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 372,241 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

Acc Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3136/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…o raise additional grounds not merely in terms of legal submissions, but also additional claims not made in the return filed by it. [Para 10] From a consideration of decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85, it is clear that an assessee is entitled to raise not merely additional legal submissions before the appellate authorities, but is also entitled to raise additional claims before them. The appellate authorities have the discretion whether or not to permit such additional claims to be raised. It cannot, however, be said that t…

Acc Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3135/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…o raise additional grounds not merely in terms of legal submissions, but also additional claims not made in the return filed by it. [Para 10] From a consideration of decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85, it is clear that an assessee is entitled to raise not merely additional legal submissions before the appellate authorities, but is also entitled to raise additional claims before them. The appellate authorities have the discretion whether or not to permit such additional claims to be raised. It cannot, however, be said that t…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 268/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement 29Th Floor, Center-1 Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai-400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit - Ltu-1 V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai-400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ought to have entertained the impugned claim. Alternatively, it is contended that the CIT(A) enjoys plenary powers of the Assessing Officer, and following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT, (1991) 187 ITR 688, the claim should have been entertained by him as the complete facts were on record. In this context, the learned counsel referred to the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd. vide ITA No.1319/PN/2009 dated 30.01.2012 wherein the import of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Go…

Acc Ltd ( Formelry Known As the Associated Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addll CIT, (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6638/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Addl. Cit -Ltu (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement 29Th Floor, Center-1 Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai-400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit - Ltu-1 V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 (Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies Ltd.) World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Cement House, 121, M.K. Road Mumbai-400005 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ought to have entertained the impugned claim. Alternatively, it is contended that the CIT(A) enjoys plenary powers of the Assessing Officer, and following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT, (1991) 187 ITR 688, the claim should have been entertained by him as the complete facts were on record. In this context, the learned counsel referred to the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd. vide ITA No.1319/PN/2009 dated 30.01.2012 wherein the import of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Go…

Acc Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

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

ITA 6082/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…ought to have entertained the impugned claim. Alternatively, it is contended that the CIT(A) enjoys plenary powers of the Assessing Officer, and following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT, (1991) 187 ITR 688, the claim should have been entertained by him as the complete facts were on record. In this context, the learned counsel referred to the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd. vide ITA No.1319/PN/2009 dated 30.01.2012 wherein the import of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Go…

Acc Ltd ( Formerly Known As the Associates Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

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

ITA 4669/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…ought to have entertained the impugned claim. Alternatively, it is contended that the CIT(A) enjoys plenary powers of the Assessing Officer, and following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT, (1991) 187 ITR 688, the claim should have been entertained by him as the complete facts were on record. In this context, the learned counsel referred to the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd. vide ITA No.1319/PN/2009 dated 30.01.2012 wherein the import of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Go…

Addl.C.I.T. Ltu, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 4556/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…ought to have entertained the impugned claim. Alternatively, it is contended that the CIT(A) enjoys plenary powers of the Assessing Officer, and following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT, (1991) 187 ITR 688, the claim should have been entertained by him as the complete facts were on record. In this context, the learned counsel referred to the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd. vide ITA No.1319/PN/2009 dated 30.01.2012 wherein the import of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Go…

Srf Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl CIT, New Delhi

In the result, this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 774/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Ussrf Limited Vs. Acit Unitech Crest, Greenwood Range – 9, City Block – C, Sector – 45, Ltu, New Delhi Gurgaon – 122 003 Pan No. Aaacs 0206 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Shri R. K. Kapoor C.A. Shri Ravi Kumar Revenue By Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit (Dr) Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2016 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-44, New Delhi [For Short, Cit(A)] Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [For Short, 'The Act'] For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under:-

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92C

…0. Having heard the rival submissions and on perusing the materials available on record we find that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. 229 ITR 383 after considering the decision in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) has held that there is no reason to restrict the power of Tribunal u/s 254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and that both the assessee and Department have a right to file an appeal/cross objections before the tribunal and the Tribunal should not be prevented from considering q…

Zydus Healthcare Ltd, Gangtok vs. ACIT, Cir. 3(2), Gangtok

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 139/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healhcare Limited,……..................Appellant (Successor To Zydus Healthcare Sikkim), 4Th Floor, ‘D’ Wing, Zudus Corporate Park, Scheme No. 63, Survey No. 536, Khoraj (Gandhinagar), Nr. Vaishnodevi Circle, Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar, Gujrat-382481 [Pan: Aaacg1895Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim-737101 Appearances By: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, Ca & Sonal Pandey, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 20, 2023 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 156Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…for the assessee, in support of his application for permission to raise additional grounds of appeal, has relied upon following decisions:- (i) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC); (ii) Jute Corporation of India Limited v CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC); (iii)CIT v Nelliappan (S.) [1967] 66 ITR 722 (SC); (iv)Ahemdabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v CIT |1993) 199 ITR 351 (Bom.); (v)Inaroo Ltd. v CIT [1993] 204 ITR 312 (Bom.); 2 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healthcare Limited (vi)Ashok Vardhan Birla v CWT [19941 208 ITR 958 (Bom.); (vii) CIT v Govindram Bros. Pvt. Ltd. [1983] 141 ITR 626 (Bom…

M/S Alpha Elsec Defence & Aerospace Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 912/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2023AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ught on record to decide the additional grounds same may be admitted for adjudication of the issue raised therein. In this context the learned A.R. relied on the judgements of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) and CIT vs. National Thermal Power Corporation 229 ITR 383. 7. The learned D.R. submitted that the assessee has not raised the issue agitated in additional ground Nos. 1 & 2 before the CIT(A). Hence the additional grounds should not be admitted. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 raised in the additional grounds read as under: - 4 Alpha Elsec Defence & Aero…

Sri Santhemathavathur Bhadregowda Shivalingaiah, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-7(2)(5), Bangalore

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

ITA 549/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, D.R
Section 234Section 56(2)(vii)

…ITA No.549/Bang/2019 Sri Santhemathavathur Bhadregowda Shivalingaiah, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sri Santhemathavathur Bhadregowda Shivalingaiah, #115/116, 1st Main, 4th Cross Magadi Road, HVR Layout Vs. ITO Ward-7(2)(5) Bangalore 560 079 Bangalore PAN NO : AKTPS9680H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, D.R. Date of Hearing : 06.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 08.02.2023 O R D E R PER LAXMI PR…

M/S Tata Power Solar Systems Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 709/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri, Kanchan Koushal, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Suresh Babu, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(10)

…ging the validity of final assessment order dated 31.01.2017 was inadvertently not taken while filing the original grounds of appeal and hence it was prayed that the same may be admitted for adjudication. Reliance was placed on Jute Corporation of India Ltd. [187 ITR 688 (SC)] and other judgments. 9. After hearing both the parties, following the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of M/s National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC), the additional ground is admitted for adjudication 10. With regard to the issue contended through additional ground, it is submitted that the TPO vide the order…

Dsv Air & Sea Pvt. Ltd (Sucesssor to Panalpina World Transport (India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl /Jt/ACIT/ ITO/NFAC, Delhi

ITA 796/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Dhananjay Hande, Sr. A.R
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

…scribed time limit and as such, consequent assessment order is liable to be annulled; that additional ground can be raised at any stage of proceedings and relied upon the judgments passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT 187 ITR 688 and National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. 229 ITR 383. 7. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue opposed the application for additional ground on the grounds inter alia that application is not maintainable having been filed after undue delay; ITA No.796/M/202 8 M/s. DSV Air & Sea Pvt. Ltd. [Successor to Panalpina World Transport (I…

Captain Steel India Limited, Kolkata vs. CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 231/KOL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Sanjoy Kejriwal & Shri SiddharthFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 80J

…. Ltd. (2021) 435 ITR 1 (Kar.). Since the claim was made at the first appellate stage by way of raising an additional ground, assessee placed its reliance on the following judgments to support its contentions: (i) Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC); (ii) Addl. CIT Vs. Gurfargravures Pvt. Ltd. (1978) 111 ITR 1 (SC); 3 Captain Steel India Ltd., AY 2019-20 (iii) National Thermal Power Company Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC); (i) Union Coal Company Ltd. Vs. CIT (1968) 70 ITR 45 (Cal); (v) Ramco Cements Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2015) 373 ITR 146. 3.1. Assessee relied on decision of Hon’ble Supr…

S.S. Oral Hygiene Products P. Ltd ( Now Merged With Colgate Palmolive (I) Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 774/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…thorities. At the sake of repetition, we crave leave of Your Honours to rely upon the following decisions in support of our plea for admission of additional ground and adjudication of the enclosed additional ground of appeal: Jute Corporation of India Ltd. [187 ITR 688 (SC)] In this case, the Hon'ble Apex Court at page 693, observed as under: "Even otherwise, an appellate authority while hearing the appeal against the order of a subordinate authority, has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the question before it subject to the restrictions or limitations, if any, prescribed by th…

Ss Oral Hygeine Products P.Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate-Palmolive (India) Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3) ( Now Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 5677/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…thorities. At the sake of repetition, we crave leave of Your Honours to rely upon the following decisions in support of our plea for admission of additional ground and adjudication of the enclosed additional ground of appeal: Jute Corporation of India Ltd. [187 ITR 688 (SC)] In this case, the Hon'ble Apex Court at page 693, observed as under: "Even otherwise, an appellate authority while hearing the appeal against the order of a subordinate authority, has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the question before it subject to the restrictions or limitations, if any, prescribed by th…

DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. S.S Oral Hygiene Products P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the learned

ITA 5538/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ss Oral Hygeine Products Private Dcit Cir 3(3) [Now Commissioner Ltd (Now Merged With Colgate – Of Income Tax – 10(3)] Palmolive (India) Ltd Room No. 450, 4 Th Floor, Aayakar Colgate – Palmolive (India) Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 Limited, Colgate Research Centre, 020 Main Street, Near Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri

…thorities. At the sake of repetition, we crave leave of Your Honours to rely upon the following decisions in support of our plea for admission of additional ground and adjudication of the enclosed additional ground of appeal: Jute Corporation of India Ltd. [187 ITR 688 (SC)] In this case, the Hon'ble Apex Court at page 693, observed as under: "Even otherwise, an appellate authority while hearing the appeal against the order of a subordinate authority, has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the question before it subject to the restrictions or limitations, if any, prescribed by th…

Vivek Mehrotra, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2359/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleshri Vivek Mehrotra V. Dcit – Central Circle – 3(2) Office No. 116, Churchgate Chamber Room No. 1913, 19Th Floor Above Greater Bank, 5 New Marine Lines Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai -400020 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aahpm4127B (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Central Circle – 3(2) V. Shri Vivek Mehrotra Central Range - 3 Office No. 116, Churchgate Chamber Above Greater Bank, 5 New Marine Lines Room No. 1913, 19Th Floor Mumbai -400020 Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aahpm4127B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 153ASection 292CSection 69ASection 6A

…ase, where the assessment order has been passed without jurisdiction can be raised at any stage of the proceedings. Apart therefrom, the Ld. DR had also placed reliance on judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT 187 ITR 688 for the proposition that assessee has to explain why the additional ground could not be raised earlier. In the present case, the said issue was brought to the notice of the assessee by the Advocate only when preparing for this appeal. Since he did not have any knowledge of this issue it could not have been raised earlier. Attention of the Hon'ble…

Aptean India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 422/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 422/Bang/2022 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Aptean India Pvt. Ltd., 1/2, 8Th Floor, Level 5, The Assistant Golden Heights, Commissioner Of 59Th C Cross Road, Income Tax, 4Th M Block, Circle – 1(1)(1), Rajajinagar, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 010. Pan: Aaacc5890M Appellant Respondent : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee By Advocate : Shri Praveen Karanth, Cit- Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-01-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 25/03/2022 Passed By Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “The Grounds Mentioned Herein By The Appellant Are Without Prejudice To One Another General Ground 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Final Assessment Order Passed By National Faceless

For Respondent: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…dditional ground raised. 4.4 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 are admitting the additional ground raised by the assessee. Accordingly the application for admission of additional ground stands admitted. 5. Ground no. 20 r.w.s. Ground no. 8 – It is submitted that following comparables deserves to be excluded due to failure of upper turnover filter of 200 crores. The Ld.AR submitted that the turnover of as…

Excel Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 6(3), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 915/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, DR
Section 115JSection 14A

…that it is merely a legal ground require to be admitted. Assessee relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of National Thermal Power Company vs. CIT 229 ITR 383, Jute Excel Industries Ltd. A.Ys. 10-11 to 15-16 Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT 187 ITR 688 and Full Bench decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Ahmadabad Electricity vs. CIT 199 ITR 351. 09. We find that this is an alternative claim of the assessee, therefore, it is not an additional ground but an alternative claim, it is also connected to ground number 1 and 2 of the appeal of the learned assessing officer, which we will co…