What is Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. v. JCIT authority for?

The assessed income can be lower than the returned income. Authorities are required to assist assessees in correcting over-assessments, even if it means reducing the income below the returned figure.

How many judgments cite Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. v. JCIT?

99 judgments on BharatTax cite Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. v. JCIT (245 ITR 84), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. v. JCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 144C(13), Section 115JB, Section 143(2), Section 147.

Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. v. JCIT (245 ITR 84)

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Mentor Capital Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1479/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri N.R. SureshFor Respondent: Smt Jothilakshmi Nayak

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ssee has submitted before us that the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in rejecting the claim of the assessee on this ground was not justified. He has further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of "Gujarat Gas Ltd. vs. JCIT" (2000) 245 ITR 84. In the said case, the words of the Circular No.549, para 5.12, dt. 31st October, 1989, providing that the assessed income under section 143(3) shall not be less than the returned income was considered by the Hon'ble High Court and it was held that as per proviso to section 119 of the Act, the Board cannot issue instructions to the Income Tax Auth…

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Mentor Capital Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1476/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri N.R. SureshFor Respondent: Smt Jothilakshmi Nayak

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ssee has submitted before us that the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in rejecting the claim of the assessee on this ground was not justified. He has further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of "Gujarat Gas Ltd. vs. JCIT" (2000) 245 ITR 84. In the said case, the words of the Circular No.549, para 5.12, dt. 31st October, 1989, providing that the assessed income under section 143(3) shall not be less than the returned income was considered by the Hon'ble High Court and it was held that as per proviso to section 119 of the Act, the Board cannot issue instructions to the Income Tax Auth…

Income Tax Officer (It)-4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Mr. Prabhakar Raghavendra Rao, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3985/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Income Tax Officer (Intl. Vs. Mr. Prabhakar Raghavendra Tax) – 4(1)(1), Rao 1729, Air India Building Flat No.602, Palm Paradise Nariman Point Palm Beach Road Mumbai – 400 021 Sector-17, Sanpada, Navi Mumbai – 400 705 Pan/Gir No. Aafpr3259K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 43B

…3 of the Income tax Act, the possible remedy to make such a claim lied only with the CBDT. ii. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the CIT(A) has erred in applying the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Gas Ltd ( 245 ITR 84), since in the said case, the AO had concluded that the assessed income was lower than the returned income but he denied the refund to the assessee by relying on the CBDT circular 549 dated 31.10.1989; iii. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the CIT(A) has erred in applying the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 8(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Sajjan India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee and revenue for AY 2011-12 are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4729/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwaldcit-8(1)(2) M/S Sajjan India Ltd., Room No. 651, 6Th Floor, Matulya Centre, ‘A’ No.2, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ground Floor, Senapati Bapat Mumbai-20. Marg, Lower Parel, Vs. Mumbai-400013. Pan: Aaacs6498M Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh (Dr) Respondent By : Shri S.L. Jain (Ca) Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.01.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Chaudhary Arun KumarFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Jain (CA)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 8D(2)(ii)

…tax can only be levied by the authority of law. The Hon‟ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Bakelite Hylam Limited (1999) 237 ITR 392(AP) as well Hon;ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Gas Company Limited v. JCIT reported in (2000) 245 ITR 84(Guj) has taken a similar view. Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Gas Company Limited(supra) has arrived at the said decision after considering CBDT circular No. 549 dated 31-10-1989 (1990) 182 ITR (st) 1 while arriving at the said decision that assessed income can fall below returned income in proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(2).…

Ratnam Metals & Tubes Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, Ground No.1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2081/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2081/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri P. D. Shah, A.R

Section 80Section 80I

…rmissible. The learned AR submitted that such premise for denial of lawful relief by the CIT(A) is squarely at odds with the long line of judicial precedents including the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd. vs. JCIT 245 ITR 84 (Guj); CIT vs. Milton Laminates Ltd. Tax Appeal No. 1022 of 2010 judgment dated 24.01.2012; CIT vs. Arvind Mills Ltd. Tax Appeal No. 1407 of 2011 judgment dated 05.07.2012; CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) etc. The learned AR thus submitted that the additional claim towards enhanced deduction eligible unde…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shraddha Constructions & Power Generation Pvt. Ltd., Pune

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

ITA 461/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.570/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)

…if any. Such matters can be brought to the notice of the concerned authority in a case where a refund is due and payable, and the authority concerned, on being satisfied, shall grant appropriate relief.” 34. In the case of Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Vs. JCIT (245 ITR 84) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the instruction of the CBDT Circular No.549 (Para No.5.12 dated 31-10-1989 is ultra-vires when the said instruction mandates the AO against making the scrutiny assessments at the figure less than that returned by the assessee. Relevant held portion of this judgment reads as under : “Held, that the circula…

Kanchan Singhvi, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2553/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2553/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Kanchan Singhvi, The Income Tax Officer, No. 156, Mint Street, Sowcarpet, Vs. Non Corporate Ward 5(1), Chennai 600 079. Chennai. [Pan: Abhps2435F] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Nithya Sankaran, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Sagadevan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.04.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 5, Chennai, Dated 20.09.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15.The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Long Term Capital Gain Of ₹.18,69,390/-

For Appellant: Ms. Nithya Sankaran, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT

Section 10(38)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…r J. Bahirwani vs. ACIT in ITA Nos.7810/M/2010 & 6599/M/2012 vide order dated 17.06.2015, by following the decision in the case of CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders Pvt. Ltd." (2012) 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) as well as in the case of Gujarat Gas Ltd. vs. JCIT 245 ITR 84 (Guj.), the Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal, granted relief in respect of Capital Gains which were inadvertently included in the return. The Tribunal observed as follows: "Moreover, if the assessee is, otherwise, entitled to a claim of deduction but due to his ignorance or for some other reason could not claim the same in the return of income, but…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune

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

ITA 681/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

…if any. Such matters can be brought to the notice of the concerned authority in a case where a refund is due and payable, and the authority concerned, on being satisfied, shall grant appropriate relief.” 34. In the case of Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Vs. JCIT (245 ITR 84) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the instruction of the CBDT Circular No.549 (Para No.5.12 dated 31-10-1989 is ultra-vires when the said instruction mandates the AO against making the scrutiny assessments at the figure less than that returned by the assessee. Relevant held portion of this judgment reads as under : “Held, that the circula…

Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 699/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

…if any. Such matters can be brought to the notice of the concerned authority in a case where a refund is due and payable, and the authority concerned, on being satisfied, shall grant appropriate relief.” 34. In the case of Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Vs. JCIT (245 ITR 84) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the instruction of the CBDT Circular No.549 (Para No.5.12 dated 31-10-1989 is ultra-vires when the said instruction mandates the AO against making the scrutiny assessments at the figure less than that returned by the assessee. Relevant held portion of this judgment reads as under : “Held, that the circula…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune

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

ITA 682/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 153A

…if any. Such matters can be brought to the notice of the concerned authority in a case where a refund is due and payable, and the authority concerned, on being satisfied, shall grant appropriate relief.” 34. In the case of Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Vs. JCIT (245 ITR 84) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the instruction of the CBDT Circular No.549 (Para No.5.12 dated 31-10-1989 is ultra-vires when the said instruction mandates the AO against making the scrutiny assessments at the figure less than that returned by the assessee. Relevant held portion of this judgment reads as under : “Held, that the circula…

Dciat 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sundaram Multipap Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5327/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 14A

…ssee has submitted before us that the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in rejecting the claim of the assessee on this ground was not justified. He has further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of "Gujarat Gas Ltd. vs. JCIT" (2000) 245 ITR 84. In the said case, the words of the Circular No.549, para 5.12, dt. 31st October, 1989, providing that the assessed income under section 143(3) shall not be less than the returned income was considered by the Hon'ble High Court and it was held that as per proviso to section 119 of the Act, the Board cannot issue instructions to the Income Tax Auth…

Eureka Forbes Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, RG-10, Kolkata

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

ITA 239/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 239/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Eureka Forbes Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Range-10, Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 5767 F ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Samir Chakraborty, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

…rmined as per the provisions of the Act and as per law. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions :- 7 M/s Eureka Forbs Ltd. A.Yr. 2009-10 a) CIT vs Bakelite Hylam Ltd reported in 237 ITR 392 (AP) b) Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd vs JCIT reported in 245 ITR 84 (Guj) c) Milton Laminates Ltd vs CIT reported in 37 taxmann.com 249 (Guj) 7.2. There is no dispute on the fact that no disallowance is to be made under Rule 8D(2)(i) of the Rules in the instant case. 7.3. With regard to disallowance to be made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, we hold that only dividend bearing investments should be taken into…

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1196/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 43-45/Kol/2016 (Arising Out Of I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016) Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. -Vs- Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 28Section 29Section 32Section 32(1)Section 80I

…f the Act can be modified even if the same has gone below the returned income. In support of this proposition, it placed reliance on the following decisions:- a) CIT vs Bakelite Hylam Ltd reported in 237 ITR 392 (AP) b) Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd vs JCIT reported in 245 ITR 84 (Guj) c) Milton Laminates Ltd vs CIT reported in 37 taxmann.com 249 (Guj) 6. The ld CITA in this regard observed :- “I have carefully gone through the submissions of AR of the appellant along with the judgments relied upon by him. I have also perused the rectification order u/s. 154. On perusal of the various judgments relied on by the appellant,…

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1195/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 43-45/Kol/2016 (Arising Out Of I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016) Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. -Vs- Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 28Section 29Section 32Section 32(1)Section 80I

…f the Act can be modified even if the same has gone below the returned income. In support of this proposition, it placed reliance on the following decisions:- a) CIT vs Bakelite Hylam Ltd reported in 237 ITR 392 (AP) b) Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd vs JCIT reported in 245 ITR 84 (Guj) c) Milton Laminates Ltd vs CIT reported in 37 taxmann.com 249 (Guj) 6. The ld CITA in this regard observed :- “I have carefully gone through the submissions of AR of the appellant along with the judgments relied upon by him. I have also perused the rectification order u/s. 154. On perusal of the various judgments relied on by the appellant,…

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1194/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 43-45/Kol/2016 (Arising Out Of I.T.A Nos. 1194-1196/Kol/2016) Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd. -Vs- Jcit, Osd, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 6621 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 28Section 29Section 32Section 32(1)Section 80I

…f the Act can be modified even if the same has gone below the returned income. In support of this proposition, it placed reliance on the following decisions:- a) CIT vs Bakelite Hylam Ltd reported in 237 ITR 392 (AP) b) Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd vs JCIT reported in 245 ITR 84 (Guj) c) Milton Laminates Ltd vs CIT reported in 37 taxmann.com 249 (Guj) 6. The ld CITA in this regard observed :- “I have carefully gone through the submissions of AR of the appellant along with the judgments relied upon by him. I have also perused the rectification order u/s. 154. On perusal of the various judgments relied on by the appellant,…

Priti Devendra Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1511/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1508 To 1511/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 132Section 153C

…if any. Such matters can be brought to the notice of the concerned authority in a case where a refund is due and payable, and the authority concerned, on being satisfied, shall grant appropriate relief.” 34. In the case of Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Vs. JCIT (245 ITR 84) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the instruction of the CBDT Circular No.549 (Para No.5.12 dated 31-10-1989 is ultra-vires when the said instruction mandates the AO against making the scrutiny assessments at the figure less than that returned by the assessee. Relevant held portion of this judgment reads as under : “Held, that the circula…

Priti Devendra Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1510/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1508 To 1511/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 132Section 153C

…if any. Such matters can be brought to the notice of the concerned authority in a case where a refund is due and payable, and the authority concerned, on being satisfied, shall grant appropriate relief.” 34. In the case of Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Vs. JCIT (245 ITR 84) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the instruction of the CBDT Circular No.549 (Para No.5.12 dated 31-10-1989 is ultra-vires when the said instruction mandates the AO against making the scrutiny assessments at the figure less than that returned by the assessee. Relevant held portion of this judgment reads as under : “Held, that the circula…

Priti Devendra Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1509/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1508 To 1511/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 132Section 153C

…if any. Such matters can be brought to the notice of the concerned authority in a case where a refund is due and payable, and the authority concerned, on being satisfied, shall grant appropriate relief.” 34. In the case of Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Vs. JCIT (245 ITR 84) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the instruction of the CBDT Circular No.549 (Para No.5.12 dated 31-10-1989 is ultra-vires when the said instruction mandates the AO against making the scrutiny assessments at the figure less than that returned by the assessee. Relevant held portion of this judgment reads as under : “Held, that the circula…

Priti Devendra Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1508/PUN/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1508 To 1511/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 132Section 153C

…if any. Such matters can be brought to the notice of the concerned authority in a case where a refund is due and payable, and the authority concerned, on being satisfied, shall grant appropriate relief.” 34. In the case of Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. Vs. JCIT (245 ITR 84) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the instruction of the CBDT Circular No.549 (Para No.5.12 dated 31-10-1989 is ultra-vires when the said instruction mandates the AO against making the scrutiny assessments at the figure less than that returned by the assessee. Relevant held portion of this judgment reads as under : “Held, that the circula…

Sajjan India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee and revenue for AY 2011-12

ITA 5550/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N.Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5550/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) बिाम/ Sajjan India Limited Addl. Cit, Range 7(2) C/O Shankarlal Jain & Aayakar Bhawan Associates , 12, Engineer M K Road V. Building, 265, Princess Queens Road Street, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacs6498M (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri. V. Jenardhanan, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…6865/Mum/2016 be levied by the authority of law. The Hon‟ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Bakelite Hylam Limited(1999) 237 ITR 392(AP) as well Hon;ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Gas Company Limited v. JCIT reported in (2000) 245 ITR 84(Guj) has taken a similar view. Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Gas Company Limited(supra) has arrived at the said decision after considering CBDT circular No. 549 dated 31-10-1989 (1990) 182 ITR (st) 1 while arriving at the said decision that assessed income can fall below returned income in proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(2).…

Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. v. JCIT

What is Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. v. JCIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Gujarat Gas Company Ltd. v. JCIT

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Mentor Capital Ltd, Mumbai

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Mentor Capital Ltd, Mumbai

Income Tax Officer (It)-4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Mr. Prabhakar Raghavendra Rao, Mumbai

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 8(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Sajjan India Ltd, Mumbai

Ratnam Metals & Tubes Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Ahmedabad

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shraddha Constructions & Power Generation Pvt. Ltd., Pune

Kanchan Singhvi, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(1), Chennai

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune

Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Shivaji Bhagwanrao Jadhav, Pune

Dciat 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sundaram Multipap Ltd, Mumbai

Eureka Forbes Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, RG-10, Kolkata

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd., Kolkata

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd., Kolkata

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Hi-Tech Systems & Services Ltd., Kolkata

Priti Devendra Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

Priti Devendra Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

Priti Devendra Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

Priti Devendra Shah, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

Sajjan India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(2), Mumbai