OLA. (ii) Tata Communications Transformation Services Rajebahadur Madhusudan Trimbak & Ors. v. ACIT

443 ITR 49High Court2022#25155 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 149(1)(b)Section 149(1)Section 151 Section 151(1)Section 151(2)Section 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 149 section 148 section 14

Judgments citing OLA. (ii) Tata Communications Transformation Services Rajebahadur Madhusudan Trimbak & Ors. v. ACIT

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SBK TRADE AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

ITA 2173/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaacit, Cc – 04, Vs. M/S. Sbk Trade & Infrastructure Private Ltd., New Delhi. 211, New Delhi House, 27, Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aarcs9589C) Co No.110 /Del/2025 (In Ita No.2173/Del/2025) (Assessment Year : 2015-16) M/S. Sbk Trade & Infrastructure Private Ltd., Vs. Acit, Cc – 04, 211, New Delhi House, New Delhi. 27, Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aarcs9589C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mukesh Jain, Ca Shri Samyak Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Order : 14.11.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi-23 [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151(1)Section 151(2)Section 3

…-16, all the notices issued on or after 1st April 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under TOLA. (ii) Tata Communications Transformation Services Rajebahadur Madhusudan Trimbak & Ors. vs. ACIT (2022) 443 ITR 49 (Bom.); (iii) JM Financial and Investment Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (2023) 451 ITR 205 (Bom.); (iv) Sidhmicro Equities Private Ltd. vs. DCIT (2023) 453 ITR 33 (Bom); (v) Soumya Girdhari Agrawal vs. ITO – (2023) 457 ITR 636 (Bom.); (vi) Voltas Limited vs. ACIT – 2022 (4) TMI 594 – Bombay High Court. In view of his submissions, ld. AR…

PUROHIT FOOD PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 10(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2678/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year 2015-16 Purohit Food Products Private The Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-10(3)(1), 1-10, Dhiraj Pen Compound, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 58-59, Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai. J.B. Nagar, Andheri (East), Mumbai. Pan : Aagcp5590F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ajay Singh A/W. Shri Akshay Pawar, For Revenue : Shri H.M. Bhatt, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-08-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-08-2024 Order Per B.R. Baskaran, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh a/wFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt, Sr.DR

Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

…t is barred by limitation as per the first proviso to Section 149 of the Act? 6.1. With regard to the first question, the Hon‟ble High Court followed its earlier decisions rendered in the case of Tata Communications Transformation Services Ltd vs. ACIT (2022)(443 ITR 49)(Bom) and Siemens Financial Services (P) Ltd vs. DCIT (2023)(154 taxmann.com 159)(Bom) and held that the provisions of TOLA provide that any notice issued under sec.148 of the Act after 31st March 2021 will travel back to the original date. 6.2. With regard to the second question, the Hon‟ble High Court held that the first proviso to sec.149 of th…

INMOBI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE3(1)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 303/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: \nShri Chaitanya, Sr. Advocate a/wFor Respondent: \nMs. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…ion 4 of TOLA that amends section 6 of the act.\n• Shell India Markets Pvt. Ltd. vs. NaFAC reported in (2022) 443 ITR 366 (Bombay)\nPage 10 of 86\nIT(TP)A Nos. 303 & 839/Bang/2022\n• Tata Communications Transformation Services Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in [2022] 443 ITR 49 (Bombay)\n• Sudesh Taneja vs. ITO reported in [2022] 442 ITR 289 (Rajasthan)\n• Roca Bathroom Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. DRP & Other reported in [2021] 432 ITR 192 (Madras)\n• Hope Textiles Ltd. vs. UOI reported in [1994] 205 ITR 508(SC)\n6.5 The Ld.Sr.Counsel also argued that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo motu Writ Petition (Civil)…