What is ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd. authority for?

Reassessment under Section 147/148 is invalid if it constitutes a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer without any fresh tangible material, especially after the assessee made a full and truthful disclosure during the original scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3).

How many judgments cite ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd.?

194 judgments on BharatTax cite ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd. (92 Taxmann.com 361), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 153A, Section 271(1)(c), Section 10A.

ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd. (92 Taxmann.com 361)

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Ltu, New Delhi vs. Srf Ltd

ITA/1148/2018HC Delhi05 Mar 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 147

…$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 1148/2018 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -LTU, NEW DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus SRF LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Satyen Sethi and Mr. Anta Trana Panda, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV % 05.03.2024 O R D E R 1. The Principal Commissioner impugns the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [‘ITAT’] dated 03 April 2018 and has proposed the follow…

Nova Estates Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 18(4), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 76/DEL/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: The Ld. Ao & Despite Such Scrutiny No Addition Was Made In The Original Assessment Proceedings.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…) was not justified in affirming the reopening the assessment due to change of opinion. Assessment proceedings were concluded after due consideration of all facts and material placed before him. In view of the judgments of ITO v. Techspan India (P) Ltd (2018) 404 ITR 10 (SC) and CIT vs Bhanji Lavji (1971) 79 ITR 582 (SC) reopening of assessment merely on change of opinion is bad in law. 6. That the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued without the proper sanction and approval as contemplated under the Act. 7. That the impugned order is liable to be set aside as the issuance of notice u/s 148 is bad in law. 8. Th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 1(1), Bhilai, Durg vs. Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd., Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 241/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No.241/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax 1(1), V Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd, Bhilai, Durg S Bsp Premises, Slag Yard Road (Opp Sector 4 Nmoh), Bhilai Pan: Aadcb1675Q (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri. R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25-10-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of : 30-10-2023 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

For Appellant: Shri. R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)(x)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…d by the-following' decisions. the Apex Court as well as various High Courts which are listed below. a). CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 1(FB)(Delhi)(HC) Approved by Supreme Court in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) ITO v. Techspan India (P) Ltd. (2018) 404 ITR 10 (SC) wherein the Apex court has held that re-examining the assessees claim which has already been examined during original scrutiny assessment and with no new material is not permissible. b) In ACIT v. Maria) Ltd. (2020) 272 Taxman 179 (SC) The reasons in support of the s. 148 notice is the very issue in respect of which the AO had raised a query…

The Income Tax Officer Ward, 2, Raigarh(Cg) vs. Shri Shri Bishambhar Dayal Agrawal, Jashpur (C.G.)

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 223/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 223/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer-2, Raigarh (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 41(4)Section 69

…he Act dated Nil. The Ld. AR, in support of his aforesaid contention, had relied on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) and that of the ITO Vs. TechSpan India Private Ltd. & Anr. (2018) 404 ITR 10. It was, thus, the claim of the Ld. AR that a mere “change of opinion” by the successor A.O. on the basis of the same set of facts available on record would by no means justify the reopening of a concluded assessment. Also, the Ld. AR placed his contention as regards the merits of the case and supported the order of the CIT(Appeals), who had vacat…

ACIT, Corporate Circle3(1), Chennai vs. M/S.Shriram Finance Company Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 439/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.439/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Finance Ltd., No. 21St Century Business Centre 1, Income Tax, Mookambika Complex, 4Th Floor, Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai. 4, Lady Desikachari Road, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. [Pan:Aaacs7018R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 10.02.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Company, Engaged In The Business Of Financing For Commercial Vehicles, Filed Its Return Of Income For 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated 29.12.2016 (supra). Accordingly, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of (i) CIT Vs, Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561; and (ii) ITO vs. TechSpan India (P) Ltd. (2018) 404 ITR 10 (supra), I hold that, in the instant case, the AO is not justified in reopening the assessment u/s.147 of the Act based on "change of opinion" and, therefore, the impugned order passed u/s.143(3) rws 147 of the Act is rendered as void ab initio. Accordingly, the AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs.16,06,89,000/-, Thus, the grounds of appea…

DCIT Central Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Coastal Energy Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1354/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1337/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai. [Pan:Aaacc4160A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1354/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca Department By : Shri R. Mohan Reddy, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1337/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5th Floor, Income Tax, Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai. [PAN:AAACC4160A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1354/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The D…

Coastal Energy Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1337/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1337/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai. [Pan:Aaacc4160A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1354/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5Th Floor, Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1), Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca Department By : Shri R. Mohan Reddy, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1337/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of No. 4, Buharia Towers, 5th Floor, Income Tax, Moores Road, Chennai 600 006. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai. [PAN:AAACC4160A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1354/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The D…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. The Tibetian Children Village

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/31/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with

Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

…Primary Dealership Limited2 and Income Tax Officer, Ward No.16(2) vs. Techspan India Private Limited and another.3 So we do not find any merit in ITA no.1 of 2020 and ITA no.28 of 2019 for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06. 2(2012) 13 SCC 514 3(2018) 6 SCC 685 12 ITA. no.31 of 2019 and ITA no.29 of 2019, ITA no.30 of 2019 and ITA no.32 of 2019 14. Coming to ITA. no.31 of 2019 and ITA no.29 of 2019, for the assessment year 2006-07, assessment order was passed on 25.06.2008, for the assessment year 2007-08, it was passed on 31.12.2009, but the said orders were revised under Section 263 of the Ac…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. The Tibetian Children Village

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/29/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with

Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

…Primary Dealership Limited2 and Income Tax Officer, Ward No.16(2) vs. Techspan India Private Limited and another.3 So we do not find any merit in ITA no.1 of 2020 and ITA no.28 of 2019 for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06. 2(2012) 13 SCC 514 3(2018) 6 SCC 685 12 ITA. no.31 of 2019 and ITA no.29 of 2019, ITA no.30 of 2019 and ITA no.32 of 2019 14. Coming to ITA. no.31 of 2019 and ITA no.29 of 2019, for the assessment year 2006-07, assessment order was passed on 25.06.2008, for the assessment year 2007-08, it was passed on 31.12.2009, but the said orders were revised under Section 263 of the Ac…

Mirnal Mehta, Cuttack vs. ITO Wrd-2(4), Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 169/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack09 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.169/CTK/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Mrinal Mehta, Vs ITO Ward-BBN-W-4(1) Iswar Dham, Alamchand Bazar, Cuttack PAN No. :AFUPM 1868 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Mohit Sheth, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 09/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 09/08/2023 आ…

Shri Murlimanohar Ramkishan Mundhra, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2)(1), Surat

In the result, ground No. 1 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 158/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.158/Srt/2023 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Physical Court) Murlimanohar Ramkishan Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), (Old Ward- Mundhra, 301 To 308, Vs 1(2)(3) Surat, Aayakar Third Floor, Shree Krishna Market, Near Metro Tower, Bhavan, Majura Gate, Ring Road, Surat-395002 Surat-395001 Pan No: Aflpm 6057 P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sudhir Surana, Ca & Shri Om Prakash Soni, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr अपील पंजीकरण/Appeal Instituted On 03.03.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03.05.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 18.07.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Ld. Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 13.01.2023 For Assessment Year 2013-14, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 30.11.2018. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal:- Murllimanohar R Mundhra “1. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts Confirming The Reassessment Proceeding Initiated By The Ld. Ao, Without Properly Appreciating The Submission Of The Appellant.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 57

…fficer during original assessment. Hence, re-assessment proceeding is nothing but change of opinion. To support such submission, assessee relied upon the decision of 6 Murllimanohar R Mundhra Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ITO Vs Tech Span (P.) Ltd. (2018) 404 ITR 10 (SC). On the merits of addition on account of disallowance of interest expenses, the assessee made similar submission as made before Assessing Officer. To support his submission, he relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income- tax vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC), and decision of Hon'ble ju…

Jt. CIT (Ods) - CC -1(4), Mumbai vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 222/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…owing observations in the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in case of SBI v. ACIT in WP 271 of 2018 vide order dated 15.06.2018: “6. We note that the Apex Court in Income-Tax Officer V/s. Techspan India Private Limited and Another, reported in [2018] 404 ITR 10(SC) reiterated the settled principle of law laid down by Page No. 26 ITA NO. 1789 & 1466/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2013-14) ITA NO. 222 & 220/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2014-15) M/s UltraTech Cement Limited the Supreme Court in CIT V/s. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561(SC) that the Assessing Officer has a power only to reassess and has no power to review the…

Ultra Tech Cement Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT- CC 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 220/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…owing observations in the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in case of SBI v. ACIT in WP 271 of 2018 vide order dated 15.06.2018: “6. We note that the Apex Court in Income-Tax Officer V/s. Techspan India Private Limited and Another, reported in [2018] 404 ITR 10(SC) reiterated the settled principle of law laid down by Page No. 26 ITA NO. 1789 & 1466/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2013-14) ITA NO. 222 & 220/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2014-15) M/s UltraTech Cement Limited the Supreme Court in CIT V/s. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561(SC) that the Assessing Officer has a power only to reassess and has no power to review the…

DCIT Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1789/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…owing observations in the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in case of SBI v. ACIT in WP 271 of 2018 vide order dated 15.06.2018: “6. We note that the Apex Court in Income-Tax Officer V/s. Techspan India Private Limited and Another, reported in [2018] 404 ITR 10(SC) reiterated the settled principle of law laid down by Page No. 26 ITA NO. 1789 & 1466/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2013-14) ITA NO. 222 & 220/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2014-15) M/s UltraTech Cement Limited the Supreme Court in CIT V/s. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561(SC) that the Assessing Officer has a power only to reassess and has no power to review the…

M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent Cir-1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1466/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…owing observations in the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in case of SBI v. ACIT in WP 271 of 2018 vide order dated 15.06.2018: “6. We note that the Apex Court in Income-Tax Officer V/s. Techspan India Private Limited and Another, reported in [2018] 404 ITR 10(SC) reiterated the settled principle of law laid down by Page No. 26 ITA NO. 1789 & 1466/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2013-14) ITA NO. 222 & 220/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2014-15) M/s UltraTech Cement Limited the Supreme Court in CIT V/s. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561(SC) that the Assessing Officer has a power only to reassess and has no power to review the…