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 372,010 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

Smt. Jyoti Jain, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, C-4(1), Chandigarh

The appeals of the assessees are allowed for

ITA 1075/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1074/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Lalit Jain The Assistant Commissioner बनाम S.C.O. 371-372, 2Nd Floor, Of Income Tax Circle-4(1), Sector-35B, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No : Aaupj 0091Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,“A”, “च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1074/CHD/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Lalit Jain The Assistant Commissioner बनाम S.C.O. 371-372, 2nd Floor, of Income Tax Circle-4(1), Sector-35B, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./PAN No : AAUPJ 0091Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1075/CHD/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Jyoti Jain The Assistant Commissioner बनाम S.C.O…

Sh. Lalit Jain, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, C-4(1), Chandigarh

The appeals of the assessees are allowed for

ITA 1074/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1074/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Lalit Jain The Assistant Commissioner बनाम S.C.O. 371-372, 2Nd Floor, Of Income Tax Circle-4(1), Sector-35B, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No : Aaupj 0091Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,“A”, “च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1074/CHD/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Lalit Jain The Assistant Commissioner बनाम S.C.O. 371-372, 2nd Floor, of Income Tax Circle-4(1), Sector-35B, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./PAN No : AAUPJ 0091Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1075/CHD/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Jyoti Jain The Assistant Commissioner बनाम S.C.O…

ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Vishwesha Co-Op. Housing Society Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2211/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, CIT-D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144A

…ers accepting the impugned capital gains have been issued in following cases: Babubhai P. Patel Vaishali B. Patel Madhuben Patel Babubhai Patel - HUF The facts have been perused once again as per ratio laid down in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. - 187 ITR 688 (SC). The factual position emerges as is indicated in the chart below:- Name Sha Amt of Share Cost Indexed Sale Capital Exempti Net Gain Total Tax of the re Share Cost Value Gain on Income Paid Asses Cer cont see t. No. I.T.A No. 2211/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No. 4 ITO vs. M/s. Vishwesha Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. Babu 12 250 16.26 1200000 2…

The ITO, Ward-4, Morbi vs. M/S Raiyani Cotton Industries, Morbi

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

ITA 129/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot18 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No. 129/Rjt/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri M. J. Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: 07/07/2021
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No. 129/Rjt/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12) ITO M/s. Raiyani Cotton बनाम/ Ward-4, Industries, A/p Neknam, Vs. Morbi Tal-Tankara, Morbi-363641 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAFR9304R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. DR अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Shri M. J. Ranpura, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent by : 07/07/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing 18/08/2021 घोषणा…

M/S Glaxosmithkline Asia Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Chandigarh

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

ITA 532/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jul 2021AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

…l ground has been raised requiring no fresh investigation into the facts the same be admitted. In this regard he relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N.T.P.C. Limited Vs. CIT, 229 ITR 383 and Jute Corporation of India Vs. CIT, 187 ITR 688. On the merits of the case, he relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble High Courts as referred to above, stating that the issue was squarely covered in favour of the assessee. 21. The Ld. DR raised no objection to the admission of the additional ground but contended that since the same were being ITA No.2453/Del/2016 A.Y. 2005-06 & ITA No.5…

DCIT-11(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sangam India Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee‟s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1490/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.1490/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dcit-11(1)(2) M/S. Sangam India Ltd. Gf, Room No.1 306, „B‟ Wing बिाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dynasty Business Park Vs. Mumbai-400 020 J.B. Nagar, A.K. Road Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaccs-0486-K (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & Co No.01/Mum/2021 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. Sangam India Ltd. Dcit-11(1)(2) 306, „B‟Wing Gf, Room No.1 बिाम/ Dynasty Business Park Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. J.B. Nagar, A.K. Road Mumbai-400 020 Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaccs-0486-K (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah-Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Ajit Kumar Shrivastava-Ld. Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 02/07/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 26/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Shrivastava-Ld
Section 2(24)

…the Tribunal so long as they arise from the subject matter of the proceedings and not necessarily from the subject matter raised in the memo of appeal. The reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85 wherein the Apex Court permitted the appellant to raise an additional ground for the first time before the appellate authority claiming deduction of purchase tax liability because the same had become liable to payment subsequent to the assessment order. The Full Bench observed that the Apex Court in Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. (…

Garg Exports (India), New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-35(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5882/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 144Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Garg Exports (India), Vs. ITO, 29/5, Nangia Park, Shakti Ward-35(2), Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi PAN :AAAFG3071H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, Adv. Respondent by Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr.DR Date of hearing 28.06.2021 Date of pronouncement 30.06.2021 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the order dated 30/04/2019 passed by the learned Commi…

Dy CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Navi Mumbai

ITA 7672/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Dcit -15(2)(1) M/S Hexaware Technologies 3Rd Floor, Room No. 357, Vs. Ltd., Unit No. 152, Millennium Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Business Park, Ttc, Marine Lines, Industrial Area, Mahape, Mumbai – 400 020 Navi Mumbai – 400 710

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 288Section 80J

…ITA No.7672/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2010-11 1 DCIT-15(2)(1) Vs. M/s Hexaware Technologies Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) DCIT -15(2)(1) M/s Hexaware Technologies 3rd Floor, Room No. 357, Vs. Ltd., Unit No. 152, Millennium Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Business Park, TTC, Marine Lines, Industrial Area, Mahape, Mumbai – 400 020 Navi Mumbai – 400 710 PAN No. AABCA3203F (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee by : Shri Rajan Vora, A.R Revenue by : Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R Date of Hearing : 22/06/2021 Date of p…

The Sarswat Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 1 (3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6609/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Anil Sathe, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Neehar Pandey, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 3Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…refer to some of these decisions only to deal with two submissions on behalf of the department. The first is with respect to an observation of the Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 1991 Supp (2) SCC 744 = (1991) 187 ITR 688. The second submission is based on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax. 11(A). In Jute Corporation of India Limited v. CIT, for the assessment year 1974-75 the appellant did not claim any deduction of its liability towards purchase tax under the provisions of the Bengal Raw Jute Taxation Act, 19…

Sh. Jeet Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 3068/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anima, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148

…The Learned Counsel for the Assessee referring to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs., CIT reported in [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) and in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd., vs., CIT reported in [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) and various other decisions submitted that all the material facts 11 ITA.No.3068/Del./2017 Shri Jeet Singh, Gurgaon. are already available on record and no new facts are required to be investigated. The additional grounds being legal in nature and go to the root of the matter and, therefore, these additional grounds should be admitted for a…

Textron India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1342/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Sumeet Khurana, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

…contentions relating to these grounds mentioned in the assessee’s letter dated 23.7.2017 was available on record before the CIT(Appeals) and pleaded that the additional grounds be admitted relying on the following judgments:- • Jute Corporation of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) • Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. and Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. v. CIT, 199 ITR 351 (Bom) • New India Industries Ltd., 207 ITR 1010 (Guj) • National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT, 229 ITR 383 (SC) • Ashok Vardhan Birla, 208 ITR 958 (Bom) • Controller of Estate Duty v. R. Brahadeeswaran, 163 ITR 680 (Mad) 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR rais…

Modern Papers, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 34(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3931/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. S.S. Nagar, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sohail Malik, Sr. DR
Section 139(5)

…claim for deduction of education cess in computing the tax liability also. 6. So far as admission of additional ground is concerned, the law is fairly settled in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT, 187 ITR 688 (SC) and National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 229 ITR(SC) and other catena of decisions from various authorities, wherein it is held that if consideration of additional grounds does not require any additional material and such additional grounds could be adjudicated with reference to the material already available on record, it would be just…

Sh. Valmik Thapar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 5767/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…re on record, no further facts are required to be investigated and therefore the ground raised by the assessee, , should be admitted. It is further stated that in case of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India Ltd versus CIT 187 ITR 688, it is held that the appellate authority has the jurisdiction to permit the appellant to raise an additional ground, which could not have been raised at the stage when the return was filed or when the assessment order was made and the ground became available on account of a change of circumstances of law. In view of this, the application of the a…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Valmik Thapar, New Delhi

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 6726/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…re on record, no further facts are required to be investigated and therefore the ground raised by the assessee, , should be admitted. It is further stated that in case of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India Ltd versus CIT 187 ITR 688, it is held that the appellate authority has the jurisdiction to permit the appellant to raise an additional ground, which could not have been raised at the stage when the return was filed or when the assessment order was made and the ground became available on account of a change of circumstances of law. In view of this, the application of the a…

Shri Valmik Thapar, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 6346/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…re on record, no further facts are required to be investigated and therefore the ground raised by the assessee, , should be admitted. It is further stated that in case of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India Ltd versus CIT 187 ITR 688, it is held that the appellate authority has the jurisdiction to permit the appellant to raise an additional ground, which could not have been raised at the stage when the return was filed or when the assessment order was made and the ground became available on account of a change of circumstances of law. In view of this, the application of the a…

Ajanta Pharma Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-7(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4785/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.4784 & 4785/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/S Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-Tax-Central Circle 6(2),19Th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. Pan No. Aaaca5579P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…refer to some of these decisions only to deal with two submissions on behalf of the department. The first is with respect to an observation of the Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 1991 Supp (2) SCC 744 = (1991) 187 ITR 688. The second submission is based on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax. 11(A). In Jute Corporation of India Limited v. CIT, for the assessment year 1974-75 the appellant did not claim any deduction of its liability towards purchase tax under the provisions of the Bengal Raw Jute Taxation Act, 1…

Ajanta Pharma Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-7(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4784/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.4784 & 4785/Mum/2019 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) M/S Ajanta Pharma Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of 98, Ajanta House, Vs. Income-Tax-Central Circle 6(2),19Th Floor, Air India Govt. Industrial Area, Hindustan Naka, Building, Nariman Point, Charkop,Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 021. Mumbai – 400 067. Pan No. Aaaca5579P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R
Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

…refer to some of these decisions only to deal with two submissions on behalf of the department. The first is with respect to an observation of the Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 1991 Supp (2) SCC 744 = (1991) 187 ITR 688. The second submission is based on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax. 11(A). In Jute Corporation of India Limited v. CIT, for the assessment year 1974-75 the appellant did not claim any deduction of its liability towards purchase tax under the provisions of the Bengal Raw Jute Taxation Act, 1…

Morgan Stanley Advantage Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 9(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 625/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Sunil LalaFor Respondent: Shri A Mohan
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…le. In support of these submissions, the learned Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following case laws wherein it has been held that the additional ground of appeal can be raised if the facts are on record:- i. Jute Corporation Of India Limited 187 ITR 688 (SC); ii. National Thermal Power Co. Limited Vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC); iii. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Limited 199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB). 4. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, made following submissions on the issue of “additional ground” raised by the assessee. “On 12.02.2021 assessee has filed a copy of „additional ground…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Flextronics Software System Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2881/DEL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No.2881 /Del/2011 (A.Y 2004-05) (Through Video Conferencing) Vs Flextronics Software System Dcit Circle 11(1), Room No. 312, Ld. (Earlier Known As Hughes C. R. Building Software System Ltd.) New Delhi 5, Jain Mandir, Connaught (Appellant) Place, New Delhi Aaach0152P (Respondent)

Section 46ASection 92C

…the CIT(A) has powers for allowing the claim of the assessee. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions wherein it has been held that the powers of the CIT(A) are co-terminus with that of the assessing authority: a) Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC) b) CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC) The Ld. AR further submitted that in the transfer pricing documentation, the assessee determined arm’s length price of the international transaction of rendering BPO services applying CUP method. Since the prices charged by the assessee at USD 19.20 per hour from the AE exceed the price…

Itd Cementation India Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 5869/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Us For Which Necessary Endorsement Was Made By Him In Our Files. Accordingly, The Ground No.4 Is Dismissed As Not Pressed For Both The Years.

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…be admitted, this argument deserves to be rejected in view of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of „National M/s. ITD Cementation India Ltd., Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT‟, 229 ITR 383 (SC) and „Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT‟, 187 ITR 688 (SC), and the Full Bench decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of „Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT‟, 199 ITR 351 (Bom.). In fact, as rightly submitted on behalf of the assessee, this is the settled position of law, as has been held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of „Ultratech Cement Ltd. Vs. ACIT‟, 81 taxmann.…