ltd. v. CIT

312 ITR 100Reported decision2009#11162 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 114(e)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 11
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

test of enduring benefitsection 35ddsection 72asection 147(b)section 115jaasection 2(31)section 147(a)true and full disclosuresection 114section 39section 54ecresulting company

Judgments citing ltd. v. CIT

ASHU ASHOK,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1046/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 153DSection 271Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1045/DEL/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ashu Ashok, vs. ACIT, Central Circle 7, I – 20, Lajpat Nagar III, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 024. (PAN : ACQPA0282N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 06.11.2025 Date of Order : 06.11.2025 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax Ap…

ASHU ASHOK,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1045/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 153DSection 271Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1045/DEL/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ashu Ashok, vs. ACIT, Central Circle 7, I – 20, Lajpat Nagar III, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 024. (PAN : ACQPA0282N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 06.11.2025 Date of Order : 06.11.2025 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax Ap…

ASHU ASOK,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1044/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 153ASection 153DSection 271Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1045/DEL/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ashu Ashok, vs. ACIT, Central Circle 7, I – 20, Lajpat Nagar III, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 024. (PAN : ACQPA0282N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 06.11.2025 Date of Order : 06.11.2025 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax Ap…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-17(1), HYDERABAD vs. DRS LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED , SECUNDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1718/HYD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri KC DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan. Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…assessment. 10.5 The question whether the reopening can be made on the basis of audit objection, is no more res integra as the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian & News Paper Society Vs. CIT (1979) 119 ITR 996 (SC), CIT Vs. Sat Ram Mangat Ram (2009) 312 ITR 100 held that the reopening based on audit objections is unsustainable. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Xerox Modicorp Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2013) 350 ITR 308 has also decided the issue in similar lines. 10.6 The ld.CIT(A) had elaborately dealt with the reasons for reopening in the order and after referring to the reasons recorded which itself…

JT. CIT (ODS) - CC -1(4), MUMBAI vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 222/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…nawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), iv. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, v. Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), vi. Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.), vii. CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and viii. Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.). 47. Now, let us come to the issues involved in the instant case on which the Revenue has concluded the reassessment proceedings. Elaborate arguments were advanced by both sides on these which are considered below: 48. Ground No. 3 of the assessee’s appeal relate to claim of deduction u/…

ULTRA TECH CEMENT LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CC 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 220/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…nawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), iv. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, v. Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), vi. Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.), vii. CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and viii. Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.). 47. Now, let us come to the issues involved in the instant case on which the Revenue has concluded the reassessment proceedings. Elaborate arguments were advanced by both sides on these which are considered below: 48. Ground No. 3 of the assessee’s appeal relate to claim of deduction u/…

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1789/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…nawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), iv. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, v. Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), vi. Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.), vii. CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and viii. Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.). 47. Now, let us come to the issues involved in the instant case on which the Revenue has concluded the reassessment proceedings. Elaborate arguments were advanced by both sides on these which are considered below: 48. Ground No. 3 of the assessee’s appeal relate to claim of deduction u/…

M/S. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT CIR-1(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1466/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…nawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), iv. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, v. Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), vi. Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.), vii. CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and viii. Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.). 47. Now, let us come to the issues involved in the instant case on which the Revenue has concluded the reassessment proceedings. Elaborate arguments were advanced by both sides on these which are considered below: 48. Ground No. 3 of the assessee’s appeal relate to claim of deduction u/…

INCOME TAX 11(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. SONU SYNTHETIC LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 5291/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer – M/S. Sonu Synthetics 11(2)(3), Ltd., Room No.425, 131/B, Sanjay Bldg. Aayakar Bhavan, No.6, Vs. M.K. Road, Mittal Indl. Estate, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai – 400 059 Pan: Aadcs5012J (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.42/M/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5291/M/2017) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer – M/S. Sonu Synthetics 11(2)(3), Ltd., Room No.425, 131/B, Sanjay Bldg. Aayakar Bhavan, No.6, Vs. M.K. Road, Mittal Indl. Estate, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai – 400 059 Pan: Aadcs5012J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 22.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.10.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Above Titled Appeal By The Revenue & Cross Objection By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254

…umar M. Hirakhanawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.) , CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.) I am therefore of the considered opinion that reopening initiated by the AO is not tenable in law. Accordingly I allow this ground of appeal in favor of the appellant and hold that reopening is invalid and the reassessment called out pursuant to that is also invalid . This ground of appeal is al…

SSIPL LUXURY FASHION PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal stands allowed

ITA 5368/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Ssipl Luxury Fashion Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-9(2) (Sumedha Luxury Fashion Pvt. Ltd.) New Delhi E-51, Mansarover Park, Shahdara, Delhi – 110 032

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…nal grounds during the course of hearing. 2. Assessee has also filed an Application for admission of additional ground of Appeal vide its Application dated 05.8.2015 in which the assessee has stated that in view of the settled decisions in the case of NTPC 229 ITR 383 (SC), (legal ground can be raised for first time in collateral and second round also). The legal ground can be very well raised for first before the ITAT which goes to the root of the matter. For the sake of convenience, the legal additional ground raised by the asseseee is reproduced as under:- “1. The addition of Rs. 6 crore by the AO and c…