(i) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. DCIT

85 ITR 431Reported decision#16173 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Judgments citing (i) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. DCIT

Ganadhipati Construction Private Ltd, Patna vs. PCIT, Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 360/PAT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…he Act. 25. So far as the applicability of Explanation 2(a) to section 263 of the Act, before proceeding, we would like to take note of the decision dated 28th December, 2020 of the Coordinate Bench, Mumbai in the case of JRD Tata Trust-vs.- DCIT reported in 85 ITR 431(supra), which reads as under:- “19. The question that we also need to address is as to what is the nature of scope of the provisions of Explanation 2(a) to Section 263 to the effect that an order is deemed to be "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue" when Commissioner is of the view that "the order is passed without making inq…

Ganadhipati Construction Private Limited, Patna vs. PCIT, Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 359/PAT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…he Act. 25. So far as the applicability of Explanation 2(a) to section 263 of the Act, before proceeding, we would like to take note of the decision dated 28th December, 2020 of the Coordinate Bench, Mumbai in the case of JRD Tata Trust-vs.- DCIT reported in 85 ITR 431(supra), which reads as under:- “19. The question that we also need to address is as to what is the nature of scope of the provisions of Explanation 2(a) to Section 263 to the effect that an order is deemed to be "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue" when Commissioner is of the view that "the order is passed without making inq…

Ganadhipati Construction Private Limited, Patna vs. PCIT, Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 358/PAT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…he Act. 25. So far as the applicability of Explanation 2(a) to section 263 of the Act, before proceeding, we would like to take note of the decision dated 28th December, 2020 of the Coordinate Bench, Mumbai in the case of JRD Tata Trust-vs.- DCIT reported in 85 ITR 431(supra), which reads as under:- “19. The question that we also need to address is as to what is the nature of scope of the provisions of Explanation 2(a) to Section 263 to the effect that an order is deemed to be "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue" when Commissioner is of the view that "the order is passed without making inq…

Ganadhipati Construction Pvt Ltd, Patna vs. PCIT, Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 357/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…he Act. 25. So far as the applicability of Explanation 2(a) to section 263 of the Act, before proceeding, we would like to take note of the decision dated 28th December, 2020 of the Coordinate Bench, Mumbai in the case of JRD Tata Trust-vs.- DCIT reported in 85 ITR 431(supra), which reads as under:- “19. The question that we also need to address is as to what is the nature of scope of the provisions of Explanation 2(a) to Section 263 to the effect that an order is deemed to be "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue" when Commissioner is of the view that "the order is passed without making inq…

Ganadhipati Construction Private Limited, Patna vs. PCIT, Central, Patna

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 356/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

…he Act. 25. So far as the applicability of Explanation 2(a) to section 263 of the Act, before proceeding, we would like to take note of the decision dated 28th December, 2020 of the Coordinate Bench, Mumbai in the case of JRD Tata Trust-vs.- DCIT reported in 85 ITR 431(supra), which reads as under:- “19. The question that we also need to address is as to what is the nature of scope of the provisions of Explanation 2(a) to Section 263 to the effect that an order is deemed to be "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue" when Commissioner is of the view that "the order is passed without making inq…

Juniper Networks International B.V., Mumbai vs. CIT (International Taxation)-3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

ITA 982/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 982/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2014-15) Juniper Networks International B.V, Boeing Avenue 240, 1119Pz Schipol-Rijk, Amsterdam,0 Netherlands Pan: Aadcj-0974-G ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It), Mumbai -3, Room No.1601, 16Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 .....""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr. Advocate With Ms. Prachi Mehta &Shri Sandeep Bhalla ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Ms. Surabhi Sharma & Shri Milind Chavan सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 13/05/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Prachi Mehta &Shri Sandeep BhallaFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma &
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

…e enquiry and also what more Assessing Officer should enquire. To support this argument the ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. DCIT, 173 ITD 130(Ahd-Trib) (ii) JRD Tata Trust vs. DCIT 85 ITR 431(Mum-Trib). (iii) Narayan Tatu Rane vs. ITO, 70 taxmann.com 227 (Mum) 5. Per contra, Ms. Surabhi Sharma representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal of assessee. The ld. Departmental Representative submits that the 6 Assessing Officer might have collected the documents during assessment pr…

(i) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. DCIT (85 ITR 431) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax