Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561(SC), CIT v. ICICI Bank Ltd.

349 ITR 482High Court2012#8041 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Judgments citing Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561(SC), CIT v. ICICI Bank Ltd.

AADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON

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

ITA 439/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…ht in reasons recorded as to what was that material fact, which was not disclosed by assessee in its return, impugned reopening notice and consequent order were to be quashed. 20. We find the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. ICICI Bank (2012) 349 ITR 482 (Bom) has held that the Assessing Officer having allowed assessee’s claim under section 36(1)(viii) in respect of fund based income, could not initiate reassessment proceeding by merely taking a view that income earned in non-fund business had been included in income earned in fund based activity and, thus, excessive deduction was allowed to asse…

OASIS SECURITIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4562/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash K. Jothwani
Section 147Section 14A

…tion u/s. 14A since the issue on which reopening was done, no disallowance was made therein. In this connection, the assessee also referred to Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Jet Airways Ltd. (331 ITR 236) and in the case of ICICI Bank Ltd. (349 ITR 482). Considering the aforesaid case laws, learned CIT(A) concluded as under :- In the instant case, it is observed that the assessment in the case of the assessee was reopened on the ground that the loan advanced by the assessee to Shri Vivek Mehrotra of Rs. 102.02 crores is of the nature of an accommodation entry. The AO while completing the re-ass…

OASIS SECURITIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4560/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash K. Jothwani
Section 147Section 14A

…tion u/s. 14A since the issue on which reopening was done, no disallowance was made therein. In this connection, the assessee also referred to Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Jet Airways Ltd. (331 ITR 236) and in the case of ICICI Bank Ltd. (349 ITR 482). Considering the aforesaid case laws, learned CIT(A) concluded as under :- In the instant case, it is observed that the assessment in the case of the assessee was reopened on the ground that the loan advanced by the assessee to Shri Vivek Mehrotra of Rs. 102.02 crores is of the nature of an accommodation entry. The AO while completing the re-ass…

OASIS SECURITIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal for A

ITA 4561/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

Section 147Section 14A

…tion u/s. 14A since the issue on which reopening was done, no disallowance was made therein. In this connection, the assessee also referred to Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Jet Airways Ltd. (331 ITR 236) and in the case of ICICI Bank Ltd. (349 ITR 482). Considering the aforesaid case laws, learned CIT(A) concluded as under :- In the instant case, it is observed that the assessment in the case of the assessee was reopened on the ground that the loan advanced by the assessee to Shri Vivek Mehrotra of Rs. 102.02 crores is of the nature of an accommodation entry. The AO while completing the re-ass…

LANDMARK EDUCATION INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) II (1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4871/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2008-09 Landmark Education India, Income Tax Officer B-206, Bhaveshwar Plaza, (Exemption)-Ii(1), बनाम/ Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (W), Piramal Chambers, Vs. Mumbai 400086 Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaatl0059L

Section 11Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…urther invited to ITA. No.4871/Mum/2014 3 Landmark Education India pages 6, 21, 24, 30, 31 and 33 of the paper book. Reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (Supreme Court), CIT vs ICICI Bank Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 482(Bom.) NYK Line (India) Ltd. [2012] 346 ITR 361(Bom) and NDT Systems and Another vs Income Tax Officer & Ors. [2014] 363 ITR 603(Bom.). 2.1. On the other hand, Shri Nitin Waghmode, ld. DR, defended the reopening of assessment by placing reliance upon the decision in the case of Dr. Amin’s Pathology Laboratory vs. Joint. Commissioner of Incom…

M/S.US TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE JCIT, TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 247/COCH/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.M.Raghunathan SFor Respondent: Sri.Santam Bose
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 263

…issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Alagendran Finance Ltd. [(2007) 293 ITR 1 (SC)] and the judgment of the Hon’ble ITA No.247/Coch/2017. 7 M/s.US Technology International P.Ltd. [(2012) 349 ITR 482 (Bom.)] . The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, supported the order passed u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The revisionary order u/s 263 of the I.T.Act was passed on 27.03.2017. Section 263(2) of the I.T.Act stipulates that no order u/s 263(1) can be made af…

ACIT, CIRCLE-10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ORIENTAL CARBON & CHEMICALS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1682/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: "ी पी.एम .जगताप, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…aintainable. There are a number of judgements of the Apex Court and High Courts which support the aforesaid view. CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC), NYK Line (India) Ltd. Vs Dy.CIT [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Born), CIT Vs ICICI Bank Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 482 (Born) : 74 DTR 251 (Bom) Bombay High Court in the case of Rabo India Finance Ltd. Vs DCIT [2012) 346 ITR 528 (Bom) NDT Systems Vs ITO [2013] 81 DTR 1 (Born) Similar views were expressed by the Bombay and Delhi High Courts in the following cases: (1) Moser Baer India Ltd. Vs DCIT - [2013] 81 DTR 10 (Del) (ii) Aventis Pharma Ltd. Vs ACIT - [2010J…

FL SMIDTH PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 393/CHNY/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 393/Ch/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2003-04 M/S. Flsmidth Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Formerly Fls Automation Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. Company Circle –Ii(1), Flsmidth House, Chennai – 34. 34, Egatoor, Kelambakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 103. [Pan: Aaacf 4997N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ&क'ओरसे/Appellant By : Shrig. Baskar, Advocate *+यथ&क'ओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Ann Mary Baby, Jcit

For Appellant: ShriG. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ann Mary Baby, JCIT
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण, ’बी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं"ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम$ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 393/Ch/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2003-04 M/s. FLSmidth Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (formerly FLS Automation Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. Company Circle –II(1), FLSmidth House, Chennai – 34. 34, Egatoor, Kelambakkam, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai – 600 103. [PAN: AAACF 4997N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ&क'ओरसे/A…

DCIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. THE TATA FINANCE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2961/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharincome Tax Appeal No.2961/Mum/2014 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Tata Finance Ltd Large Tax Payer Unit (Now Merged With Tata Motors Centre -1, 29Th Floor Ltd.) World Trade Centre Bombay House 24 Cuffe Parade Homi Mody Street Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan : Aaact1629F (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Income Tax Appeal No.2962/Mum/2014 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2005-06) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Tata Motors Ltd. Large Tax Payer Unit Bombay House, 24 Centre -1, 29Th Floor Homi Mody Street World Trade Centre Mumbai – 400 001 Cuffe Parade Pan : Aaact2T27Q Mumbai – 400 005 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : Smt S Padmaja & Smt Mahva Sarkar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Dinesh Vyas & Shri Manish Haria सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/12/2016 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N.Prasad (J.M.) : These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-6, Mumbai Dated 27.01.2014 For The Assessment Years

For Appellant: Smt S Padmaja & Smt Mahva SarkarFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh Vyas & Shri Manish Haria
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80G

…(FB) iii) Idea Cellular Ltd. v DCIT (301 ITR 407) (Bom.) iv) Cartini India Limited v ACIT (314 ITR 275) (Bom.) v) CIT v Prima Paper & Engg. Ltd. (364 ITR 222) (Bom.) vi) Siemens Information Systems Ltd. v. ACIT (295 ITR 333) (Bom.) vii) CIT v ICICI Bank Ltd. (349 ITR 482) (Bom.) viii) NYK Line (India) Ltd. v DCIT (346 ITR 361)(Bom.) ix) Aroni Commercials Ltd. v ACIT (377 ITR 405)(Bom.) x) GKN Sinter Metals Ltd. v ACIT (371 ITR 225) (Bom.) xi) Rabo India Finance Ltd. v DCIT (346 ITR 528)(Bom.) 9 Tata Finance Ltd. (now merged with Tata Motors Ltd) ITA No.2961 & 2962/Mum/2014, A.Ys.2003-04 & 2005-06 13. We have hea…

M/S. RICHA INDUSTRIES LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

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

ITA 1476/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singh & Sh.Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 36Section 80I

…WRT TO PARA 3E ABOVE Judgement Judgement Name No. 5 Atomstroyexport v. Deputy DIT (I.T.) [2014] 363 ITR 612 (Bom). 6 Sayaji Hotels Ltd. v. ITO [2011] 339 ITR 498 (Guj). 8 CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC). 9 CIT v. ICICI Bank Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 482 (Bom). 10 Direct information (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2012] 349 ITR 150 (Bom) 11 NYK Line (India) Ltd. v. Deputy CIT (No. 2) [2012J 346 ITR 361 (Bom). 12 Rabo India Finance Ltd. v. Deputy CIT [2012] 346 ITR 528 (Bom). I.T.A .No.-1476/Del/2014 Richa Industries Ltd. vs ACIT Page 7 of 8 13 NDT Systems v. ITO [2014] 363 ITR 602 (Bom) 15 Ritu Investments…

DCIT 10(2), MUMBAI vs. CAPAGEMINI CONSULTING INDIA P. LTD ( NOW KNOWN AS CAPGEMINI INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee also dismissed

ITA 2291/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri M M Golvala and Shri Hormuzd JamshedjiFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…rned from the said UNIT. In 9 I T A N o . 1 3 3 8 / M / 2 0 1 2 , 2 2 9 1 / M / 2 0 1 2 a n d C O . 8 2 / M / 1 3 defence, the ld.AR heavily relied on a number of decisions namely Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561(SC), CIT V/s ICICI Bank Ltd reported in (349 ITR 482) (Bom), Cliantha Research Ltd V/s DCIT (SCA No.1547 of 2013)(Guj), Metal Alloys Corporation v.ACIT [2013] 350 ITR 245 (Gujarat) and the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT V/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd in Income Tax Appeal No.128 of 2016 order dated 1.4.2016. 9. On the other hand, the ld DR heavily relied on the orde…

CAPGEMINI CONSULTING INIDA P.LTD ( NOW KNOWN AS CAPGEMINI INDIA P.LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee also dismissed

ITA 1338/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri M M Golvala and Shri Hormuzd JamshedjiFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…rned from the said UNIT. In 9 I T A N o . 1 3 3 8 / M / 2 0 1 2 , 2 2 9 1 / M / 2 0 1 2 a n d C O . 8 2 / M / 1 3 defence, the ld.AR heavily relied on a number of decisions namely Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561(SC), CIT V/s ICICI Bank Ltd reported in (349 ITR 482) (Bom), Cliantha Research Ltd V/s DCIT (SCA No.1547 of 2013)(Guj), Metal Alloys Corporation v.ACIT [2013] 350 ITR 245 (Gujarat) and the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT V/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd in Income Tax Appeal No.128 of 2016 order dated 1.4.2016. 9. On the other hand, the ld DR heavily relied on the orde…

ITO (3) 2(2), MUMBAI vs. R.K. EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION, MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee also dismissed

ITA 1318/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri M M Golvala and Shri Hormuzd JamshedjiFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…rned from the said UNIT. In 9 I T A N o . 1 3 3 8 / M / 2 0 1 2 , 2 2 9 1 / M / 2 0 1 2 a n d C O . 8 2 / M / 1 3 defence, the ld.AR heavily relied on a number of decisions namely Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561(SC), CIT V/s ICICI Bank Ltd reported in (349 ITR 482) (Bom), Cliantha Research Ltd V/s DCIT (SCA No.1547 of 2013)(Guj), Metal Alloys Corporation v.ACIT [2013] 350 ITR 245 (Gujarat) and the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT V/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd in Income Tax Appeal No.128 of 2016 order dated 1.4.2016. 9. On the other hand, the ld DR heavily relied on the orde…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NANDAN AUTO TECH LTD, NEW DELHI

ITA 3166/DEL/2009[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain, Ashish Chadha, AshishFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…(Del) (viii) CIT vs Narayan Securities P Ltd (Del) ITA no. 40/2009 dt. 3-6- 2011 (ix) ACIT vsMaj Deepak Mehta 344 ITR 641 (Chatis) (x) CIT vsShri Ram Singh 306 ITR 343 (Raj) (xi) Double Dot Finance Ltd vs CIT (Bom) ITA no. 856/2011 (xii) CIT vs ICICI Bank Ltd 349 ITR 482 (Bom) 26. We have heard both the parties and perused the assessment order and the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and also gone through the paper book on record. The learned AR has raised a legal issue regarding no addition being made in the reassessment proceeding for which assessment was reopened. It will be appropriate first to deal with t…