NYK Lime (India) Ltd. v. DCIT (No.2)

Capri Global Advisory Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…pport various submissions: - i) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Navi Trading Ltd. Vs Union of India [375 ITR 308] ii) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs R.B.Wadkar [190 ITR 166] iii) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in NYK Line (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT [346 ITR 361] iv) Hon’ble Bombay High Court in PCIT Vs Century Textiles & Industries Limited [167 DTR (Bom) 105] v) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Unitech Holdings Ltd. Vs DCIT [240 Taxman 70] vi) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Cliantha Research Ltd. Vs DCIT [35 Taxmann.com 61] 4.2 Per Contra, Ld. DR submitted that receipt of information from investigation wing…

Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal,Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Kotak Mahindra Asset Assistant Commissioner Of Income Management Co. Ltd.,C-27 बिधम/ Tax- 14(2)(1), Mumbai. Bkc, G Block, Bandra Kurla Vs. Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai 400 051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaack5576C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Deputy Commissioner Of Kotak Mahindra Asset Management बिधम/ Income Tax- 14(2)(1), 432, 4Th Co. Ltd., C-27 Bkc, G Block, Bandra Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kurla Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400 020. 400 051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaack5576C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…preme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC). The Ld. A.R in order drive home his aforesaid contention, further relied on the judgments of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay viz. (i) NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom); and (ii) Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). Lastly, it was submitted by the Ld. A.R that the reopening of a concluded assessment framed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3), vide order dated 30.09.2010, by declining to accept the order of the Tribunal on the issue under consideration in the case of M/s Accentur…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Asset Management Co.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal,Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Kotak Mahindra Asset Assistant Commissioner Of Income Management Co. Ltd.,C-27 बिधम/ Tax- 14(2)(1), Mumbai. Bkc, G Block, Bandra Kurla Vs. Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai 400 051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaack5576C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : Deputy Commissioner Of Kotak Mahindra Asset Management बिधम/ Income Tax- 14(2)(1), 432, 4Th Co. Ltd., C-27 Bkc, G Block, Bandra Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kurla Complex, Bandra E, Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400 020. 400 051. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaack5576C (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

…preme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC). The Ld. A.R in order drive home his aforesaid contention, further relied on the judgments of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay viz. (i) NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom); and (ii) Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). Lastly, it was submitted by the Ld. A.R that the reopening of a concluded assessment framed by the A.O under Sec. 143(3), vide order dated 30.09.2010, by declining to accept the order of the Tribunal on the issue under consideration in the case of M/s Accentur…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…notice u/s. 148 of the Act. This tantamount to change of opinion on the same set of facts without having any tangible material. In support of this proposition, reliance is placed upon the decisions in the case of Purity Techtextile Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Asst. CIT 325 ITR 459 25 M/s Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. ITA Nos7310 to 7313/Mum/ 2017 (Bom), wherein the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court observed/held as under : “2. The challenge in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the reopening of assessments for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 by notices dated 24-3-2009 and 31-3-2009…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…notice u/s. 148 of the Act. This tantamount to change of opinion on the same set of facts without having any tangible material. In support of this proposition, reliance is placed upon the decisions in the case of Purity Techtextile Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Asst. CIT 325 ITR 459 25 M/s Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. ITA Nos7310 to 7313/Mum/ 2017 (Bom), wherein the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court observed/held as under : “2. The challenge in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the reopening of assessments for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 by notices dated 24-3-2009 and 31-3-2009…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…notice u/s. 148 of the Act. This tantamount to change of opinion on the same set of facts without having any tangible material. In support of this proposition, reliance is placed upon the decisions in the case of Purity Techtextile Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Asst. CIT 325 ITR 459 25 M/s Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. ITA Nos7310 to 7313/Mum/ 2017 (Bom), wherein the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court observed/held as under : “2. The challenge in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the reopening of assessments for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 by notices dated 24-3-2009 and 31-3-2009…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…notice u/s. 148 of the Act. This tantamount to change of opinion on the same set of facts without having any tangible material. In support of this proposition, reliance is placed upon the decisions in the case of Purity Techtextile Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Asst. CIT 325 ITR 459 25 M/s Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. ITA Nos7310 to 7313/Mum/ 2017 (Bom), wherein the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court observed/held as under : “2. The challenge in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the reopening of assessments for assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05 by notices dated 24-3-2009 and 31-3-2009…

Landmark Education India, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) II (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

…rk 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 Income- tax (No. 1) (2001) 252 ITR 673(BOM). It was…

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed as above

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM I.T.A. No.681/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited Dy. CIT, Circle 2(3)2, 27, BKC, C-27, G Block, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAACK 4409 J (Appellant) : (Respondent) : Shri F. V. Irani Appellant by : Shri Sanjay Singh Respondent by Date of Hearing : 28.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 14.09.2018 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of…

DCIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. National Bank of Agriculture An Rural Development, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhdcit 3(2)(2) National Bank Of Agriculture & Room No. 674, 6Th Floor, Rural Development, C-24, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400020. Bandra, Mumbai-400051. Pan: Aaact4020G Appellant Respondent

…asis of change of opinion is not permissible under the law. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the following decision: (i) Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs. ACIT (268 ITR 332) (Bombay High Court), (ii) NYK Line (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT (346 ITR 361) (Bombay High Court), (iii) Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT (343 ITR 183(Bombay High Court),Idea Cellular Ltd. vs. DCIT (301 ITR 407 (Bombay High Court) (iv) Mumbai Tribunal in Van Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors BV vs. ADIT in ITA No. 495 & 496/Mum/2016 dated 28.02.2018. 7. The ld. AR of the assessee further argued that the decision relied…

Bharat Petroleum Corp Ltd ( Kochi Refineries Ltd), Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 1(1) RG 1, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2000-01 Assessment Year: 2002-03 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2003-04

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2000-01 Assessment Year: 2002-03 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2003-04 M/s. Bharat Petroleum The Asstt. Comm. of Corp. Ltd., (Kochi Income Tax, Refineries Limited), Circle 2(1), Bharat Bhavan Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 4 & 6, Currimbhoy Road, Mumbai Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACB2902M (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Tiresh Dave, A.R. Shri N.A. Patade, A.R. R…

ACIT - 2(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Central Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

…. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions in support of his above contentions: (a) CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd [320 ITR 561]. (b) Indian Bank v. DCIT [44 taxmann.com 339 (Madras)]. (c) Purity Techtextile (P) Ltd. v. ACIT & Anr. [325 ITR 459]. 6. Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer in reopening of assessment. She further submitted that there is no change C.O NOs. 301, 302 & 303/MUM/2017 M/s. Central Bank of India of opinion as the Assessing Officer did not consider the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank Ltd. v. Addl. C.I.T (su…

ACIT - 2(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Central Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

…. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions in support of his above contentions: (a) CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd [320 ITR 561]. (b) Indian Bank v. DCIT [44 taxmann.com 339 (Madras)]. (c) Purity Techtextile (P) Ltd. v. ACIT & Anr. [325 ITR 459]. 6. Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer in reopening of assessment. She further submitted that there is no change C.O NOs. 301, 302 & 303/MUM/2017 M/s. Central Bank of India of opinion as the Assessing Officer did not consider the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank Ltd. v. Addl. C.I.T (su…

ACIT - 2(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Central Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

…. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions in support of his above contentions: (a) CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd [320 ITR 561]. (b) Indian Bank v. DCIT [44 taxmann.com 339 (Madras)]. (c) Purity Techtextile (P) Ltd. v. ACIT & Anr. [325 ITR 459]. 6. Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer in reopening of assessment. She further submitted that there is no change C.O NOs. 301, 302 & 303/MUM/2017 M/s. Central Bank of India of opinion as the Assessing Officer did not consider the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank Ltd. v. Addl. C.I.T (su…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

…owed u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of tax at source u/s.194J, that the facts in the case under consideration left no scope for any other interpretation. He referred to cases of Kelvinator of India Ltd (256 ITR 1),NYK line (India) Ltd. (346 ITR 361), Calcutta Discount Company Ltd. (41 ITR 191) and observed that mere change of opinion in the mind of the AO could not be basis for forming reason to believe, that the section 147 did not empower the AO to review the assessment order on the same facts,that fresh application of mind by AO on similar facts would tantamount to review of his own deci…