NTPC v. CIT

97 Taxmann 358Supreme Court of India1998#1618 most cited

What is NTPC v. CIT authority for?

Appellate authorities can admit and adjudicate additional grounds of appeal, including new legal issues or claims, even if not raised before lower authorities, provided they are bona fide, supported by existing record, and there is a good reason for the omission.

70

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

NTPC v CIT · 1998 · 229 ITR 363 · additional grounds of appeal · ITAT jurisdiction · new claim · legal issue · bona fide · good reason · material on record · appellate powers

Also reported as

229 ITR 363

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 250Section 263Section 147Section 148Section 144B

Issues it is cited on

section 57(i)section 2(d)section 17(2)(iiia)section 153a proceedingssection 35(1)(iv)section 46section 46asection 17(2)section 35(1)section 10(1)section 35ddeduction under section 80ia

Judgments citing NTPC v. CIT

DCIT- 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3238/M/2018 for assessment year 2013 –

ITA 3238/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT
Section 14ASection 35DSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM ITA No. 3499/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Yes Bank Limited 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Circle 2(2)(2) Discovery of India, Dr. AB Road, 545, Aykar Bhavan, Vs. Worli, Mumbai-400 018 MK road, Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AAACY2068D ITA No. 3237/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Yes Bank Limited 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Circle 2(2)(2) 545, Aaykar Bhavan, Discovery of India, Dr. AB Road, Vs. Wo…

DCIT- 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3238/M/2018 for assessment year 2013 –

ITA 3237/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT
Section 14ASection 35DSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM ITA No. 3499/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Yes Bank Limited 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Circle 2(2)(2) Discovery of India, Dr. AB Road, 545, Aykar Bhavan, Vs. Worli, Mumbai-400 018 MK road, Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AAACY2068D ITA No. 3237/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Yes Bank Limited 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Circle 2(2)(2) 545, Aaykar Bhavan, Discovery of India, Dr. AB Road, Vs. Wo…

DCIT 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3238/M/2018 for assessment year 2013 –

ITA 3236/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT
Section 14ASection 35DSection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM ITA No. 3499/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Yes Bank Limited 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Circle 2(2)(2) Discovery of India, Dr. AB Road, 545, Aykar Bhavan, Vs. Worli, Mumbai-400 018 MK road, Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AAACY2068D ITA No. 3237/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Yes Bank Limited 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, Circle 2(2)(2) 545, Aaykar Bhavan, Discovery of India, Dr. AB Road, Vs. Wo…

Ram Niwas Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward- 38(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 6909/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Mr. V.K. Sabharwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 234BSection 271Section 44A

…use no mandatory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee prior to the completion of assessment order dated 10.11.2017. Ld. Counsel for the assessee hence, requested that in view of the Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of NTPC vs. CIT 229 ITR 389 (SC), the additional grounds may be admitted and adjudicated first. To support his arguments on these legal grounds, he relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd. reported in (2015) 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) arising out of order of Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in…

Ram Niwas Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward- 38(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 6908/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Mr. V.K. Sabharwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 234BSection 271Section 44A

…use no mandatory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee prior to the completion of assessment order dated 10.11.2017. Ld. Counsel for the assessee hence, requested that in view of the Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of NTPC vs. CIT 229 ITR 389 (SC), the additional grounds may be admitted and adjudicated first. To support his arguments on these legal grounds, he relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime & Chemical Ltd. reported in (2015) 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC) arising out of order of Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in…

Arvind Kumar Arora, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

Accordingly ITA number 1019/Del/2017 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1019/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271BSection 44A

…t matter of appeal and no new fact or evidence is required in relation to this ground and accordingly the abovesaid ground may kindly be admitted in the interest of justice. He further relied on the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of NTPC Ltd 229 ITR 363. 10. On the given date of hearing the learned departmental representative sought adjournment. Looking at the smallness of issue, also being covered by decision of Honourable Jurisdictional high court in favour of assessee, we are not inclined to accede to request of ld DR. However, on our request, the learned senior DR Ms Rakhi Vimal assisted the…

Arvind Kumar Arora, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

Accordingly ITA number 1019/Del/2017 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1018/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271BSection 44A

…t matter of appeal and no new fact or evidence is required in relation to this ground and accordingly the abovesaid ground may kindly be admitted in the interest of justice. He further relied on the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of NTPC Ltd 229 ITR 363. 10. On the given date of hearing the learned departmental representative sought adjournment. Looking at the smallness of issue, also being covered by decision of Honourable Jurisdictional high court in favour of assessee, we are not inclined to accede to request of ld DR. However, on our request, the learned senior DR Ms Rakhi Vimal assisted the…

Smt. G. Sridevi, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 374/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Years : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Aravind V Chavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri TN Prakash Addl, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)Section 56

…up before Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax and is claimed before Hon'ble Bench at this stage, which may be admitted and adjudicated upon the 3 legal ground. This request to be considered based on the Hon'ble Apex Court's decision in the case of NTPC Vs CIT, 229 ITR 363. (b) The order of the Hon'ble Assessing Officer is legally not tenable because the order has been passed after the date of search carried out at the premises of the Appellant and the Appellant submits that as per Second Proviso to Sec.153A(1) that, any assessment relating to any Asst. Year falling within the period of 6 years pending on the date…

Sushila Devi, Deoghar vs. ACIT Circle-1, Ranchi

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

ITA 275/RAN/2017[07-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi28 Nov 2018

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri M.K.Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI ‘ SMC’ BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2007-08 Sushila Devi, W/O Sri Hari Vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Ranchi. Narayan Rai, R/O. Sonaraithari, Dist: Deogarh. PAN/GIR No.AIFPD 7904 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri M.K.Choudhary, Adv Revenue by : Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT Date of Hearing : 27/11/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 28/11/ 2018 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), Ranchi, dated 22.8.2017 for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. An adjournment petition was filed by ld…

Satpal Sachdev HUF, Jamshedpur vs. ITO Ward-3(1), Jamshedpur

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

ITA 317/RAN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Poddar/Devesh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…Ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that as the additional ground goes to the root of the matter ad is purely a legal issue, same should be admitted in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. A sse ss ment Y ear: 2011 -12 NTPC, 229 ITR 363 (SC). Ld D.R. had no objection to the admission of additional ground raised by the assessee. We, therefore, admit the additional ground. 5. We find that this additional ground was not raised before the CIT(A). Both the parties agreed before us that the matter may be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudicating the same as per law. Hence…