Instruments and Control Company v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

349 ITR 571High Court2012#24598 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,406 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2018.

Judgments citing Instruments and Control Company v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

Rajendra Raojibhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3274/AHD/2015[2005-6]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Oct 2018

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.3274/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2005-06 Rajendra Raojibhai Patel, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Trushna Bungalows, Opp.Suman Ward-3(1), Surat. Park, Ambika Niketan, Athwalines, Surat – 395 007. [Pan: Aavpp 8050 E] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Hiren R. Vepari – Ca िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Anil Dhaka – Sr.Dr राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By 19.09.2018 सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2018 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On आदेश /O R D E R Per O. P. Meena, Accoutant Member: 1. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ii, Surat(In Short “The Cit (A)”) Dated 11.08.2015 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2005-06, Which In Turn Has Arisen From The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Surat(In Short “The Ao”) Dated 11.07.2014 Under Section 143(3) Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’).

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(3)(ii)

…not justified in taking reliance on section 153(3)(ii) which is subject to section 153(2A) of the Act. In support of this contention, the ld.Counsel has placed reliance in the case of Instruments and Control Company vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax [2012] 349 ITR 571 (Guj). 4. On the other hand, the ld.Departmental Representative(DR) submitted that the original assessment in the case of assessee was completed on 30.11.2007 by assessing total income at Rs.33,40,280/-. The additions made in the assessment order were confirmed by the CIT(A) vide his order dated 27.06.2008, the ITAT Rajendra Raojibhai Patel Vs.…

Citicorp Finance (I) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 10(1), Mumbai

ITA 3610/MUM/2011[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: S/Shri Joginder Singh & Rajendraआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/ 3610 & 3611/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2000-01 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Citicorp Finance (I) Limited The Addl. Cit, Range-10(1) 5Th Floor, Plot C-61,Bandra Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai. Vs. G-Block,Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Pan:Aabcc 4881 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/ 3162/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2000-01 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" The Addl. Cit, Range-10(1) Citicorp Finance (I) Limited Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai. Mumbai-400 051. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) ""या"ेप ""या"ेप/C.O/.No. 148 /Mum/2011,Arising Out Of Ita/3162/Mum/2011 Ay.2000-01 ""या"ेप ""या"ेप Citicorp Finance (I) Limited The Addl. Cit, Range-10(1) Vs. Mumbai-400 051. Aayakar Bhavan,Mumbai. (Cross Objector) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: S/Shri M. Dayasagar, Ganesh Bare-Cit(Dr) Assessee By: Shri A.V. Sonde-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing 26.05.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 08.07.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Sonde-ARFor Respondent: S/Shri M. Dayasagar, Ganesh Bare-CIT(DR)

Section 10(33)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 254Section 254(1)Section 254(2)

…efore deciding the merits of the case.The basic issue to be decided is as to which sub-section of the section 153 would be applicable to the case under consideration. 5.1.Before proceeding further,we would like to refer to case of Instruments and Control Co. (349 ITR 571) of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court wherein the issue of time limit has been dealt at length.Facts of the case were that the assessee -company had filed its return of income declaring a total income of Rs. 2,09,106/-that the return was taken in scrutiny,that the AO framed scrutiny assessment on 31.03.1989, determining a total income of the assesse…

DCIT, Circle - 48, Kolkata vs. Sanjay Jaiswal, Howrah

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is allowed , appeals of the assessee and revenue are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1649/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gopal Ram Sharma, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Debasish Lahiri, JCIT, ld. Sr.DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(3)Section 254

…set aside to the extent it did not give the assessee opportunity to place its evidence. Therefore, section 153(2A) was applicable. (b) Decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Instruments and Control Co. vs CCIT and Others reported in (2012) 349 ITR 571 (Guj) , wherein it was held that : 25. To our mind, the case on hand would fall under sub-section (2A) of section 153 of the Act. The Tribunal may not have used the words of “setting aside the assessment”, nevertheless, when it remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for summoning two witnesses again for cross- examination by the asses…