Nirmal Bang Nirmal Bang Securities (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

382 ITR 93High Court2016#4690 most cited

What is Nirmal Bang Nirmal Bang Securities (P) Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Reassessment proceedings initiated after four years from the end of the assessment year are invalid if there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Nirmal Bang Securities · reassessment · section 147 · four years · full and true disclosure · material facts · assessment procedure · section 143(3) · section 149

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 10AASection 115JBSection 149Section 40A(2)(b)

Issues it is cited on

full and true disclosurebeyond four yearsinitial assessment yearfresh tangible materialsection 151(2)material facts necessary for assessmentsection 10aamere change of opinionaccumulated profitssection 10acomputer softwaresection 144c(1)

Judgments citing Nirmal Bang Nirmal Bang Securities (P) Ltd. v. ACIT

Ashok Baldevbhai Patel, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 16(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground No.2 of the

ITA 787/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhashok Baldevbhai Patel Acit- 16(2), 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir 133, Enterprises Apartments, Forjett Hill Road, Tardeo, Vs. Building, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400036. Mumbai-400007. Pan: Agipp8800B Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Dharmesh Shah (Ar) Respondent By : Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2018 Order Per Pawan Singh; 1. The Instant Appeal By Assessee Under Section 253 Of The Income-Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah (AR)For Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 68

…revailing, during the relevant period. Further to buttress his submissions the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decisions of Bombay High Court in case of Ghanshyam K. Khabrani Vs ACIT & Ors [346 ITR 443], Nirmal Bang Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT & Ors [382 ITR 93], Titanor Components Ltd Vs ACIT & Ors [343 ITR 183],Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs ACIT & Ors [268 ITR 332] and Morarjee Goculdas Spinning And Weaving Co Ltd Vs P.N. Bansal & Another [208 ITR 471], Mumbai Tribunal in Vaman International Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT [ITA No. 1040 & 1041/Mum/2017] dated 27.09.2017, Rajasthan High Court in case of Dhadda Exports…

Maharashtra Stae Road Development Corporation Td, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

ITA 4900/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Years: 2002-03 Dcit-5(2), M/S Maharashtra State Road R. No.571, Development Corporation बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Limited, Vs. M.K. Road, Pwd Compound, Near Mumbai-400020 Priyadarshni Park, Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacm6833C Assessment Years: 2002-03 M/S Maharashtra State Dcit-5(2), Road Development R. No.571, बनाम/ Corporation Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Pwd Compound, Near M.K. Road, Priyadarshni Park, Mumbai-400020 Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacm6833C "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri B.S. Sharma & Shri Dalpat Shah राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Narendra Singh Janpangi-Dr

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

…a period of four years, as per the assessee, it is not permissible for which reliance was placed upon the decision in the case of German Remidies Ltd. vs DCIT 287 ITR 494, Godrej Agrovet Ltd. vs DCIT & Anr. 323 ITR 97, Nirmal Bang Securites Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT 382 ITR 93(Bom.) and CIT & Anr. Vs Foramar France 264 ITR 566 (SC). It was also contended that the notice was issued to the assessee on the basis of audit objection. Reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT vs Lucas T.V.S. Ltd. 249 ITR 306(SC), Idea Celluar Ltd. vs DCIT 301 ITR 407 (Bom.), ICICI Home Finance Co. Ltd. vs ACIT 210 taxmann 67 (Bom.), IL…

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4519/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Years: 2002-03 Dcit-5(2), M/S Maharashtra State Road R. No.571, Development Corporation बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Limited, Vs. M.K. Road, Pwd Compound, Near Mumbai-400020 Priyadarshni Park, Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacm6833C Assessment Years: 2002-03 M/S Maharashtra State Dcit-5(2), Road Development R. No.571, बनाम/ Corporation Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Pwd Compound, Near M.K. Road, Priyadarshni Park, Mumbai-400020 Nepeansea Road, Mumbai-400036 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacm6833C "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri B.S. Sharma & Shri Dalpat Shah राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Narendra Singh Janpangi-Dr

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

…a period of four years, as per the assessee, it is not permissible for which reliance was placed upon the decision in the case of German Remidies Ltd. vs DCIT 287 ITR 494, Godrej Agrovet Ltd. vs DCIT & Anr. 323 ITR 97, Nirmal Bang Securites Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT 382 ITR 93(Bom.) and CIT & Anr. Vs Foramar France 264 ITR 566 (SC). It was also contended that the notice was issued to the assessee on the basis of audit objection. Reliance was placed upon the decision in CIT vs Lucas T.V.S. Ltd. 249 ITR 306(SC), Idea Celluar Ltd. vs DCIT 301 ITR 407 (Bom.), ICICI Home Finance Co. Ltd. vs ACIT 210 taxmann 67 (Bom.), IL…

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

…Fit For Publication (AM) (JM) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH.ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .No.-1476/Del/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2005-06) Richa Industries Ltd., Vs ACIT, Plot No.29, DLF Ind. Area, Circle-1, Phase-II, Faridabad Faridabad. PAN-AAACR7943J (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) Assessee by Sh.Vijay Kumar Singla, CA Revenue by Sh.F.R.Meena, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 07.03.2017 Date of Pronouncement 14.03.2017 ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (A). The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assail…

DCIT 10(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Hexaware Technologies Ltd, Navi Mumbai

ITA 64/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2016AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Anuj KishandwalaFor Respondent: Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 50B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद,"याियक सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/64/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2006-07 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" DCIT, 10-(1)(1) M/s . Hexaware Technologies Ltd. Room No.209. Aayakar bhavan 152, Millenium Business Park, Vs. MK Road,Mumbai-20. Sector-3, TTC Indl Area Mahap…