Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT

187 ITR 688Supreme Court of India1991#29 most cited

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

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

1,372

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,887 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

Viacom 18 Media P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst DIT (It) 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 667/MUM/2016[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Respondent: Shri M. V. Rajguru
Section 195Section 248

…nce of the additional ground, it has been submitted that they are 4. essentially for the due dispensation of substantial of justice. In this regard, the assessee has placed reliance on the following case laws: - Jute Corporation of India Limited v CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) - National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v CIT [19981 229 ITR 383 (SC) - CIT v Nelliappan (S.) |1967] 66 ITR 722 (SC) - Ahemdabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom.) - Ashok Vardhan Birla v CWT |1994| 208 ITR 958 (Bom.) - Inaroo Ltd. v CIT (1993] 204 ITR 312 (Bom.) - CIT v Goviodram Bros. Pvt. Ltd. [1983] 141 ITR 626 (Bom.) 5. Sinc…

Viacom 18 Media P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst DIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the assessee’s appeals are allowed as above

ITA 599/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Respondent: Shri M. V. Rajguru
Section 195

…ptance of the additional ground, it has been submitted that they are essentially for the due dispensation of substantial of justice. In this regard, the assessee has placed reliance on the following case laws: - Jute Corporation of India Limited v CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) - National Thermal Power Co. Ltd v CIT [19981 229 ITR 383 (SC) - CIT v Nelliappan (S.) |1967] 66 ITR 722 (SC) - Ahemdabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v CIT [1993] 199 ITR 351 (Bom.) - Ashok Vardhan Birla v CWT |1994| 208 ITR 958 (Bom.) - Inaroo Ltd. v CIT (1993] 204 ITR 312 (Bom.) - CIT v Goviodram Bros. Pvt. Ltd. [1983] 141 ITR 626 (Bom.) Viacom 1…

Hilton International Llc, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(1)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7701/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. S.P. Singh, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Arun Kr. Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(c)

…h investigation into facts of the case. The Appellant by way of this application craves leave of the Hon’le Bench to raise the aforesaid additional ground. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT: 187 ITR 688 and the discretion vested with your Honour under Rule 11 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, it is prayed that the aforesaid additional grounds of appeal may kindly be admitted and adjudicated on merits. The Appellant trusts that its request shall be acceded to.” 2.1 Since, the issue involved a question of law arising from the f…

Shri Jagdish Prasad Goel, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 43, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2121/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A No. 2121/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Jagdish Prasad Goel -Vs- Dcit, Circle-43, Kolkata [Pan: Affpg 1693 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM] I.T.A No. 2121/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Jagdish Prasad Goel -vs- DCIT, Circle-43, Kolkata [PAN: AFFPG 1693 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Miraj D Shah, AR For the Revenue : Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 16.04.2018 Date of Pronouncement : .06.2018 ORDER This appeal by the Assessee directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata [ in short the ld CITA] dated 18.07.2017 passed under section 250 of the Inc…

ITO 31(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Surekha Vilas Soudagar, Mumbai

ITA 5198/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…s in disposing of an appeal. The scope of his power is conterminous with that of the Income-tax Officer. He can do what the Income-tax Officer can do and also direct him to do what he has failed to do. 2. In the case of Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT (1990) 187 ITR 688 (SC) the 5 ITA 5198/Mum/2016 Supreme Court again analysed the powers of the CIT(A). During the hearing of the appeal, the assessee had raised an additional ground claiming deduction of Rs. 11,54,995 on the ground of liability of purchase tax based on the decision of the Supreme Court in Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363. The…

Dy. Comm. of Income-Tax, Cirlce-1, Nashik vs. M/S. Sidhivinayak Associates, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1350/PUN/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1350/Pun/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 143(2)

…additional ground for assessing income as per original return of income instead of revised return of income. The Hon'ble High Court referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT, reported as 187 ITR 688 and held that the First Appellate Authority has power to consider the additional ground raised CO. No. 100/PUN/2011 A.Y.2008-09 by the appellant for the first time at the appellate stage. Therefore, we do not find any error in Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) admitting additional ground raised by assessee/ appellant. Further, it is well set…

Shri Rajeev Kumar Tulsiyan, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(4) Now Ward-2(2)(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 700/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenas V. आ.अ.सं./I. िनधा" अपीलाथ" Appellant ""थ"/Res . T.A No. Pondent रण N वष"/A O Y: 1 700/Ahd/2 2007- Rajeev Kumar Tulsiyan, V. The 016/Srt 08 Prop. Of Nidhi Textile, Income R-206, Rohit A/C Market, Tax Ring Road, Surat–395002. Officer, Ward-5(4), Pan: Abxpk 3288J Surat. 2 3093/Ahd/ 2008- Rajeev Kumar Hariprasad V. The & 2014/Srt 09 Tulsiyan, Income 3 Shop No.1012, Rohit A.C. Tax & & Market, Ring Road, Surat – Officer, 395 001. Ward-5(4), 3094/Ahd/ 2009- Surat. 2014/Srt 10 Pan: Abxpk 3288J

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147

…ct that assessment was made u/s.144 of the Act as the assessee could not submit the relevant evidences during the course of assessment proceedings. Therefore, citing the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688 it was urged before us that the additional ground and additional evidences be admitted in the interest of justice. However, such additional evidences were submitted under Rule 46A before the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2008-09 and 2009-10. But same were also not admitted, therefore, it was requested that additional evidences under Rule 29 Trib…

Rajeevkumar Hariprasad Tulsiyan, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 3093/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenas V. आ.अ.सं./I. िनधा" अपीलाथ" Appellant ""थ"/Res . T.A No. Pondent रण N वष"/A O Y: 1 700/Ahd/2 2007- Rajeev Kumar Tulsiyan, V. The 016/Srt 08 Prop. Of Nidhi Textile, Income R-206, Rohit A/C Market, Tax Ring Road, Surat–395002. Officer, Ward-5(4), Pan: Abxpk 3288J Surat. 2 3093/Ahd/ 2008- Rajeev Kumar Hariprasad V. The & 2014/Srt 09 Tulsiyan, Income 3 Shop No.1012, Rohit A.C. Tax & & Market, Ring Road, Surat – Officer, 395 001. Ward-5(4), 3094/Ahd/ 2009- Surat. 2014/Srt 10 Pan: Abxpk 3288J

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147

…ct that assessment was made u/s.144 of the Act as the assessee could not submit the relevant evidences during the course of assessment proceedings. Therefore, citing the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688 it was urged before us that the additional ground and additional evidences be admitted in the interest of justice. However, such additional evidences were submitted under Rule 46A before the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2008-09 and 2009-10. But same were also not admitted, therefore, it was requested that additional evidences under Rule 29 Trib…

DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Indian Oil Petronas Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 157/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Jm ]

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Srihari, CITFor Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…rd the ld. Counsels appearing for the parties. We have perused the materials available on records. The ld. Tribunal considering the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Thermal Power Co.Ltd. vs CIT (229 ITR 383), Jute Corporation of India vs CIT (187 ITR 688) both passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as order passed by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Mayank Poddar HUF vs CWT (262 ITR 633) held in favour of the assessee by observing that if in law the assessee was not liable to be assessed on capital gains arising on transfer of agricultural land then the assessee’s claim for its…

Shri Sudeep Mahendrabhai Shah, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward1(3)(5), Surat

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

ITA 2423/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 132(4)Section 143Section 147Section 148

…e be admitted for adjudication. The learned counsel for the assessee placed reliance in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC) : [1999] 157 CTR 249 (SC) as well as in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC): [1990] 53 Taxman 85 (SC). In so far as the admission of additional ground is concerned, there is no serious opposition by the ld. DR except pointing out that these aspects were otherwise not raised before the lower authorities. Be that as it may be, in our considered opinion, following the ratio 4. of judgement of the Hon`ble Supreme Court…

Thiruvananthapuram Road Development Co. Ltd, Orrissa vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

ITA 622/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

Section 143Section 253Section 32

…the appellate authorities. The jurisdiction of the appellate authorities to entertain such a claim is not barred. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court while relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85 has observed that the power of the Appellate Commissioner is coterminous with that of the Income Tax Officer and an appellate authority while hearing appeal against the order of the subordinate authority, has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the questions before it, subject to the restrictions o…

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Thirvanthapuram Road Development Company Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

ITA 4346/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

Section 143Section 253Section 32

…the appellate authorities. The jurisdiction of the appellate authorities to entertain such a claim is not barred. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court while relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85 has observed that the power of the Appellate Commissioner is coterminous with that of the Income Tax Officer and an appellate authority while hearing appeal against the order of the subordinate authority, has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the questions before it, subject to the restrictions o…

Mr. Manoj Kumar Nayak, Bhubaneswar vs. DDIT, International Taxation, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 389/CTK/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, DR
Section 143(1)Section 154(2)

…ome from capital gains under section 10 was claimed. Therefore, there was an error on the facts of the order of Commissioner and the same was not sustainable. [Para 7]‖ 17. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688/[1990] 53 Taxman 85, held that “the declaration of law is clear that the power of the AAC is co-terminous with that of the ITO, if that be so, there appears to be no reason as to why the appellate authority cannot modify the assessment order on an additional ground even if not raised before the ITO. No exception could be taken to this view as the…

ACIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. Amber Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5176/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri, Amarjit Singh Jm Acit 25(1) Vs. M/S. Amber Enterprises Mumbai – 400 051 7, Taren Compound Behind Krishna Hotel Dahisar (E) Mumbai – 400 068 Pan/Gir No. Aalfa3071G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 80B(10)(f)Section 80FSection 80I

…ayer is entitled to raise additional grounds not merely in terms of legal submissions, but also additional claims not made in the return filed by it. The decision of the Supreme Court in the following cases, 1) Jute Corporation of India Limited v/s CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) 2) ACIT v/s Gurjargravures Pvt Ltd. (1978) 111 ITR 1 SC 3) National Thermal Power Company-Ltd. V/s CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383. 11.5) The Bombay High court (High Court) In the case of Pruthvi Brokers &. Shareholder Pvt.Ltd. V/s CIT (ITA No. 3908 of 2010) held that the taxpayer is entitled to claim the deduction before the appellate authorities wh…

The DCIT, Circle-3(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Harjivanbhai Chaganbhai Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2460/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2384/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Harjivanbhai C. Patel, Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co., Vs Income-Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 3(2), 105, Sakar-I, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Abupp 1238 N आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2460/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Harjivanbhai C. Patel, C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co., Income-Tax, Vs Chartered Accountants, Circle 3(2), 105, Sakar-I, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Abupp 1238 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pd. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/04/2018 आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue & The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Ahmedabad Dated 21St July, 2016 Arising In The Assessment Order Dated 27.02.2015 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri PD. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr DR
Section 131Section 143(3)

…Nirbheram Daluram 224 ITR 610 (SC) In view of ratio laid down in above case laws, the additional evidences so submitted are decided to be admitted. The jurisdictional directions laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) are also being relied. As there is no response from the AO, the appeal is being decided as per facts on record. ITA Nos. 2384 & 2460/Ahd/2016 Assessee : Harjivanbhai C Patel AY: 2012-13 6 The ground No.2 has four parties to whom certain expenses have been paid. There is non-reconciled figures figuring in assessment order and in certain sub…

Shri Harjivanbhai C. Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2384/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2384/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Harjivanbhai C. Patel, Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co., Vs Income-Tax, Chartered Accountants, Circle 3(2), 105, Sakar-I, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Abupp 1238 N आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2460/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Harjivanbhai C. Patel, C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co., Income-Tax, Vs Chartered Accountants, Circle 3(2), 105, Sakar-I, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380009 Pan : Abupp 1238 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pd. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/04/2018 आदेश/O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue & The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Ahmedabad Dated 21St July, 2016 Arising In The Assessment Order Dated 27.02.2015 Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri PD. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr DR
Section 131Section 143(3)

…Nirbheram Daluram 224 ITR 610 (SC) In view of ratio laid down in above case laws, the additional evidences so submitted are decided to be admitted. The jurisdictional directions laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. 187 ITR 688 (SC) are also being relied. As there is no response from the AO, the appeal is being decided as per facts on record. ITA Nos. 2384 & 2460/Ahd/2016 Assessee : Harjivanbhai C Patel AY: 2012-13 6 The ground No.2 has four parties to whom certain expenses have been paid. There is non-reconciled figures figuring in assessment order and in certain sub…

Kesoram Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 505/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…f any statutory provision to the contrary, the Ld. CIT(A) is vested with the plenary power to admit and adjudicate claims of the appellant, by placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (supra) reported in 187 ITR 688. e. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the profit for the captive undertakings in Karnataka and Bangalore may be recomputed by considering the price of the power generated by the appellant at the average annual landed cost of electricity purchased by the assessee from the respective SEBs. f. That the Assessing Officer erred in facts…

Kesoram Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5, Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1188/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…f any statutory provision to the contrary, the Ld. CIT(A) is vested with the plenary power to admit and adjudicate claims of the appellant, by placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (supra) reported in 187 ITR 688. e. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the profit for the captive undertakings in Karnataka and Bangalore may be recomputed by considering the price of the power generated by the appellant at the average annual landed cost of electricity purchased by the assessee from the respective SEBs. f. That the Assessing Officer erred in facts…

Kesoram Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl C.I.T RG - 5, Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 773/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…f any statutory provision to the contrary, the Ld. CIT(A) is vested with the plenary power to admit and adjudicate claims of the appellant, by placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (supra) reported in 187 ITR 688. e. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the profit for the captive undertakings in Karnataka and Bangalore may be recomputed by considering the price of the power generated by the appellant at the average annual landed cost of electricity purchased by the assessee from the respective SEBs. f. That the Assessing Officer erred in facts…

D.C.I.T Cir - 5, Kolkata vs. M/S Kesoram Industries Limited, Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1995/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…f any statutory provision to the contrary, the Ld. CIT(A) is vested with the plenary power to admit and adjudicate claims of the appellant, by placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. (supra) reported in 187 ITR 688. e. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the profit for the captive undertakings in Karnataka and Bangalore may be recomputed by considering the price of the power generated by the appellant at the average annual landed cost of electricity purchased by the assessee from the respective SEBs. f. That the Assessing Officer erred in facts…