Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT

187 ITR 688Supreme Court of India1991#29 most cited

What is Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) possesses co-terminus powers with the Assessing Officer and can direct the Assessing Officer to perform actions he failed to do, but cannot introduce a new source of income in the assessment. The appellate assessment must be confined to the items of income that were the subject matter of the original assessment.

1,372

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,939 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT · 187 ITR 688 · CIT(A) powers · Section 251 · appellate authority · new source of income · assessment confined to original items · additional legal grounds · Section 143(3) validity · Section 153C · Income Tax Act 1961

Also reported as

53 Taxmann 85

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 1961

Issues it is cited on

block periodsection 158bsection 119section 158section 127income escaping assessmentsection 149loose paperssection 132achief commissionersection 151section 92ca

Judgments citing Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT

Priyanvada Amol Mahajan, Jalgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Nashik

In the result, all the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1063/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A

…required to be investigated. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation Of India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax And Anr (1991) 187 ITR 688, he submitted that the additional grounds raised by the assessee should be admitted. 10. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly opposed the admission of the additional grounds. He submitted that these grounds are never raised before the ITA Nos.1063 to 1065/PUN/2024 Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee is raising this issue for the first time before the…

DCIT CC-1(4), Kol, Kolkata vs. Saj Food Products Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1246/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"य" एबं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member ] I.T.A. Nos. 1244 to 1246/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata Vs. Saj Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAICS 0790 G) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / (""यथ") Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 23.10.2024 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 25.11.2024 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant/ Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate "नधा"रती क" ओर से Mit…

DCIT CC-1(4), Kol., Kolkata vs. Saj Food Products Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1245/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"य" एबं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member ] I.T.A. Nos. 1244 to 1246/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata Vs. Saj Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAICS 0790 G) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / (""यथ") Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 23.10.2024 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 25.11.2024 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant/ Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate "नधा"रती क" ओर से Mit…

DCIT CC-1(4), Kol., Kolkata vs. Saj Food Products Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1244/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"य" एबं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member ] I.T.A. Nos. 1244 to 1246/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata Vs. Saj Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAICS 0790 G) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / (""यथ") Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 23.10.2024 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 25.11.2024 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant/ Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate "नधा"रती क" ओर से Mit…

Premalata Jagdish Chander Bansal, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-25(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2473/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Premalata Jagdish Chander Ito, Ward-25(3)(2), Bansal Mumbai 401, Dev Plaza, S.V. Road, Opp. Vs Fire Brigade, Andheri West, Mumbai-400058. Pan: Aezpb 7903 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok BansalFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH ‘C’, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Premalata Jagdish Chander ITO, Ward-25(3)(2), Bansal Mumbai 401, Dev Plaza, S.V. Road, Opp. vs Fire Brigade, Andheri West, Mumbai-400058. PAN: AEZPB 7903 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Ashok Bansal Revenue by : Shri H.M. Bhatt (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 02.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 21.11.2024 O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, AM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against…

Mukul Rani Thakur, Dehradun vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-31, Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1483/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarshri Vimal Kumar

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153DSection 250Section 65B

…the light of judgements ITA No. rendered in the case of National Thermal Power Co.Ltd. vs CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) ational Thermal Power Co.Ltd. vs CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) ational Thermal Power Co.Ltd. vs CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) and Jute Corporate of India Ltd. vs CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC). Jute Corporate of India Ltd. vs CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC). 7. The issue raised as per as per additional ground touches the jurisdictional additional ground touches the jurisdictional aspects and thus, goes to the root of the matter. The relevant aspects and thus, goes to the root of the matter. The relevant facts are facts are stated to be emana…

Harpreet Kaur Kaushik Manek, Bhavnagar vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1, Bhavnagar

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

ITA 109/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…ectricity Co. Limited vs CIT (1997) 225 ITR 746 (SC). The Ld. AR further submitted that it is well settled that the additional claim can be raised before the Appellate Authorities as held by the Hon’ble Apex Corut in case of Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT, 187 ITR 688 (SC) and National Thermal Power Corporation vs. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC). The Ld. AR also relied upon the Hon’ble Gujrat High Court’s decision in the case of S.R. koshti vs CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165, CIT vs Mitesh Impex (2014) 367 ITR 85 and PCIT vs UTI Bank (2017) 398 ITR 514. 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer has not disputed as to w…

Aravali Infrabuild Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-13, Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 1328/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153DSection 37

…the Courts have taken a view that there is no reason to justify the curtailment of powers of the CIT(A) to entertain additional grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee in seeking modification of the assessment order passed by the AO. Jute Corp. of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) National Thermal Power Co, Ltd. 229 ITR 383 (SC), Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. 199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB). Further, the AO in his remand report has also not raised any objection against the additional ground taken by the assessee. Thus, the additional ground taken is allowed to be considered. 8.2 The AO in his remand report has submitted that:…

Aravali Infrabuild Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-13, Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 1327/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153DSection 37

…the Courts have taken a view that there is no reason to justify the curtailment of powers of the CIT(A) to entertain additional grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee in seeking modification of the assessment order passed by the AO. Jute Corp. of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) National Thermal Power Co, Ltd. 229 ITR 383 (SC), Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. 199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB). Further, the AO in his remand report has also not raised any objection against the additional ground taken by the assessee. Thus, the additional ground taken is allowed to be considered. 8.2 The AO in his remand report has submitted that:…

Aravali Infrabuild Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-13, Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 1326/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicialmember

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 153DSection 37

…the Courts have taken a view that there is no reason to justify the curtailment of powers of the CIT(A) to entertain additional grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee in seeking modification of the assessment order passed by the AO. Jute Corp. of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) National Thermal Power Co, Ltd. 229 ITR 383 (SC), Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. 199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB). Further, the AO in his remand report has also not raised any objection against the additional ground taken by the assessee. Thus, the additional ground taken is allowed to be considered. 8.2 The AO in his remand report has submitted that:…

M/S. Tirubala International Private Limited, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-VI, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 147/LKW/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2014-15 Tirubala International Pvt. Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of C-7, Panki Industrial Area, Vs. Income Tax, Range-Vi, Kanpur Kanpur, U.P. Pan:Aaect2086J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Vikas Garg, Fca Revenue By: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2024 O R D E R Per Sh. Nikhil Choudhary: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee That Was Filed Against The Order Of The Dcit-6, Kanpur Passed On 19.12.2016. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Ao, Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Making An Addition Of Rs. 29,164/- On Account Of Late Payment Towards Employees Contribution To Esi. 2. That The Authorities Below Have Failed To Appreciate That The Payment Of Rs.29,164 Towards Employee'S Contribution To Provident Fund Was Made Before The "Due Date" Of Filing Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 Therefore There Could Not Be Any Addition Of The Aforesaid Amount To The Returned Income. 3. That The Authorities Below Have Failed To Appreciate That The Due Date As Mentioned In 36(1) (Va) Is To Be Read In Conjunction With Section 43B(B)

For Appellant: Sh. Vikas Garg, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 195Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…irming the adhoc disallowance of Rs.3,00,000 even though the case was decided ex-parte 2. In its plea for admission of additional grounds the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688 and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Taylor Instrument Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT (1992) 198 ITR-1.The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the aforesaid decision held that it is the duty of the state to see that justice is done to its citizen, therefore shelter should not ordinarily been taken behind procedural technicalities with…

Kwokutla Varakanth Reddy, Ranga Reddy vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 264/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 264/Hyd/2019 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Kwokutla Varakanth Vs. Income Tax Officer Reddy Ward 15(4) Ranga Reddy Distt. Hyderabad Pan:Airpr9829P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 142Section 56(2)(vii)

…of certain judicial precedents including the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (53 Page 4 of 10 ITA No 264 of 2019 Kwokutla Varakanth Reddy ITR 225) and in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd vs. CIT (187 ITR 688) rejected the objections raised by the assessee on the powers of the CIT (A) in dealing with the issue and held that the CIT (A) being the first appellate authority have coterminous power with that of the Assessing Officer and thus, once the issue is before the appellate authorities, the appellate authority can decide the issue based on the facts…

M/S. Buniyad Chemicals Ltd., Mumbai vs. The ACIT., C.C.2(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2422/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhri

Section 143Section 148Section 2Section 250

…% expenses against the income earned 0.15% of bank deposits.” 2.1 The Ld. AR placed reliance on following decision in support to admit additional ground.  National Thermal Power Corporation Vs. CIT [229 ITR 383] (SC)  Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT (187 ITR 688) (SC)  Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (199 ITR 351) (Bom) 2.2 The Ld. DR though objected to the admission of addition ground however could not controvert that the issue raised in the additional ground can be adjudicated based on the facts already available on record. 2.3 Upon perusal of the additional grounds, we find that these are dire…

M/S. Buniyad Chemicals Ltd., Mumbai vs. The ACIT., C.C.2(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2421/AHD/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhri

Section 143Section 148Section 2Section 250

…% expenses against the income earned 0.15% of bank deposits.” 2.1 The Ld. AR placed reliance on following decision in support to admit additional ground.  National Thermal Power Corporation Vs. CIT [229 ITR 383] (SC)  Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT (187 ITR 688) (SC)  Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (199 ITR 351) (Bom) 2.2 The Ld. DR though objected to the admission of addition ground however could not controvert that the issue raised in the additional ground can be adjudicated based on the facts already available on record. 2.3 Upon perusal of the additional grounds, we find that these are dire…

Shivalik Prints Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Special Range-8, New Delhi

In the result, assessees’ appeals in ITA nos

ITA 8136/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80J

…e Appellant mainly on the ground that no such claim was made in the return of income as well as during the course assessment proceedings. While rejecting the claim, Ld. CIT(A) referred the decisions in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1990)187 ITR 688 (SC) and Add, CIT v. Gurjargravures Pvt. LTD, [1978] 111 ITR 1 (SC). SUBMISSIONS 2. Regarding justification of raising new claim during appellate proceedings and the powers of the Appellate authorities to entertain and decide the same, the Appellant submits as under: [A] No tax to be levied except by authority of law and only correct income to be…

M/S. Shivalik Prints Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessees’ appeals in ITA nos

ITA 2296/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80J

…e Appellant mainly on the ground that no such claim was made in the return of income as well as during the course assessment proceedings. While rejecting the claim, Ld. CIT(A) referred the decisions in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1990)187 ITR 688 (SC) and Add, CIT v. Gurjargravures Pvt. LTD, [1978] 111 ITR 1 (SC). SUBMISSIONS 2. Regarding justification of raising new claim during appellate proceedings and the powers of the Appellate authorities to entertain and decide the same, the Appellant submits as under: [A] No tax to be levied except by authority of law and only correct income to be…

Aarav Fragrance and Flavors Pvt Ltd, Thane Maharashtra vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle One Thane

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is stands partly allowed

ITA 301/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2016-17 Aarav Fragrances & Flavors Acit, Circle-1, Thane, Private Limited Maharashtra Plot A-152/153, Wagle Industrial Vs. Area, Road No. 25, Midc, Thane (West), Maharashtra-400604. Pan: Aagca 2145 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Athavale Revenue By : Dr. K.R. Subhash, Cit/Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 O R D E R Per Beena Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh AthavaleFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT/DR
Section 143(2)Section 29Section 36(2)

…in the hands of the assessee. Considering the submissions and respectfully following the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd.Vs. CIT reported in (1998) 229 ITR 383 and Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 187 ITR 688, we admit the additional ground raised by the assessee. Accordingly, the additional grounds filed by assessee stand admitted. Brief facts of the case are as under: 3. The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 on 29/11/2016 declaring the total income of Rs.11293450/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny and in response to no…

Suwalka and Suwalka Properties and Builders Pvt Ltd, Kota, Rajasthan vs. ACIT, Central Cirlce, Kota, Rajasthan

ITA 302/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Him Challenging The 2 Suwalka & Suwalka Properties & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 129Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.302/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years :2017-18 cuke Suwalka and Suwalka Properties Asst. Commissioner of Vs. and Builders Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Bundi Road, Kunhari Ladpura, Central Circle, Kota. Kota. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAHCS 7054 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by :Sh.…

Subhash Runwal, Bibwewadi, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(4) Pune, Pune

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

ITA 1279/PUN/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13 Subhash Runwal 204, Solitari-5, Nr. Kalyan Bhel, Bibwewadi Rd., Pune-411037. Pan: Adbpr7670R. . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr CD Upasani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 69Section 69A

…hile filing the memorandum of appeal in the extant case was neither wilful nor unreasonable, for the reason we deem fit to admit it in the light of ‘CIT v Western Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd.’ [1985, 156 ITR 54 (Bom)], ‘Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v CIT’ [1991, 187 ITR 688(SC)] and ‘Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v CIT’ [1993, 199 ITR 351(Bom)]. Ergo, same is admitted and advanced accordingly. We shall now deal with the admitted legal ground which 7. seeks to quash the reassessment for the reason that when no addition of income is made on the basis of which reasons for escapement was recorded for issuance of notic…

Philips Foods India Private Limited, Tuticorin vs. PCIT-1, Madurai

ITA 640/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 640/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Year: 2016-17 Philips Foods India Private Limited, The Principal Commissioner Of Vs. C-75 / 76, Sipcot Industrial Complex, Madathoor, Tuticorin - 628008 [Pan: Aabcp7916Q] Madurai-1 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Ashik Sha, Ca, Mr.Vinay Jain Ca, Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2024 आदेश / Order Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2022-23/1051684572(1) Dated 30.03.2023 Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Pcit" For The

For Appellant: Shri Ashik Sha, CA
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 92C

…urt decision in the case of NTPC Limited relied upon by the assesse does not renders it an unfettered right to raise any ground in appeal at any point of time. It placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India 187 ITR 688 thus it was argued that the appellant has not been able to conclusively satisfy its bona-fide of the ground raised and why it was not raised earlier. The Ld. DR argued that the assesse fully participated in the assessment proceedings and hence cannot now challenge the revisionary proceedings. It was argued that the reliance of the appellant in th…