Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

Lupin Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Circle-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and the revenue are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm)

…during the year under consideration. Since it was a new claim made without filing revised return of income, the AO rejected the same by 11 M/s. Lupin Limited following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd vs. CIT (284 ITR 323)(SC). 8.1 We notice that the assessee did not contest the decision of AO rendered on this issue before Ld CIT(A). Even though this claim has been made without filing revised return of income, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the very same case of Goetze (India) Ltd (supra) that its decision will not impinge the power of the Tribunal to admi…

Gautamkumar & Co, Mumbai vs. DCIT 16(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…d 15/09/2008 wherein the declaration made in the survey was retracted. This retraction statement was considered by the ld. AO as an afterthought. The ld. AO applied the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 284 ITR 323 and stated that assessee in order to avail any benefit could do only by way of filing a valid return. Accordingly, he ignored the affidavit filed by the assessee and proceeded to disallow the depreciation of Rs.2,51,33,166/- in the assessment. 4.1. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee gave detailed written submissions together with various case l…

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Hikal Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharish & Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit – 3(1)(2), Vs. M/S Hikal Ltd Room No. 607, 6Th Floor 717/718, Maker Aayakar Bhavan, Chambers V, Mumbai – 400020. Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach0383A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Smt .Madhumalti Gosh.Cit Dr Respondent By : Sri.Sanjay Parikh.Ar Date Of Hearing 16.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.01.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai, Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

…ras 15, 24, 25, 26, 28) CIT v. Rasoi Ltd. [2011] 335 ITR 438 (Cal) (para 15, 28) CIT v. Shree Balaji Alloys [2016] 7 ITR-OL 50 (SC) (para 15) CIT (Principal) v. Shyam Steel Industries Ltd. [2018] 12 ITR-OL 342 (Cal) (para 15) Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC) (paras 13, 31) Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 228 ITR 253 (SC) (paras 11, 24, 25, 26, 28) Shree Balaji Alloys v. CIT [2011] 333 ITR 335 (J&K) (para 15) 9. Similarly the Ld.AR has also relied on the decision of the Honble Tribunal in the case of M/s Baltiboi Ltd Vs. DCIT ITA no 6228/M/2017 dated 21-5-2021 has observed at page…

Kishori Dwarkanath Pandey, Mumbai vs. ITO-32(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं. 2558/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2014-15) Kishori Dwarakanath Pandey, 604, Dahisar Jaya Apartment Chsl, Ramkumat Thakur Road, Dahisar East, Mumbai – 400 068. Pan: Ahspp-7195-A ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer -32(2)(2),Mumbai, Room No.304, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Prateek Jha & Prayag Jha ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 03/01/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/01/2023 आदेश/ Order

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “ एच”, मुंबई पीठ "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी गगन गोयल, लेखाकार सद"य के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “ H ”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं. 2558/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2014-15) Kishori Dwarakanath Pandey, 604, Dahisar Jaya Apartment CHSL, Ramkumat Thakur Road, Dahisar East, Mumbai – 400 068. PAN: AHSPP-7195-A ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer -32(2)(2),Mumbai, Room No.304, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "…

DCIT - CC-3(2), Mumbai vs. Aarti Drugs Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…of the Act in respect of profits and gains derived by the undertaking engaged in the generation of steam was made for the first time before the learned CIT(A) by way of additional ground. We find that Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetz India Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2006] 284 ITR 323 and Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders Pvt. Ltd., [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) has held that the appellate authority can entertain a fresh claim made by the assessee, even if such a claim was not made in return of income or by way of revised return of income. Thus, we find no infirmity in the impugned order…

Cma Cgm Sa, Mumbai vs. Dy.Commm of Income Tax (International Taxationa)-2(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1820/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) बिधम/ Cma Cgm Sa Dcit, (International C/O Cma Cgm Agencies Taxation) Circle-2(1)(1) Vs. Room No. 1713, 17Th (India) Pvt. Ltd. One International Center, Floor, Air India Building, Tower 3, 8Th Floor, Senapati Nariman Point, Mumbai- Bapat Marg, Elphinstone 400021. Road West, Mumbai- 400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc9048G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Poojari/Jasmin Amalsadvala Revenue By: Shri Milind Chavan (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Final Assessment Order Dated 19/05/2021, Passed Under Section 143(3) R/W Section 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), Pursuant To The Directions Dated 12/05/2021, Issued By The Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (“Ld. Drp”) Under Section 144C(5) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year 2018–19. 2. In This Appeal, Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: “General 1. Erred In Assessing The Total Income Of The Appellant At Inr 46,94,25,922/- As Against Revised Income Of Inr 52,35,195/- As Per Revised Computation Submitted By The Appellant During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings;

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1820/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) बिधम/ CMA CGM SA DCIT, (International C/o CMA CGM Agencies Taxation) Circle-2(1)(1) Vs. Room No. 1713, 17th (India) Pvt. Ltd. One International Center, Floor, Air India Building, Tower 3, 8th Floor, Senapati Nariman Point, Mumbai- Bapat Marg, Elphinstone 400021. Road West, Mumbai- 400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCC9048G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. Assessee by: Shri Rajesh Poojar…

ACIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Amrut Enterprises, Mumbai

Appeal of the Assessee is allowed and revenue appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.1215/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Acit 25(2) Mumbai. Amrut Enterprises. Room No. 220, 2Nd Flr, 203, Avon Arcade, Dasrathlal बिधम/ Kautilya Bhavan Bkc Road, Vile Parle(W), Vs. Bandra(E), Mumbai- Mumbai- 400056 400051 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No Aaofa3252E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.1017 & 1018/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Amrut Enterprises. Jcit 25(2), Mumbai. Room 203, Avon Arcade, No. 502, 5Th Flr, Pratyakshar बिधम/ Dasrathlal Road, Vile Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra(E), Parle(W), Mumbai-400051 Vs. Mumbai- 400056 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No Aaofa3252E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. S Khandelwal & Shri Nilkanth Khandelwal प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Sonha, Sr.Ar. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ 04.10.2022 : Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / 02.01.2023 : Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla:

…fficer, after reproducing the Assessee‟s reply and explanation, rejected the claim and distinguished the decisions relied upon by the Assessee held that in view of the decision of „Hon‟ble Supreme Court‟ in the case of “Goetze” (India) Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 284 ITR 323, Assessee 8 I.T.A. No. 1017,1215 & 1018/Mum/2020 AMRUT ENTERPRISES cannot may ammendment in the return of income by way of any application at the assessment stage without revising the return. Thus, he rejected claim of the Assessee the Mesne profit is capital receipt. 10. However, Ld. Assessing Officer while coming to the conclusion has mainly…

Amrut Enterprises, Mumbai vs. JCIT 25(2), Mumbai

Appeal of the Assessee is allowed and revenue appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.1215/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Acit 25(2) Mumbai. Amrut Enterprises. Room No. 220, 2Nd Flr, 203, Avon Arcade, Dasrathlal बिधम/ Kautilya Bhavan Bkc Road, Vile Parle(W), Vs. Bandra(E), Mumbai- Mumbai- 400056 400051 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No Aaofa3252E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.1017 & 1018/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Amrut Enterprises. Jcit 25(2), Mumbai. Room 203, Avon Arcade, No. 502, 5Th Flr, Pratyakshar बिधम/ Dasrathlal Road, Vile Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra(E), Parle(W), Mumbai-400051 Vs. Mumbai- 400056 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No Aaofa3252E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. S Khandelwal & Shri Nilkanth Khandelwal प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Sonha, Sr.Ar. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ 04.10.2022 : Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / 02.01.2023 : Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla:

…fficer, after reproducing the Assessee‟s reply and explanation, rejected the claim and distinguished the decisions relied upon by the Assessee held that in view of the decision of „Hon‟ble Supreme Court‟ in the case of “Goetze” (India) Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 284 ITR 323, Assessee 8 I.T.A. No. 1017,1215 & 1018/Mum/2020 AMRUT ENTERPRISES cannot may ammendment in the return of income by way of any application at the assessment stage without revising the return. Thus, he rejected claim of the Assessee the Mesne profit is capital receipt. 10. However, Ld. Assessing Officer while coming to the conclusion has mainly…

Amrut Enterprises, Mumbai vs. JCIT 25(2), Mumbai

Appeal of the Assessee is allowed and revenue appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.1215/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Acit 25(2) Mumbai. Amrut Enterprises. Room No. 220, 2Nd Flr, 203, Avon Arcade, Dasrathlal बिधम/ Kautilya Bhavan Bkc Road, Vile Parle(W), Vs. Bandra(E), Mumbai- Mumbai- 400056 400051 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No Aaofa3252E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.1017 & 1018/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Amrut Enterprises. Jcit 25(2), Mumbai. Room 203, Avon Arcade, No. 502, 5Th Flr, Pratyakshar बिधम/ Dasrathlal Road, Vile Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra(E), Parle(W), Mumbai-400051 Vs. Mumbai- 400056 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No Aaofa3252E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. S Khandelwal & Shri Nilkanth Khandelwal प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Sonha, Sr.Ar. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ 04.10.2022 : Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / 02.01.2023 : Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla:

…fficer, after reproducing the Assessee‟s reply and explanation, rejected the claim and distinguished the decisions relied upon by the Assessee held that in view of the decision of „Hon‟ble Supreme Court‟ in the case of “Goetze” (India) Ltd Vs. CIT reported in 284 ITR 323, Assessee 8 I.T.A. No. 1017,1215 & 1018/Mum/2020 AMRUT ENTERPRISES cannot may ammendment in the return of income by way of any application at the assessment stage without revising the return. Thus, he rejected claim of the Assessee the Mesne profit is capital receipt. 10. However, Ld. Assessing Officer while coming to the conclusion has mainly…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Raymond Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…capital loss of Rs. 6,89,82,716/- in respect of Units of US64 whereas the same was not claimed by the asssessee in its return of income because of which this loss was disallowed by the A.O. by following the apex court judgment in the case of Goetze India Ltd (284 ITR 323) wherein it has been held that any claim has to be made in the return of income." 4. We shall deal with the above issues ground wise. M/s. Raymond Limited Ground No. 1: "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Learned CITA) has erred in holding that no additions/ disallowances can be made in an order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153A…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Raymond Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…capital loss of Rs. 6,89,82,716/- in respect of Units of US64 whereas the same was not claimed by the asssessee in its return of income because of which this loss was disallowed by the A.O. by following the apex court judgment in the case of Goetze India Ltd (284 ITR 323) wherein it has been held that any claim has to be made in the return of income." 4. We shall deal with the above issues ground wise. M/s. Raymond Limited Ground No. 1: "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Learned CITA) has erred in holding that no additions/ disallowances can be made in an order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153A…