DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE vs. M/S. ALFA LAVAL INDIA LTD,, PUNE
In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed
ITA 2173/PUN/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Mar 2022AY 2003-04
Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2173/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04 The Dy.Cit, .......अपीलाथ" /Appellant Circle-8, Pune. बनाम / V/S. M/S.Alfa Laval India Ltd., S.No.2221 A, Mumbai – Pune Road, Dapodi, Near Kasarwadi, Pune – 411 012. ……""यथ" / Respondent Pan: Aaaca 5899 A Revenue By : Shri S.P.Walimbe - Dr Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak - Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10.03.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2022 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-6, Pune Dated 01.05.2017 For The Assessment Year 2003-04. The Revenue Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld.Cit(A) Is Correct In Holding The Reopening Of Assessment U/S.147 As Bad In Law? 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld.Cit(A) Is Justified In Not Appreciating That The Mistake In The Original Assessment Due To Erroneous Construction Or Due To Non-Consideration Of The Conditions Required To Be Eligible For Claiming Deduction U/S
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak - ARFor Respondent: Shri S.P.Walimbe - DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80H
…ai Brothers Ltd Vs. ANR [2005] 272 ITR 335 (Bom). d. Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs. R.B.Wadkar, ACIT [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bom) e. Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd Vs. ACIT & ORS [2006] 282 ITR 516 (Bom) f. Industan Petroleum Corporation Ltd Vs.DCIT& ANR [2010] 328 ITR 534 (Bom) g. Prashant Project Ltd Vs. ACIT & ORS [2011] 333 UTR 368 (Bom) h. Titanor Components Ltd Vs. ACIT & ORS [2012] 343 ITR 0183 (Bom). 5.1.1 The appellant also relied on the decision of Pune Tribunal in the appellant’s own case for A.Y. 2004-05 on identical facts where it was held that the issuance of notice u/s 147 and 148 is bad in law.” IT…