harbour Express Road, Madurai. Tuticorin-628 008. [PAN:AAACS 4697 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guwahati vs. Abci Infrastructures Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 2/GTY/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

…Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the A.O hasno power to entertain a claimmade by the Assessee otherwise than by filing a revised return – the Ld. DR has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd.Vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (ii) That, since the Assessee had not filed the return of income within the due date prescribed/s 139(1) of the Act, the right course of action for the Assessee would be to file condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) & (c) of the Act with the Appropriate Authority for filing of return of income, which was not done. (iii) That the Hon’ble Jodhpur ITAT…

Abci Infrastructures Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 43/GTY/2022[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati05 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44A

…Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the A.O hasno power to entertain a claimmade by the Assessee otherwise than by filing a revised return – the Ld. DR has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd.Vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (ii) That, since the Assessee had not filed the return of income within the due date prescribed/s 139(1) of the Act, the right course of action for the Assessee would be to file condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) & (c) of the Act with the Appropriate Authority for filing of return of income, which was not done. (iii) That the Hon’ble Jodhpur ITAT…