Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

364 ITR 632High Court2014#12734 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 68Section 142BSection 149

Issues it is cited on

section 282section 151aincome escaping assessmentnational faceless assessment centresection 292bsection 148a(b)section 151section 148a(d)section 149faceless assessmentreassessment proceedingsservice of notice

Judgments citing Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

NEZONE TUBES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 180/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

…hed. It is also submitted that the aforesaid legal issue was not before CIT(A) since the order of the Apex Court was delivered after the decision by CIT(A). However it has been held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kansai Nerolac Paints reported in 364 ITR 632 that legal issue if raised before ITAT for the first time has to be decided by the ITAT and cannot be remanded to the lower authorities. Ground No. 2 is not pressed. In ground No. 3 & 5, it is submitted that the original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) wherein all facts were fully disclosed. There was nothing in the reasons recorded prior to…

NEZONE TUBES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 179/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 68

…hed. It is also submitted that the aforesaid legal issue was not before CIT(A) since the order of the Apex Court was delivered after the decision by CIT(A). However it has been held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kansai Nerolac Paints reported in 364 ITR 632 that legal issue if raised before ITAT for the first time has to be decided by the ITAT and cannot be remanded to the lower authorities. Ground No. 2 is not pressed. In ground No. 3 & 5, it is submitted that the original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) wherein all facts were fully disclosed. There was nothing in the reasons recorded prior to…

TIRATHRAJ RAJMURAT MAURYA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 505/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.501, 504 & 505/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Tirathraj Rajmurat Vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(6) Maurya Surat Plot No. 20, Opp BRC Gate, Master NI Chal, Harinagar 3, Udhana, Opp BRC, Colony, Surat PAN – ANIPM0381M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vardhman Jain, CA Revenue by Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challeng…

TIRATHRAJ RAJMURAT MAURYA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 504/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.501, 504 & 505/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Tirathraj Rajmurat Vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(6) Maurya Surat Plot No. 20, Opp BRC Gate, Master NI Chal, Harinagar 3, Udhana, Opp BRC, Colony, Surat PAN – ANIPM0381M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vardhman Jain, CA Revenue by Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challeng…

TIRATHRAJ RAJMURAT MAURYA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 501/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.501, 504 & 505/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Tirathraj Rajmurat Vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(6) Maurya Surat Plot No. 20, Opp BRC Gate, Master NI Chal, Harinagar 3, Udhana, Opp BRC, Colony, Surat PAN – ANIPM0381M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vardhman Jain, CA Revenue by Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challeng…

M/S. HARDEV CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 408/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.408/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) M/S Hardev Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, Circle Ii(I), Kolkata 8/2A, Garcha 2Nd Lane, Ballygunge, S.O. Kolkata, West Bengal-700019 Pan No. Aabch1827J (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Dipu Koley, Adl.Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.07.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 148 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Delay, Which Are Plausible & Bonafide. Ld. Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Objection To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, Delay Of 148 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 3. The Only Issue Pressed At The Time Of Hearing By The Ld. Counsel Of The Assessee Is Against The Invalid Approval Accorded For Issuing Notice

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dipu Koley, Adl.CIT-Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

…in the case of NTPC, reported in 229 ITR 383, wherein it has been held that legal argument can be raised at any stage of the proceedings. The ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kansai Nerolac Paints, reported in 364 ITR 632 (Bombay High Court), 3 wherein it has been held that the Tribunal should decide the legal issue instead of remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer. Ld. counsel therefore submitted that the grounds may be admitted and adjudicated. 6. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material available on record, we find that the issue ra…

MAYURPLY INDUSTRIES PVT LTD.,HOOGHLY, WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

In the result IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 224/GTY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati24 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kaushik Roy, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 253Section 253(5)

…on. In defense of his arguments, the ld. AR relied on the decision of Special Bench in case of Zuari Leasing & Finance Corpn. Ltd. Vs. ITO [2008] 112ITD205 (Delhi) (TM) and the decision of Bombay High Court in case of Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. VS DCIT [2014] 364 ITR 632 (Bombay). 07. On the other hand, the ld. DR sought time from the Bench during the course of hearing to seek clarification from the ld. AO whether the addition made on the basis of incriminating materials found and seized during search. Accordingly, the sufficient time of more than two weeks was allowed to the ld. DR. On the next date of hearing…

SEEMA SINGH,ASANSOL vs. ITO, WARD1(1), ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 405/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 50CSection 69

…rity has to decide the same and the same should not be relegated to the AO or the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR in defense of 3 Seema Singh, AY 2018-1 his argument relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. Vs. DCIT 364 ITR 632 (Bom.). 6. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material placed before us, we find that the undisputed facts as presented before us and are culled from the records are that the notice u/s. 148A(b) dated 12.03.2022 was issued wherein the AO stated that the assessee received certain payments as stated hereinabove are despite that t…

Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (364 ITR 632) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax