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

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 747/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN Virtual Hearing BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. S. PADMAVATHY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 745 to 747/Coch/2019 AY 2008-09 to 2010-11 & ITA Nos. 272 to 275/Coch/2020 AY 2011-12 to 2014-15 The Federal Bank Ltd., Vs. The Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax Federal Bank Towers, Palace Corporate Cr 2(1) Junction, Aluva, Ernakulam 683 101 Kochi PAN : AABCT0026H APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.33 to 35 /Coch/2020 AY 2008-09 to 2010-11 & ITA No.309 to 311/Coch/2020 AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. The Federal Bank Ltd., Income T…

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 746/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN Virtual Hearing BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. S. PADMAVATHY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 745 to 747/Coch/2019 AY 2008-09 to 2010-11 & ITA Nos. 272 to 275/Coch/2020 AY 2011-12 to 2014-15 The Federal Bank Ltd., Vs. The Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax Federal Bank Towers, Palace Corporate Cr 2(1) Junction, Aluva, Ernakulam 683 101 Kochi PAN : AABCT0026H APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.33 to 35 /Coch/2020 AY 2008-09 to 2010-11 & ITA No.309 to 311/Coch/2020 AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. The Federal Bank Ltd., Income T…

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 745/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN Virtual Hearing BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. S. PADMAVATHY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 745 to 747/Coch/2019 AY 2008-09 to 2010-11 & ITA Nos. 272 to 275/Coch/2020 AY 2011-12 to 2014-15 The Federal Bank Ltd., Vs. The Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax Federal Bank Towers, Palace Corporate Cr 2(1) Junction, Aluva, Ernakulam 683 101 Kochi PAN : AABCT0026H APPELLANT RESPONDENT ITA No.33 to 35 /Coch/2020 AY 2008-09 to 2010-11 & ITA No.309 to 311/Coch/2020 AY 2012-13 and 2014-15 The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. The Federal Bank Ltd., Income T…

DCIT Central Circle -2(2), Maharashtra vs. M/S. Vinati Organics Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide

ITA 445/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhdeputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Vinati Organics Ltd Income Tax, Cc, 2(2) 1102, Parinee Crescezo, Old Cgo Building, G, Block, Plot No. 806, 8Th Floor, M.K. Road C38/39, Behind Mca, Mumbai – 400020 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacv6538K Respondent .. Appellant M/S Vinati Organics Ltd Vs. Acit, Cc-2(2) 11Th Floor, 1102, Parinee Crescezo, G, Block, Plot No. C38/39, Behind Mca, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacv6538K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Nishant Thakker &For Respondent: Hemant Kumar Chimanlal
Section 143(2)

…rendered by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of PCIT vs Karnataka state co-op Federation Ltd. 128 Taxmann.com. Besides various Courts have taken similar view in the following cases: 1. NTPC Vs CIT 229 ITR 383(SC), 2. Jute Corporation of India Vs. CTT 181 ITR 688 (SC). Therefore, considering the overall facts and legal position on the issue, remand report of the AO and the rejoinder of the appellant, the additional ground taken by the assessee is admitted and is adjudicated as under: 9.8 As regards Sales Tax Subsidy, the AO in its remand report has stated that the nature of a subsidy, whether capital or r…

M/S. Vinati Organics Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide

ITA 402/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhdeputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Vinati Organics Ltd Income Tax, Cc, 2(2) 1102, Parinee Crescezo, Old Cgo Building, G, Block, Plot No. 806, 8Th Floor, M.K. Road C38/39, Behind Mca, Mumbai – 400020 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacv6538K Respondent .. Appellant M/S Vinati Organics Ltd Vs. Acit, Cc-2(2) 11Th Floor, 1102, Parinee Crescezo, G, Block, Plot No. C38/39, Behind Mca, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaacv6538K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Nishant Thakker &For Respondent: Hemant Kumar Chimanlal
Section 143(2)

…rendered by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of PCIT vs Karnataka state co-op Federation Ltd. 128 Taxmann.com. Besides various Courts have taken similar view in the following cases: 1. NTPC Vs CIT 229 ITR 383(SC), 2. Jute Corporation of India Vs. CTT 181 ITR 688 (SC). Therefore, considering the overall facts and legal position on the issue, remand report of the AO and the rejoinder of the appellant, the additional ground taken by the assessee is admitted and is adjudicated as under: 9.8 As regards Sales Tax Subsidy, the AO in its remand report has stated that the nature of a subsidy, whether capital or r…

Astrazeneca Pharma India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bangalore

In the result, the revenue appeal is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 460/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.It(Tp)A No. 460/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(11)

…In view of the above, the Appellant requests your Honours to admit the additional ground of appeal. In respect of the above proposition, we rely on the following decisions: • National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. (229 ITR 383) (SC) • Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (187 ITR 688) (SC) • Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. (199 ITR 351) (Born FB) • M/s Wheels India Ltd (ITA No 251/Mds/2010) dated 14 March 2014 • All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. vs. DCIT — ITAT Special Bench- ITA No. 5018/Munn/2010 dated 21 May 2012 In view of the above, the Appellant requests your Honours to consider the additional ground of appeal enclosed her…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Astra Zenca Pharma India Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the revenue appeal is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 446/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.It(Tp)A No. 460/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(11)

…In view of the above, the Appellant requests your Honours to admit the additional ground of appeal. In respect of the above proposition, we rely on the following decisions: • National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. (229 ITR 383) (SC) • Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (187 ITR 688) (SC) • Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. (199 ITR 351) (Born FB) • M/s Wheels India Ltd (ITA No 251/Mds/2010) dated 14 March 2014 • All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. vs. DCIT — ITAT Special Bench- ITA No. 5018/Munn/2010 dated 21 May 2012 In view of the above, the Appellant requests your Honours to consider the additional ground of appeal enclosed her…

Ands Foundation, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Exemptions, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 7151/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 164(2)Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Ands Foundation, C/o. Vs. Income-Tax Officer, M/s. RRA Taxindia, D- Ward-1(1), 28,South Extension, Part-1, New Delhi New Delhi-1100 49 PAN :AABTA8346C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Dr. Rakesh Gupta and Shri Shrey Jain, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 01.09.2022 Date of pronouncement 30.11.2022 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 4.7.2019 of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) -40, Delhi pertaining to assessme…

M/S Ge T&D India Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Unit 1, Chennai

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

ITA 725/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 725/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010 - 11 Ge T&D India Ltd., The Dcit, 19/1, Ioc Building, Gst Road, Vs. Large Tax Payer Unit-1, Pallavaram, Chennai Chennai – 600 043. Pan: Aaacg 2115R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Sriram Seshadhri, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Marudhu Pandian, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadhri, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri S. Marudhu Pandian, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…the assessee wishes to include the same as a separate ground of appeal. The Ld.AR further submitted that that all facts relevant for adjudication of the additional ground is placed on record before the Hon'ble ITAT. grounds:- Jute Corporation of India [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) National Thermal Power Co Ltd (229 ITR 383 (SC) Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders [TS-463-HC-2012 (BOM)] The assessee hs raised the additional ground regarding reopening, which reads as under:- Reopening of assessment On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law 2.1The Learned Respondent erred in re-opening the assessment without bri…

Bank of India, Surat vs. ITO (TDS-1), Surat

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

ITA 323/SRT/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj R Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 201(1)

…o entertain the additional ground though not raised earlier. For our above contention that the additional ground can be entertained by the Hon'ble ITAT though not raised earlier, we rely on the following judgments: (i) Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Nirbheram Daluram [1997] 91 Taxman 181 (SC) (iii) CIT vs. Gokuldas & Commission. [2002] 122 Taxman 849 With this background, we humbly request your honour to entertain the ground for the sake of the justice to the assessee.” 5. On perusal of records, we find that impugned orders were passed by Ld. CIT(A) on 12.10.2017 and 15.06.…

Bank of India, Surat vs. Dy. CIT, TDS, Circle, Surat

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

ITA 248/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj R Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 201(1)

…o entertain the additional ground though not raised earlier. For our above contention that the additional ground can be entertained by the Hon'ble ITAT though not raised earlier, we rely on the following judgments: (i) Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Nirbheram Daluram [1997] 91 Taxman 181 (SC) (iii) CIT vs. Gokuldas & Commission. [2002] 122 Taxman 849 With this background, we humbly request your honour to entertain the ground for the sake of the justice to the assessee.” 5. On perusal of records, we find that impugned orders were passed by Ld. CIT(A) on 12.10.2017 and 15.06.…

Bank of India, Surat vs. Dy. CIT, TDS, Circle, Surat

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

ITA 247/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj R Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 201(1)

…o entertain the additional ground though not raised earlier. For our above contention that the additional ground can be entertained by the Hon'ble ITAT though not raised earlier, we rely on the following judgments: (i) Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Nirbheram Daluram [1997] 91 Taxman 181 (SC) (iii) CIT vs. Gokuldas & Commission. [2002] 122 Taxman 849 With this background, we humbly request your honour to entertain the ground for the sake of the justice to the assessee.” 5. On perusal of records, we find that impugned orders were passed by Ld. CIT(A) on 12.10.2017 and 15.06.…

Bank of India, Surat vs. Dy. CIT, TDS, Circle, Surat

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

ITA 246/SRT/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj R Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 201(1)

…o entertain the additional ground though not raised earlier. For our above contention that the additional ground can be entertained by the Hon'ble ITAT though not raised earlier, we rely on the following judgments: (i) Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Nirbheram Daluram [1997] 91 Taxman 181 (SC) (iii) CIT vs. Gokuldas & Commission. [2002] 122 Taxman 849 With this background, we humbly request your honour to entertain the ground for the sake of the justice to the assessee.” 5. On perusal of records, we find that impugned orders were passed by Ld. CIT(A) on 12.10.2017 and 15.06.…

ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Ashesh Sidharth Agarwal, Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1004/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1004/Ahd/2018 (िनधार्रण वषर् / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बनाम/ Income Tax Officer Shri Ashesh Sidharth Agarwal Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad Vs. D-804, Awari Flats, B/H Karnavati Bunglow, S. G. Highway, Satellite, Ahmedabad - 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afwpa2415A (अपीलाथीर् /Appellant) (प्र"यथीर् / Respondent) .. अपीलाथीर् ओर से /Appellant By : Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr.D.R. प्र"यथीर् की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of 07/09/2022 Hearing घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of 31/10/2022 Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri V. K. Mangla, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80C

…Jogindersingh (ITA No. 2942/DELH1/2011) ITAT, Delhi - Anmol Colour India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO 31 SOT 18 (JP) 121 ITJ 269: ITAT, Jaipur. - CIT Vs.. Khanpur Cool Synthicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC): The ratio laid down in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. - 187 ITR 688 is applied. Under the circumstances, I hold that the appellant has carried on business activities for the year under consideration and all the receipts having duly accounted for in the cash book, are treated as business receipts. All the cash found to have been deposited in the bank account are also duly reflected in the cash book. The perusal of…

Satyen Sarawat L/H of Late Smt.Anjana Saraswat, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-33, Kolkata

ITA 2435/KOL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2008-09
Section 143(13)Section 147Section 148Section 54E

…me of hearing of appeal 3. At the outset before us the Ld. Counsel for the assessee placing reliance on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Co.Ltd Vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) and Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) prayed for admitting the following additional ground:- 7. For that the AO issuing the notice u/s. 148, had no jurisdiction over the appellant and therefore the entire reassessment is liable to be quashed. 4. As agreed by both the parties we will first take up the additional ground challenging assumption of jurisdiction by the ld.AO for iss…

Pallavi Constructions, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 649/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Pallavi Constructions Vs. Acit Hyderabad Circle 14(1) Pan:Aacfp1600M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/10/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.2.2018 Of The Learned Cit (A)-6, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Development Of Properties/Construction. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.11.2014 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,16,40,200/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Observed From The Details Furnished By The Assessee That It Has Claimed An Amount Of Rs.2,72,36,046/- Towards “Bank Interest & Charges”. On Being Asked By The Assessing Officer To Submit The Page 1 Of 8

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 191Section 194A(3)(ii)Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 201Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 40

…unsel for the assessee referring to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Ltd reported in 229 ITR 383 and the decision in the case of Jute Page 3 of 8 ITA No 649 of 2018 Pallavi Constructions Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688(1990) submitted that these grounds being purely legal in nature and no new facts are required to be investigated, these grounds should be admitted for adjudication. 6.1 After hearing both the sides and considering the fact that the additional grounds raised by the assessee are purely legal in nature and no new facts are required to be investigat…

The ITO, Ward-2(2)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Hemantkumar Chhabildas Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1695/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1695/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 I.T.O, Hemantkumar Chhabildas Patel, Ward-2(2)(2), Vs. 78, Kalhar Exortica, Ahmedabad. Near Science City Road, Soal, Ahmedabad-380060. Pan: Aftpp3706J

For Appellant: Ms Nupur Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 48Section 68Section 69

…mount in the assessment order also. Copies of above accounts have been placed on record as per Annexure-C and have been examined. All the above entries are explained by the appellant and examined as per ratio laid down in the case of Jute Corpn. Of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) and the comments are as under: Sr.No. Date Description Amount Remarks 1 02/05/2011 RTGS, Mahesh K. Patel 24,00,0007^ The deposit by specific person and explained. 2 18/07/2011 RTGS- Paramyug Land 15,00,000/- The deposit by specific person and explained. 3 21/07/2011 RTGS- Paramyug Land 12,00,000/- The deposit by specific person and explained…

Sankalp Recreation Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1666/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1666/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Sankalp Recreation Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., C/O Ketan H. Shah,Advocate Vs. Circle-4(1)(1), 512, Times Square-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Ram Baug Bunglow, Thaltej Shilaj Road, Thaltej, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Shah, with Shri Aman Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 154

…Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 also, the apex court considering the powers of the Appellate Commissioner as well as the Tribunal to permit additional grounds observed as under (page 386) : "In the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688, this court, while dealing with the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, observed that an appellate 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 the statutory provisions. In the absence of any statutory provision,…

M/.S Synamedia India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed in respect of the issues argued and considered hereinabove

ITA 2595/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 2595/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Synamedia India Pvt. Ltd., Block 9A & 9B, The Deputy Pritech Park, Commissioner Of Survey No. 51-64/4, Income Tax, Sarjapur Outer Ring Circle – 6(1)(2), Road, Bengaluru. Vs. Bellandur Village, Bengaluru – 560 103. Pan: Aaccn1140K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ankur Pai, Advocate : Shri Praveen Karanth, Revenue By Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 28-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-10-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Dated 29/10/2019 Passed By The Ld.Dcit, Circle – 6(1)(2), Bangalore For A.Y. 2014-15 On Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Pai, Advocate
Section 143(2)

…estigation of any facts. 10. 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 additional grounds raised by assessee stands admitted. 11. Before we undertake the comparability analysis, it is sinequanon to understand the functions performed, assets owned and risks assumed. Page 16 of 51 IT(TP)A No. 2595/Bang/2019 12. The Ld.AR submitted that i…

M/S. Ruchi Sarees Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(1), Surat

In the result, ground No. 1 of the appeal is also dismissed

ITA 468/SRT/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 68

…of appeal are available on record and no new fact is to be brought on record. To support his submissions, the ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NTPC Vs CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 and Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688. 7. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that no ground of appeal was raised by assessee before the first appellate authority. No facts regarding challenging the validity of notice under Section 148 and reopening under Section 147 of the Act is emanating from the order of ld. CIT(A) which is not the ground in the present appe…