Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT

63 ITR 232Supreme Court of India1967#712 most cited

What is Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) cannot permit a new ground requiring fresh investigation of facts unless it remands the matter or requests a report from the lower appellate authority. The ITAT possesses the power to remand or remit cases back to the authorities below in appropriate circumstances.

142

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT · 63 ITR 232 · ITAT appellate powers · fresh investigation of facts · power to remand · Income Tax Appellate Tribunal · remand to lower authorities · new grounds of appeal · Section 143(3) · Section 148

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 143(3)Section 144ASection 40A(3)Section 119Section 147
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 274(2)section 243section 245hacasus omissussection 245csettlement applicationsection 245d(4)section 153(4)section 153(a)section 144basection 245dsection 244

Judgments citing Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT

Ych Logistics (India) Private Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Dr. S.Palani Kumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…of the proceedings and not necessarily only from the subject-matter raised in the memorandum of appeal. This point, however, is not res integra. There are a large number of authorities on this question. 20. In the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232, the Supreme Court was required to consider the powers of the Appellate Tribunal under section 33(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which is equivalent to the present section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In the case before the Supreme Court, the assessee-company was incorporated in the then native State of Indore. It was assessed in Briti…

Gautam Enterprises, Thane vs. Pr. CIT -1, Thane

ITA 1217/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Pr. Commissioner Of Income Gautam Enterprises Tax-1, Office No. 1B, 1St Floor, ‘B’ Wing, 6Th Floor, Shiv Krupa Chs Ltd, Ashar It Park Road 16Z, Vs. Charai, Thane, Wagle Ind Estate, Mumbai-400 601 Thane 400 604 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aabfg0439L Assessee By : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Dr. Pallavi Darade, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 31.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.06.2022

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Dr. Pallavi Darade, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Pr. Commissioner of Income Gautam Enterprises Tax-1, Office No. 1B, 1st Floor, ‘B’ Wing, 6th Floor, Shiv Krupa CHS Ltd, Ashar IT Park Road 16Z, Vs. Charai, Thane, Wagle IND Estate, Mumbai-400 601 Thane 400 604 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AABFG0439L Assessee by : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, AR Revenue by : Ms. Dr. Pallavi Darade, CIT DR Date of hearing: 31.05.2022 Date of pronouncement : 21.06.2022 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the or…

DCIT, Circle- 16(2), New Delhi vs. Minerals Managements Services India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5478/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmathe Dcit Vs. M/S. Minerals Managements Circle 16(2), Services India Pvt. Ltd. 1104, 11Th Floor, New Delhi Hemkunt Chamber, Nehru Place Pan : Aaacm6334J New Delhi-110019 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…merits of the case. The same could not be disputed by Revenue :- “1. DCIT vs. M/s. Casby Logistics Pvt. Ltd. , ITA No. 1949 & 1950/MUM/2016 (ITAT Mumbai) 2. ITO vs. Smt. Gurinder Kaur , [2006] 102 ITD 189 (ITAT Delhi) 3. Hukumchand Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 (SC) 4. DCIT Vs. Metro Tyres Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 2873/Del/2016” 6. It is submitted on behalf of the assessee that the ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the notice dated 25.02.2013 issued u/s 274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) of the Act is not legally sustainable as it is not disclosed as to if the notice is issued for furnishing inaccurate particulars or…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. Labzone Electronics City Private Limited (Formerly Known As M/S Alexandria Labspace Electronics City Private Limited), Hyderabad

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1489/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year: 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. M/S. Labzone Electronics Of Income Tax, City Private Limited Circle 16(1), (Formerly Known As M/S. Hyderabad. Alexandria Labspace Electronics City Private Limited), Hyderabad. Pan :Aajca1470G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P.V.S.S. Prasad. Revenue By: Shri Yvst Sai. Date Of Hearing: 14.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.02.2022 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Revenue’S Appeal For A.Y. 2013-14 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 4, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 17.07.2019 In Case No.10331/17-18/Dcit, Cir.1(1)/Cit(A)-4/Hyd/19-20, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short, ‘The Act’]. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Deleting Section 94A(4) Addition Of Rs.18,86,00,000/- Made In The Course Of Assessment Framed On 29.12.2016. The Cit(A)’S Lower Appellate Detailed Discussion To This Effect Reads As Follows :-

For Appellant: Shri P.V.S.S. PrasadFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 143(3)Section 94ASection 94A(4)

…013. Mr. Sai next admitted very fairly that “Cyprus” stands removed from the list of other notified tax jurisdictions as per Circular No.15 of 2017 dt.21.04.2017. He however quoted hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 232 (SC) that even if the assessee has been absolved from application of section 94A of the Act, it deserves to be directed to prove creditworthiness of the overseas entity hereinabove so as to discharge its onus contemplated u/s 68 of the Act before the Assessing Officer afresh. 5. Learned authorized representative has drawn strong support from CIT(…

Smt. Jyoti Raghuram Desai, Kalaburagi vs. Asst.C.I.T., Kalaburagi

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

ITA 1206/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Shree Hari Kutsa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 250

…ese grounds for the first time before this Hon'ble Tribunal. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of CIT v. Mahalakshmi Textile Mills Limited reported in 66 ITR 710 (SC) and Hukumchand Mills Limited v. CIT reported in 63 ITR 232 (SC). Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the matter of Beharilal Ramcharan Cotton Mills Ltd., v. CIT reported in 62 ITR 212. 3. The learned Assessing Officer is not justified in denying the claim of the Appellant towards the indexed cost of improvement of Rs.l0,85,466/- on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4…

ACIT, Jammu vs. Sh Vikramaditya Singh, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 269/ASR/2007[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…e before Hon‟ble Tribunal, and argument of the revenue would tantamount to making the position of respondent worse than had he not filed an appeal; i. MCorp Global (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2009] 309 ITR 434 (SC) ii. Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 33.2. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that the AO cannot be permitted to take a contrary view than taken in the assessment and improve his assessment by adopting a new theory: i. Ms. Aishwarya K. Rai, 127 ITD 204 (Mum.) 65 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.Nos.43 to 45/Asr/2007 Shri M.K. Ajatshatru, Jammu & Other…

ACIT, Cir-II, Jammu vs. Smt. Yashorajya Laxmi, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 268/ASR/2007[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…e before Hon‟ble Tribunal, and argument of the revenue would tantamount to making the position of respondent worse than had he not filed an appeal; i. MCorp Global (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2009] 309 ITR 434 (SC) ii. Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 33.2. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that the AO cannot be permitted to take a contrary view than taken in the assessment and improve his assessment by adopting a new theory: i. Ms. Aishwarya K. Rai, 127 ITD 204 (Mum.) 65 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.Nos.43 to 45/Asr/2007 Shri M.K. Ajatshatru, Jammu & Other…

ACIT, Jammu vs. Dr Karan Singh, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 267/ASR/2007[1998-99\u005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005c]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…e before Hon‟ble Tribunal, and argument of the revenue would tantamount to making the position of respondent worse than had he not filed an appeal; i. MCorp Global (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2009] 309 ITR 434 (SC) ii. Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 33.2. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that the AO cannot be permitted to take a contrary view than taken in the assessment and improve his assessment by adopting a new theory: i. Ms. Aishwarya K. Rai, 127 ITD 204 (Mum.) 65 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.Nos.43 to 45/Asr/2007 Shri M.K. Ajatshatru, Jammu & Other…

ACIT, Jammu vs. Sh M.K. Ajat Shatru, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 263/ASR/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl
Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…e before Hon‟ble Tribunal, and argument of the revenue would tantamount to making the position of respondent worse than had he not filed an appeal; i. MCorp Global (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2009] 309 ITR 434 (SC) ii. Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 33.2. Referring to the following decisions he submitted that the AO cannot be permitted to take a contrary view than taken in the assessment and improve his assessment by adopting a new theory: i. Ms. Aishwarya K. Rai, 127 ITD 204 (Mum.) 65 ITA.Nos.263/Asr/2003, 267 to 269/Asr/2007 & C.O.Nos.43 to 45/Asr/2007 Shri M.K. Ajatshatru, Jammu & Other…

Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-I

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 530/ASR/2009[]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenav.S. Cit – I Shirmoni Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee Amritsar Teja Singh Mundri Hall Sri Amritsar Pan:Aants1981K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10Section 12ASection 2Section 80Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

…y the CIT in the impugned Order. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of MCorp Global Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 309 ITR 434 (SC) wherein it has been held: “6. In the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT reported in (1967) 63 ITR 232 this Court has held that under Section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (equivalent to Section 254(1) of the 1961 Act), the Tribunal was not authorized to take back the benefit granted to the Assessee by the AO. The Tribunal has no power to enhance the assessment. Applying the ratio of the said judgment to the present case, we are of the view tha…

Fortis Hospitals Ltd vs. ACIT Circle 9(2) New Delhi

ITA-132/2021HC Delhi29 Jul 2021

Bench: The Learned

Section 143(3)Section 194LSection 254(2)Section 260ASection 32(1)(ii)

…T, therefore, could not have reopened this issue on which there was no dispute raised by the respondent. Placing reliance on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Bombay, AIR 1967 SC 455: (1967) 63 ITR 232; and MCorp Global Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2009) 3 SCC 420: (2009) 309 ITR 434, the learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that that the learned ITAT has no power to enhance the assessment or take back the benefit granted to the assessee by the Assessing Officer. He further places reliance on: 2021:DHC:2240-DB…

Fortis Hospitals Ltd

ITA/132/2021HC Delhi29 Jul 2021

Bench: The Learned

Section 143(3)Section 194LSection 254(2)Section 260ASection 32(1)(ii)

…T, therefore, could not have reopened this issue on which there was no dispute raised by the respondent. Placing reliance on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Bombay, AIR 1967 SC 455: (1967) 63 ITR 232; and MCorp Global Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2009) 3 SCC 420: (2009) 309 ITR 434, the learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that that the learned ITAT has no power to enhance the assessment or take back the benefit granted to the assessee by the Assessing Officer. He further places reliance on: 2021:DHC:2240-DB…

D.C.I.T., Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. Shri Saroj Kumar Poddar, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 2406/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble]

Section 250

…09] 209 ITR 434/178 Taxman 347 (SC) and Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. Global (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 209 ITR 434/178 Taxman 347 (SC) and Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. Global (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 209 ITR 434/178 Taxman 347 (SC) and Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 (SC). The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd. vs. ITO Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd. vs. ITO reported in [2018] 93 taxmann.com 330 (Madras) 93 taxmann.com 330 (Madras), held as follows:- “In this regard, it is relevant to take note of the legal position as to whe…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kadapa vs. Zuari Cement Limited, Kadapa

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2235/HYD/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri P. Chandra SekharFor Respondent: Sri Chythanya K.K. DR
Section 143(3)

…Pulipathi Subbarao & Co. vs. AAC 35 ITR 673 and the Hon'ble M.P High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Hope Textiles Ltd (1997) 225 ITR 993. 4. The CIT (A) failed to appreciate the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd vs. CIT 63 ITR 232 that power of Tribunal is restricted to the subject matter of appeal alone – the words “thereon” restricts the jurisdiction. Hence, when ITAT remits an issue to the CIT (A), he will have same powers or restrictions as the ITAT and his powers are restricted to subject matter of appeal remitted back by the ITAT and he cannot have more powers than IT…

Mannulal Jagannath Das Trust Hospital, Jabalpur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 13/JAB/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Sept 2020AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri Nrs Ganesan & Sanjay Arora

Section 10Section 10(1)Section 11Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…o.13/JAB/2019 12 Mannulal Jagannath Trust v. CIT (Exemptions) memorandum of appeal (or taken with its’ leave), though shall give opportunity of hearing on any ground or matter considered pertinent by it. The Apex Court in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. vs. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 (SC) explained that r.11 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules is not exhaustive of the powers of the Tribunal. The said decision was, among others, considered in Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom)(FB), to explain that the appellate proceedings, being in continuation of the assessment proceedings, it is the correct assessmen…

Chandulal A.Shah(HUF), Surat vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee, Ind for A

ITA 83/SRT/2017[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं././././I.T.A Nos.83 & 84/Srt/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2000-01 & 2004-05 1.Chandulal Amrutlal Shah (Huf), V. Income Tax Officer, Bunglow No.74, Saifee Society, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. L.H. Road, Surat-395 006. [Pan: Aaahc 8116 R] 2.Chandulal Amrutlal Shah, V. Income Tax Officer, Bunglow No.74, Saifee Society, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. L.H. Road, Surat-395 006. [Pan: Adaps 5844 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148

…Chandulal A Shah (HUF) v. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1),Surat/ITA. 83 & 84/SRT/2017/A.Y.2000-01 & 2004-05 Page 1 of 15 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं././././I.T.A Nos.83 & 84/SRT/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2000-01 & 2004-05 1.Chandulal Amrutlal Shah (HUF), V. Income Tax Officer, Bunglow No.74, Saifee Society, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. L.H. Road, Surat-395 006. [PAN: AAAHC 8116 R] 2.Chandulal Amrutlal Shah, V. Income Tax Officer, Bunglow No.74, Saifee Society, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat. L.H. Road, Surat-395 006. [PAN:…

Volkswagen Finance P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) 4(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2195/MUM/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2020AY 2015-16
Section 201

…nch of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom.). Their Lordships have discussed in detail, as to how powers of the Tribunal are to be exercised. In the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 (SC), which has been followed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's Full Bench judgment in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. (supra). Their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court were in seisin of a situation in which it was argued before Their Lordships that "the Tribunal was not competent to go into the question whether the provisions of parag…

Pooja Exports, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6101/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Pooja Exports, 306-Prasad Deputy Commissioner Of Chambers, 3Rd Floor, Opera Income Tax, Central Circle- Vs. House, Mumbai-400004. 1(1), Mumbai, Old Cgo Building, Pratistha Bhawan, M.K. Road, Mumbai. Pan No. Aaafp1047L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anant Pai, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Awungshi Gimson, Dr Date Of Hearing : 12/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/09/2019

For Appellant: Mr. Anant Pai, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Awungshi Gimson, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 251

…late Commissioner to ‘pass such as he thinks fit’ and similar words can be found in section 251(1) which deals with order to be passed by Appellate Tribunal. It is argued by him that noting these words, the Supreme Court in Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 232 (SC) has held that the powers of the Appellate Tribunal are wide but does not include power of enhancement unlike powers of Commissioner (Appeals). Thus the Ld. counsel submits that the power of the Appellate Commissioner to deal with appeal against re- Pooja Exports 6 assessment order logically lies in clause (d) and the same should align with ‘…

Prism Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2545/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri NS JangpangiFor Respondent: Shri S.E.Dastur, AR
Section 143(3)Section 401A(9)Section 40A(9)

…bunals “thinks fit” includes all the powers (accept possibly the power of enhancements) which are conferred upon the CIT(A) by section 254 of the Act. He referred to Para 18 and 19 which read as under: - “18. In the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 , the Supreme Court was required to consider the powers of the Tribunal under old section 33(4) of the 1922 Act which is equivalent to the present section 254 of the 1961 Act. In the case before the Supreme Court the assessee-company was incorporated in the then native State of Indore. It was assessed in British India, except for the assessment ye…

DCIT CC 6(1) (Earlier CC-34), Mumbai vs. Prism Cement Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1757/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri NS JangpangiFor Respondent: Shri S.E.Dastur, AR
Section 143(3)Section 401A(9)Section 40A(9)

…bunals “thinks fit” includes all the powers (accept possibly the power of enhancements) which are conferred upon the CIT(A) by section 254 of the Act. He referred to Para 18 and 19 which read as under: - “18. In the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 , the Supreme Court was required to consider the powers of the Tribunal under old section 33(4) of the 1922 Act which is equivalent to the present section 254 of the 1961 Act. In the case before the Supreme Court the assessee-company was incorporated in the then native State of Indore. It was assessed in British India, except for the assessment ye…