H.A. Shah & Co. v. CIT

30 ITR 618High Court1956#2263 most cited

What is H.A. Shah & Co. v. CIT authority for?

The principle of res judicata or estoppel does not strictly apply to Income Tax authorities, including the Tribunal. However, an earlier decision on the same question should not be reopened if it was arrived at after due inquiry, was not arbitrary or perverse, and no fresh facts are presented.

51

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

H.A. Shah & Co. v. CIT · res judicata income tax · estoppel income tax authorities · ITAT previous findings · Tribunal departing earlier decision · Section 143(3) · Section 142(1) · assessment year principle · non-applicability res judicata

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 10(1)Section 115JAASection 115JBSection 142(1)Section 144CSection 14ASection 2(1A)

Issues it is cited on

section 80lsection 80lasection 80ib(4)section 80ia(5)section 80ia(4)(i)section 80ia(8)section 2(1a)section 2(1)initial assessment yearresulting companysection 10(1)captive service provider

Judgments citing H.A. Shah & Co. v. CIT

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 9205/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 2Section 92C

…was Indian company being 100% subsidiary of a foreign company and there was no bar in its claim for exemption u/s 2(1A) r.w.s 10(1) of the Act. He also referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HA Shah & co. vs CIT & Excess 30 ITR 618 to submit that no res-judicata applies to the Tribunal and the Tribunal was justified in law in departing from its previous findings of the circumstances. 12. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR supported the orders of the authorities below. It was submitted by him that the ld. AR could not bring any point or any submission which the Tribunal had n…

PHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI

ITA 1575/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 2Section 92C

…was\nIndian company being 100% subsidiary of a foreign company\nand there was no bar in its claim for exemption u/s 2(1A) r.w.s\n10(1) of the Act. He also referred to the decision of the Hon'ble\nBombay High Court in the case of HA Shah & co. vs CIT &\nExcess 30 ITR 618 to submit that no res-judicata applies to the\nTribunal and the Tribunal was justified in law in departing from\nits previous findings of the circumstances.\n12. On the other hand, the 1d. CIT-DR supported the\norders of the authorities below. It was submitted by him that the\nld. AR could not bring any point or any submission which the\nTribunal…

C.G. BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee company is dismissed

ITA 300/RPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.300/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 C.G Buildcon Private Limited B-1, 3Rd Floor, C.G. Elite, Opp. Mandi Gate, Vidhan Sabha Road, Pandri (C.G.)-492 004 Pan: Aaccc5355P

For Appellant: Shri S.N Agrawal, CA (Joined virtually)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 801Section 80I

…32 C.G Buildcon Private Limited Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur res judicata is not the creature of any statute or the handiwork of any code of law. It is the gift of public policy. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of H.A. Shah and Co. Vs. CIT (1956) 30 ITR 618 (Bom.) has held that “the principle of estoppel or res judicata does not strictly apply to the Income Tax authorities” and yet declaring that “an earlier decision on the same question cannot be reopened if that decision is not arbitrary or perverse, if it had been arrived at after due inquiry, if no fresh facts are placed before the Tribunal givin…

LOKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-45(5), DELHI

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

ITA 1575/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 2Section 92C

…was Indian company being 100% subsidiary of a foreign company and there was no bar in its claim for exemption u/s 2(1A) r.w.s 10(1) of the Act. He also referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HA Shah & co. vs CIT & Excess 30 ITR 618 to submit that no res-judicata applies to the Tribunal and the Tribunal was justified in law in departing from its previous findings of the circumstances. 12. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR supported the orders of the authorities below. It was submitted by him that the ld. AR could not bring any point or any submission which the Tribunal had n…

TODI INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 8(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 895/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 22Section 37

…s been accepted. Since, there is no change in facts or change in law therefore, principle of consistency should be followed and in support he relied upon the following decisions:- Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT [1991] 193 ITR 321 (SC) H.A. Shah & Co. v. CIT [1955] 30 ITR 618 (Bombay HC) CIT v. Neo Poly Pack (P) Ltd.[2000] 245 ITR 492 (Delhi HC) CIT v Goel Builders [2010] 331 ITR 344 (Allahabad HC) Shibani S. Bhojwani v. DCIT [2017] 166 ITD 488 (Mumbai Trib) Samir Bhojwani v. ACIT (ITA No. 331/M/2015) (Mumbai Trib.) ITO v. Rasiklal & Co. (P) Ltd. [2008] 119 ITD 61 (Mumbai Trib.) 7. Ld. Counsel submitted that the princi…

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,, MUMBAI CITY

In the result, appeals of the revenue and CO’s of assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2032/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 90/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri . East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 91/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg0569P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & Respective Cross Objections (‘Co’) Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31-03-2023 For Ay 2008-09 & Ay 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (DR)
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…ies have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: ♦ H.A. Shah & Co v. CIT [1956] (30 ITR 618) (Bom.) ♦ Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. v. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 ♦ Cruch of South India Trust Association v. Telugu Church Council [1996] 2 SCC 520 ITA Nos. 1889 and 1241/Mum/2018, 2384, 2958, 3475 and 3843/Mum/2019 Assessment years: 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 ♦ Radhasoami Satsang (supra) 51. From the record we also found that the overa…

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the revenue and CO’s of assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2031/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 90/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2031/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-3(4) बिधम/ M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1, World 3Rd Floor, Elegant Vs. Trade Center, Cuffe Parade, Business Park, Midc Mumbai-400005. Cross, Road B Andheri . East, Mumbai-400059. Cross Objection No. 91/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2032/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Ambuja Cements Ltd बिधम/ Dcit-3(4) 3Rd Floor, Elegant Business 29Th Floor, Center-1, Vs. Park, Midc Cross, Road B World Trade Center, Andheri East, Mumbai- Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400059. 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg0569P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Dr) C.O. 90 & 91/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2010-11 Ambuja Cements Ltd सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & Respective Cross Objections (‘Co’) Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Dated 31-03-2023 For Ay 2008-09 & Ay 2010-11 Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (DR)
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

…ies have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: ♦ H.A. Shah & Co v. CIT [1956] (30 ITR 618) (Bom.) ♦ Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. v. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 ♦ Cruch of South India Trust Association v. Telugu Church Council [1996] 2 SCC 520 ITA Nos. 1889 and 1241/Mum/2018, 2384, 2958, 3475 and 3843/Mum/2019 Assessment years: 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 ♦ Radhasoami Satsang (supra) 51. From the record we also found that the overa…

ACC LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 800/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. DCIT (LTU) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. CIT – 3(4) v. M/s. ACC Limited 29th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Chai…

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(4), MUMBAI-400005 vs. M/S. ACC LIMITED, MUMBAI-400020

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 1171/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. DCIT (LTU) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. CIT – 3(4) v. M/s. ACC Limited 29th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Chai…

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1018/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 32ASection 801ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Industry House, 18th Floor, 10, Camac Street, Kolkata - 700017 [PAN: AAACE6607L] …………… Appellant Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle – 1(4), Mumbai, 9th Floor, Old CGO Building, M K Road, Respondent ……………. Mumbai - 400020 Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle – 1(4), Mumbai, Room No. 902, Pratistha Bhavan, 9th Floor, Old CGO Building, Annexe, Mumbai – 400020 [PAN: AAACE6607L] …………… Appellant Vs M/s Essel Mining &…

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATTA vs. DY CIT CC-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 297/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2021 (A.Ys.2011-12 To 2013-14) Essel Mining & Vs. Dy. Cit, Cc-1(4) Industries Limited 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Industry House, 18Th Building, M.K. Road, Floor, 10 Camac Street, Mumbai - 400020 Kolkata – 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent Jcit, Cc-1(4) Vs. M/S Essel Mining & R. No. 902, Pratistha Industries Limited Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Industry House, 18Th Cgo Building, Annexe, Floor, 10, Cama Street, Mumbai – 400 020 Kolkata- 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Yohesh Thar &For Respondent: Biswanath Das
Section 132(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153C

…arties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: Shah & Co (HA) v. CIT (1956) (30 ITR 618) (Bom). P a g e | 11 ITA No.1022 & 1549/Mum/2018 296 & 297/Mum/2021 Essel Mining & industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-1(4) Amalgamated Coalfields vs. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 South India Trust Association vs. Telugu Church Council (1996) 2 SCC 520. Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC). ………………………. 54. We have also verified the calcu…

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATTA vs. DY CIT CC-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 296/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2021 (A.Ys.2011-12 To 2013-14) Essel Mining & Vs. Dy. Cit, Cc-1(4) Industries Limited 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Industry House, 18Th Building, M.K. Road, Floor, 10 Camac Street, Mumbai - 400020 Kolkata – 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent Jcit, Cc-1(4) Vs. M/S Essel Mining & R. No. 902, Pratistha Industries Limited Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Industry House, 18Th Cgo Building, Annexe, Floor, 10, Cama Street, Mumbai – 400 020 Kolkata- 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Yohesh Thar &For Respondent: Biswanath Das
Section 132(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153C

…arties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: Shah & Co (HA) v. CIT (1956) (30 ITR 618) (Bom). P a g e | 11 ITA No.1022 & 1549/Mum/2018 296 & 297/Mum/2021 Essel Mining & industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-1(4) Amalgamated Coalfields vs. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 South India Trust Association vs. Telugu Church Council (1996) 2 SCC 520. Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC). ………………………. 54. We have also verified the calcu…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI vs. ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1549/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2021 (A.Ys.2011-12 To 2013-14) Essel Mining & Vs. Dy. Cit, Cc-1(4) Industries Limited 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Industry House, 18Th Building, M.K. Road, Floor, 10 Camac Street, Mumbai - 400020 Kolkata – 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent Jcit, Cc-1(4) Vs. M/S Essel Mining & R. No. 902, Pratistha Industries Limited Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Industry House, 18Th Cgo Building, Annexe, Floor, 10, Cama Street, Mumbai – 400 020 Kolkata- 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Yohesh Thar &For Respondent: Biswanath Das
Section 132(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153C

…arties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: Shah & Co (HA) v. CIT (1956) (30 ITR 618) (Bom). P a g e | 11 ITA No.1022 & 1549/Mum/2018 296 & 297/Mum/2021 Essel Mining & industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-1(4) Amalgamated Coalfields vs. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 South India Trust Association vs. Telugu Church Council (1996) 2 SCC 520. Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC). ………………………. 54. We have also verified the calcu…

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1022/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 296 & 297/Mum/2021 (A.Ys.2011-12 To 2013-14) Essel Mining & Vs. Dy. Cit, Cc-1(4) Industries Limited 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Industry House, 18Th Building, M.K. Road, Floor, 10 Camac Street, Mumbai - 400020 Kolkata – 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent Jcit, Cc-1(4) Vs. M/S Essel Mining & R. No. 902, Pratistha Industries Limited Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Industry House, 18Th Cgo Building, Annexe, Floor, 10, Cama Street, Mumbai – 400 020 Kolkata- 700017 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaace6607L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Yohesh Thar &For Respondent: Biswanath Das
Section 132(1)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153C

…arties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: Shah & Co (HA) v. CIT (1956) (30 ITR 618) (Bom). P a g e | 11 ITA No.1022 & 1549/Mum/2018 296 & 297/Mum/2021 Essel Mining & industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-1(4) Amalgamated Coalfields vs. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 South India Trust Association vs. Telugu Church Council (1996) 2 SCC 520. Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC). ………………………. 54. We have also verified the calcu…

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3178/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: ♦ H.A. Shah & Co v. CIT [1956] (30 ITR 618) (Bom.) ♦ Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. v. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 ♦ Cruch of South India Trust Association v. Telugu Church Council [1996] 2 SCC 520 51. From the record we also found that the overall profits of the company have increased due to such commercial benefits and the same should have been treated as the revenue of the rail systems…

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: ♦ H.A. Shah & Co v. CIT [1956] (30 ITR 618) (Bom.) ♦ Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. v. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 ♦ Cruch of South India Trust Association v. Telugu Church Council [1996] 2 SCC 520 51. From the record we also found that the overall profits of the company have increased due to such commercial benefits and the same should have been treated as the revenue of the rail systems…

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3176/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…ing the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: 39 ITA NO.3135& 3136/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. ACC Limited ♦ H.A. Shah & Co v. CIT [1956] (30 ITR 618) (Bom.) ♦ Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. v. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 ♦ Cruch of South India Trust Association v. Telugu Church Council [1996] 2 SCC 520 51. From the record we also found that the overall profits of the company have increased due to such commercial benefits and the same should have been treated as the revenue of the rail systems…

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT(LTU) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3139/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: ♦ H.A. Shah & Co v. CIT [1956] (30 ITR 618) (Bom.) ♦ Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. v. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 ♦ Cruch of South India Trust Association v. Telugu Church Council [1996] 2 SCC 520 51. From the record we also found that the overall profits of the company have increased due to such commercial benefits and the same should have been treated as the revenue of the rail systems…

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT(LTU) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3137/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: ♦ H.A. Shah & Co v. CIT [1956] (30 ITR 618) (Bom.) ♦ Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. v. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 ♦ Cruch of South India Trust Association v. Telugu Church Council [1996] 2 SCC 520 51. From the record we also found that the overall profits of the company have increased due to such commercial benefits and the same should have been treated as the revenue of the rail systems…

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3136/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…ing the order, it would not be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The above principles have been accepted in the undernoted case: 39 ITA NO.3135& 3136/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. ACC Limited ♦ H.A. Shah & Co v. CIT [1956] (30 ITR 618) (Bom.) ♦ Amalgamated Coalfields Ltd. v. Janapada Sabha AIR 1964 SC 1013 ♦ Cruch of South India Trust Association v. Telugu Church Council [1996] 2 SCC 520 51. From the record we also found that the overall profits of the company have increased due to such commercial benefits and the same should have been treated as the revenue of the rail systems…

Showing 1–20 of 51 · Page 1 of 3