How many judgments cite Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT?

1,372 judgments on BharatTax cite Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (187 ITR 688), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 153A, Section 132, Section 142(1).

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

Issues it is cited on

block period section 158b section 119 section 158 section 127 income escaping assessment section 149 loose papers section 132a chief commissioner section 151 section 92ca

Judgments citing Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Evolving Systems Networks India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed and revenue’s appeal stands partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 419/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Apr 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri. O.P. Meena

For Appellant: Mr. Muzaffar Hussain CIT – DRFor Respondent: Shri. Padamchand Khincha, CA

Section 10ASection 143Section 144C(13)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A 419/Bang/2016 Asst. Year : 2011 – 12 Income – Tax Officer, M/s. Evolving Systems Ward – 2 (1) (4), Networks India Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 207, 2nd Floor, ‘Gurudas Heritage’, BMTC Building, 3rd Floor, 59/2, Koramangala, Vs. 100 Ft. Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 095. Banashankari II Stage, Bengaluru – 560 070. PAN NO : AABCE2761N APPELLANT RESPONDENT & IT(TP)A 461/Bang/2016 Asst. Year : 2011 – 12 M/s. Evolving Systems Income – Tax Officer, Networks India Pvt. Ltd., Ward –…

Manubhai Gems Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC2 (3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our order

ITA 7301/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shree V.Sreekar-Ld.DR

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

…require appreciation of new facts and raises pure question of law. For the said submissions, reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Thermal Power Corporation Vs. CIT [229 ITR 383]; Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT [187 ITR 688] and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [199 ITR 351]. Going by the ratio of aforesaid decisions, the additional ground was admitted. 3 Manubhai Gems Private Limited Assessment Year :2010-11 1.3 We have carefully heard the arguments advanced by both the representatives vis-à-vis grounds of appeal.…

Pinakin Laxmichand Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 19 (2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6112/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Tiwari a/wFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora

Section 36Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.6112/Mum./2018 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) ITA no.6113/Mum./2018 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) Shri Pinakin Laxmichand Shah 212, Shreeji Chambers ……………. Appellant Opera House, Mumbai 400 004 PAN – AACPS7747Q v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–19(2), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri S.C. Tiwari a/w Ms. Rutuja Pawar Revenue by : Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora Date of Hearing – 16.12.2020 Date of Order – 13.03.2020 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. T…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 6(3)(1), Bangalore vs. Sri. Sandeep Bhujanga Shetty, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated above and appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1068/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Mar 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. Manjeet Singh, Addl. CIT – DRFor Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, C A

Section 54Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA 1068/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015 – 16 Asst. Commissioner of Shri. Sandeep Bhujanga Income Tax, Shetty, Circle – 6(3) (1), No – B, SNS Chambers, Room No. 438, 4th Floor, Vs. 274, Sankey Road, BMTC Building, Sadashivanagar, Koramangala, Bengaluru – 560 080. Bengaluru – 560 095. PAN NO : AACPS 9801 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT & ITA 1070/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015 – 16 Shri. Sandeep B Shetty, Asst. Commissioner of No – 13, SNS Chambers, Income Tax, 274, Sankey Ro…

Mr. Dinesh Sharma, Hapur vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 5234/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 271(1)Section 69

…equire any fresh investigation into facts apart from looking into the material already on record and the same may be admitted in view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of NTPC vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) and Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC) and the issue in dispute may be decided in favour of the assessee. To support his contention, he draw my attention towards the order sheet dated 13.03.2015 of the proceedings of the Assessing Officer, a copy of which was placed before the Bench. He also draw my attention towards the notice issued u/s. 143(2) of the Act dated 13.03.2015 for a…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 219/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 43B

…if the grounds raised are bona fide. In support of this proposition the Id. AR relied on plethora of judgments including the decision of Supreme Court in the cases of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd Vs CIT (229 ITR 383)& Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (187 ITR 688)and Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Private Limited (252 CTR 151)and the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Jai Parabolic Springs Limited (306 ITR 42).The Ld. AR further took recourse to Explanation 5 to Section 32 which puts the question of allowing depreciation beyond any doubt and makes the deduction…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 218/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 43B

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 217/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 43B

Shabbir Huseni Merchant, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer(It)-3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4675/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Shabbir Husseni Merchant Vs. Income Tax Officer (It)- B/405, Raj Mandir 3(2)(1) Off. Yari Road Mumbai Versova, Andheri East Mumbai – 400 061 Pan/Gir No.Aeapm7675K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 271(1)(c)

…root of the matter and does not require any verification of fresh facts and hence, by following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Limited reported in 229 ITR 383 and in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. reported in 187 ITR 688, we deem it fit to admit the additional ground of appeal raised by the assessee and take up the same for adjudication. 3. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee is an individual and had filed his return of income for the A.Y.2014-15 on 09/12/2014 declaring total income of Rs.7,01,540/…

Durga Ferrous P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-7(4), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 672/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…equire any fresh investigation into facts apart from looking into the material already on record and the same may be admitted in view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of NTPC vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC) and Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC) and the issue in dispute may be decided in favour of the assessee. To support his contention, he draw my attention towards the order sheet dated 05.10.2015 of the proceedings of the Assessing Officer which is placed at page no. 107 of the Paper Book. 4. On the contrary, Ld. DR stated that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned order on the b…

Addl CIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Sons Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4893/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, CIT-DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…basis of records which were available in the assessment proceedings and prayed before the bench to admit the same for adjudication. In defense of his arguments the ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions: - i. Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT (187 ITR 688 (SC); ii. National Thermal Power Corpn. Ltd. V. CIT (229 ITR 383) (Bom High Court) (FB); : 4 : M/s. Tata Sons Ltd., (Group case) iii. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT (188 ITR 351) (Bom High Court) (FB); iv. CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (349 ITR 336) (Bom High Court) 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee in support of his above…

Tata Sons Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl.C.I.T. 2(3), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4543/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, CIT-DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Income Tax Officer-23(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Indian Corporate Loan Securities Trust 2008 Series 14, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue's appeal for A

ITA 4789/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Iii Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat17440L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Matru Mandir 2008 Series 36 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16925L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals In Ita No.4789/Mum/2017, 4791/Mum/2017 & 4794/Mum/2017 For A.Y.2010-11 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 32/It-604/23(1)(2)/2015-16, Cit(A)-32/It-48/19(3)(2)/2012-13 & Cit(A)-32/It-483/Ito-19(3)(4)/12-13 Respectively Dated 24/04/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 26/02/2016, 31/10/2012 Respectively By The Ld. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(2) & 19(3)(2) Respectively, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 148Section 161Section 161(1)Section 61

…rendered in a case where the additional ground was filed by the assessee, however, the ratio of the judgement is equally applicable in a case where the department filed additional grounds. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd.187 ITR 688 held that the Act does not contain any express provision debarring an assessee from raising an additional ground in appeal and there is no provision in the Act placing restriction on the power of the appellate authority in entertaining an additional ground of appeal. The Bombay High Court in the case of Pruthvi Brokers & share Holders,349 ITR 336…

M/S. Laxmi Rolling and Strips Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 4(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2013/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Council for DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, BANGALORE Before Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member ITA No.2013/Bang/2019 : Asst.Year 2012-2013 M/s.Laxmi Rolling and Strips The Income Tax Officer Private Limited, Plot No.54, Vs. Ward 4(1)(1) Anekal Taluk, Bommasandra Bangalore. Industrial Area Bangalore – 560 099. PAN : AAACL8886A. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Ramasubramanian, CA Respondent by : Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Council for DR Date of Date of Hearing : 23.01.2020 Pronouncement : 28.01.2020 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A),…

The DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed to the extent indicated in the order

ITA 7486/MUM/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2020AY 2004-2005

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7486/Mum/2007 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Acit-(Ltu)-1 Ambuja Cements Limited बनाम/ World Trade Centre [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.] Elegant Business Park Centre-1, 29Th Floor, Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-05. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg-0569-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7494/Mum/2007 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Ambuja Cements Limited Dcit–Range-3(1) [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd] बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Elegant Business Park Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg 0569 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No.222/Mum/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 7494/Mum/2007] (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2004-05) Acit-(Ltu)-1 Ambuja Cements Limited बनाम/ [Earlier Known As Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.] World Trade Centre Elegant Business Park Centre-1, 29Th Floor, Vs. Midc Cross Road “B”, Off Andheri-Kurla Road Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-05. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacg-0569-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/Shri Yogesh Thar, Hardik Nirmal &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma-Ld.CIT-DR & Shri

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…oyment and therefore, the same would be capital in nature. In the above background, a plea has been raised to admit the said additional ground of appeal. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Jute Corporation of India Ltd. V/s CIT (187 ITR 688), decision of jurisdictional High Court in Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. V/s CIT (199 ITR 351) and the decision of this Tribunal in Nivea India P.Ltd. V/s DCIT (2017 189 TTJ 422). 5.2 Au Contraire, the revenue has filed cross-objections, against admission of additional ground of appeal, at this stage. The objection raised by revenue read as unde…

Addl CIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Communications Ltd ( Formerly Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4452/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Additional Commissioner Vs. M/S. Tata Communications Of Income Tax, Range – Limited (Formerly Known As 1(3) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited) Mumbai Videsh Sanchar Bhavan Room No.540/564, 5 Th M.G.Road, Fort Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 001 Maharshi Karve Road, New Marine Linmes Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacv2808C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & M/S. Tata Communications Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known As Income Tax, Range – 1(3) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Mumbai Limited) Room No.540, Aayakar Videsh Sanchar Bhavan Bhavan, Maharshi Karve M.G.Road, Fort Road Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacv2808C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Tata Communications Ltd.

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 263

…risdictional issues and can be decided on the basis of facts available on record and there is no requirement to investigate into new facts in the light of the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 187 ITR 688; Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. NTPC Ltd. reported in 229 ITR 383 (SC) and Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders reported in 349 ITR 336 (Bom), among others. 5.1. At the instance of the bench, the ld. DR filed the following written submissions clarifying the queries raised by the…

Imperial Consultants & Securities Ltd. (Formerly Known As Omperial Consultants & Securities Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT -6 (3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3529/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S. Imperial Consultants & Dcit, Circle - 6(3)(1) Securities Ltd. Room No. 506, 5Th Floor (Formerly Imperial Consultants & Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Securities P. Ltd) Vs. Mumbai 400020 Manickam Complex, Gr. Floor 1/3, General Paters Roadchennai 600002 Pan – Aaacg4413G Appellant Respondent Dcit, Circle - 6(3)(1) M/S. Imperial Consultants & Room No. 506, 5Th Floor Securities Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Essar House, 11, Kk Marg Mumbai 400020 Mahalaxmi, Mumbai 400034 Pan – Aaacg4413G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 36(1)(iii)Section 56Section 57

…are coming out of the assessment records. Therefore the learned A.R. prayed that the same may kindly be admitted for adjudication. The ld AR relied on the following decisions on the admissibility of additional grounds: i)Jute Corporation of India Ltd Vs. CIT 187 ITR 688(SC) ii)National thermal Power Corporation of India Ltd.Vs CIT(1998) 220 ITR 383(SC) iii) CIT Vs Prithvi Brokers and Shareholders (2012) 349 ITR 336(bom) 16. The learned D.R., on the other hand, strongly opposed admission of additional grounds on the ground that these grounds were never raised before the learned CIT(A) nor the claim was made in…

Oracle Financial Services Software Ltd ( Formerly Knoawn As I-Flex Solutions Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 855/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Sawhney, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Awunghi Gimson, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…position which has come to the notice of the assessee only recently and therefore the same has been filed immediately before this Hon’ble Forum. In defence of his arguments, the Ld. A.R. relied on the following decisions: 1. Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT 187 ITR 688 (SC) 2. National Power Thermal Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 220 ITR 383 (SC) 3. CIT vs. Prithvi Brokers and Shareholder (2012) 349 ITR 336 (Bombay) The Ld. A.R. finally prayed that in view of the ratio laid down in the above decisions the additional ground raised by the 4 ITA No.855/M/2013 & ITA No.5455/M/2009 & ors. M/s. Oracle Financial Ser…

Jani Properties Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2640/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) & Shri Rifaur Rahman (Am) Jani Properties Pvt Ltd Vs Ito, 2(2)(1), Gkdj & Associates, Cas Aayakar Bhavan, 333, Sohrab Hall, 21, Sassoon M.K. Road, Road, Opp Jehangir Hospital, Mumbai -400020 Pune-411 001 Pan : Aaacj7356D Appellant Respondednt

Section 115Section 115JSection 115OSection 154Section 234B

…r adjudication of additional ground are on record. In support of his submission, the Ld. AR for the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Thermal Power Corporation Vs CIT 229 ITR 381 and in Jute Corporation of India vs CIT (187 ITR 688 SC). 7. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the revenue objected to raising of additional ground of appeal. Though, no reply in writing objecting the additional grounds of appeal id filed by the revenue. 5 Jani Properties Pvt Ltd 8. We have considered the submissions of both the parties. Perusal of additional ground of appeal reveals that the asse…

ACIT Circle-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed and Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 4077/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 44

…nvestigation, the same may kindly be admitted by Your Honours. In this regard, reliance is placed upon the following decisions rendered by various Courts. i. National Thermal Power Corporation v. CIT [229ITR 383(SC) ii. Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [187 ITR 688 (SC) iii. Ahmadabad Electricity Co, Ltd. v. CIT [199 ITR 351 (Bom) (FB) In view of the above, it is most humbly submitted that the enclosed additional grounds may kindly be admitted and adjudicated upon by Your Honours.” 5. Assessee-company is engaged in the business of export credit insurance for exporters, domestic credit insurance, full fled…