Otters Club v. DIT

392 ITR 244High Court2017#454 most cited

What is Otters Club v. DIT authority for?

The Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days.

202

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2020.

Also referred to as

Otters Club v. DIT · Tribunal order beyond 90 days · assessment procedure · Bombay High Court · appeal period · time limit for tribunal orders · income tax act

Issues it is cited on

section 143indiasection 14section 143(3)

Judgments citing Otters Club v. DIT

Sh. Puneet Sehdev Prop;, Jammu vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Jammu

ITA 5/ASR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri L. P. Sahu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri P.N Arora, A.R)For Respondent: Shri M.P Singh, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time bound by this Court, the period for which…

Pomegranate Media (Pty) Ltd, South Africa vs. DCIT(It)-3(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 698/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek TilakFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 9

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon‟ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon‟ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made timebound by this Court, the period for which t…

Hexaware Technologies Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 10(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1861/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanआअसं. 1861/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) M/S. Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Unit No.152, Block –A, Sector -3, Millenium Business Park, Ttc Industrial Area, Mahape, Navi Mumbai 400 701 Pan: Aabca3203F ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Ms. Mamta Bansal
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 80Section 80J

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while 7 calculating the time for disposal of matters made time-bound by this Court, the period for wh…

Koch Chemicals Technology Group India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(2), Mumbai

ITA 4580/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Nirmit M. MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ujjwal Kumar
Section 92C

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon‟ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon‟ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made timebound by this Court, the period for which t…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 3, Thane vs. The Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Ltd, Thane

ITA 6639/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar DesaiFor Respondent: Shri Inder Solanki
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80A(5)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon‟ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon‟ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made timebound by this Court, the period for which t…

Knight Riders Sports P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4389/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं. 4389/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2011-12) M/S. Knight Riders Sports Private Limited, Backstage, Plot No.612, 15Th Road, Junction Of Ramakrishna Mission Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai 400 054. Pan: Aadck3118M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate with Shri Hitendra Chanda &For Respondent: S/Shri Narendra Singh & Jangapanji
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time-bound by this Court, the period for which…

Bnp Paribas India Solutions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 12(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1906/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Farookh V. IraniFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

…at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of 24 BNP Paribas India Solutions Pvt. Ltd. our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon‟ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon‟ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made timebound by this Court, the period for which t…

Krishiv Rama Foundation, Jammu vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 648/ASR/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Jun 2020AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri L.P. Sahu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.648/Asr/2019 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :Na) वष" Krishiv Rama Foundation, Vs. Cit(E), Chandigarh House No.83, Ward No.1, R.S.Pura, Jammu-181102 "थायी लेखा सं./Panno. : Aadtk 8135 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (" यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"!रती क" क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By : Shri P.N.Arora, Advocate क" क" ओर ओर राज"व क" क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By : Shri M.P.Singh, Cit-Dr क" क" ओर ओर सुनवाई क" तार'ख / Date Of Hearing : 06/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार'ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/06/2020 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(E), Chandigarh, Dated 25.09.2019. 2. The Sole Issue Involved In The Present Appeal Of The Assessee Is With Regard To Rejection Of Application Of Assessee For Grant Of Registration U/S.12A Of The Act By The Cit(E). 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Application Electronically In Form No.10A The Act On 10.03.2019 Seeking Registration U/S.12A Of The Act, 1961. However, The Cit(E) Rejected The Application Of The Assessee Holding That The Assessee Trust Does Not Exist For The Purpose Of Charity, Rather It Is Working Commercially, Which Is Defeating Its Own Aims & Objectives.

For Appellant: Shri P.N.Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.P.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 12A

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, अमृतसर अिधकरण अमृतसर अमृतसर "यायपीठ अमृतसर "यायपीठ "यायपीठ, अमृतसर "यायपीठ अमृतसर अमृतसर अमृतसर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH AMRITSAR BEFORE SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.648/ASR/2019 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :NA) वष" Krishiv Rama Foundation, Vs. CIT(E), Chandigarh House No.83, Ward No.1, R.S.Pura, Jammu-181102 "थायी लेखा सं./PANNo. : AADTK 8135 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (" यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"!रती क" क" ओर ओर…

Perstorp Chemicals India P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 10(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2137/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri G.Manjunathaआअसं. 2137/मुं/2017 ("न.व 2010-11) Perstorp Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd., 501, 5Th Floor, Kesar Solitaire, Plot No.5, Sector -19, Sanpada, Navi Mumbai -400 705 Pan: Aaacp9450G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Mayur KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Uodal Raj Singh
Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time- bound by this Court, the period for which…

Shri Anil Abhubhai Odedara, Jamnagar vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1), Jamnagar

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 141/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royanil Abhubhai Odedara Vs. Income Tax Officer 205-Sagar Apartment, Ward-3(1), B/H. Haria School, Jamnagar Jamnagar [Pan No. Aaq Po7 361 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suhas Mistry, Sr. D.R
Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Anil Abhubhai Odedara Vs. Income Tax Officer 205-Sagar Apartment, Ward-3(1), B/h. Haria School, Jamnagar Jamnagar [PAN No. AAQ PO7 361 P] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, CA Respondent by : Shri Suhas Mistry, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 28.02.2020 Date of Pronouncement 29.06.2020 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY JUDICIAL MEMBER: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner o…

Shri Suraj, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-I, Kanpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 331/LKW/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2013-14

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time- bound by this Court, the period for which…

Sri Suresh Khatri, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer- 3(4), Kanpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 781/LKW/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2013-14

Section 172Section 172(1)Section 194CSection 200Section 40

…when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented I.T.A. No.781/Lkw/2017 Assessment Year:2013-14 11 disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time- bound by this Court, the period for which…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Ralty & Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 3929/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm& Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3929/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri R. Manjunatha SwamyFor Respondent: Ms. Aarti Vissanji, AR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JM& SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3929/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s Tata Realty & ACIT 2(3), Infrastructure Ltd. R. No. 552, 5TH floor, बिधम/ Elphinstone Bldg, 2nd floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. 10 Veer Nariman Road, Road, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. AACCT6242L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, DR by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Ms. Aarti Vissanji, AR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 31.01.2020 Date of…

Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Kalash Metals Private Limited, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 504/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 504/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri K. Bhoopati, DR byFor Respondent: Shri S.C. Tiwari & Ms
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 504/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s Kalash Metals Pvt. ITO 6(3)(3), Ltd. Room No. 524, 5TH Floor, बिधम/ 41, 4th floor, Kalpataru Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. CHS, Seth Motisha, Lane Road, Mumbai-400 020 Byculla, Mumbai-400 010 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. AACCK8464F (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri K. Bhoopati, DR by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri S.C. Tiwari & Ms. Rutuja N Pawar, ARs सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 29.01.…

The Inxome Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Hajiabdulgani T. Memon, Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2580/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: 03.03.2020
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time-bound by this Court, the period for which…

ITO 14(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Nextgen Constructions P.Tld (Changed to M/S Aetius Construction P. Ltd Which Is Further Amalgamated With M/S Supergold Properties Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 3593/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Dr.P.Daniel-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman-CIT- DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made timebound by this Court, the period for which t…

Piramal Glass Private Ltd(Earlier Known As Piramal Glass Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 556/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanआअसं. 556/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2013-14) Piramal Glass Private Limited, (Earlier Known As Piramal Glass Ltd) Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aabcg0093R ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Ronak G. Doshi with Shri Hardik NirmalFor Respondent: Shri A. Mohan
Section 143(3)

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time- bound by this Court, the period for which…

Powernetics Equipment India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO 9(2)4, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3078/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanआअसं. 3078/मुं/2016 ("न.व. 2011-12) M/S. Powernetics Equipments India Pvt. Ltd. 7C,Bindya, Bandra Reclamation, Bndra(W), Mumbai 400 050 Pan: Aaacp9311Q ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Hari S. RahejaFor Respondent: S/Shri A.Mohan & Uodal Raj Singh
Section 143(3)Section 35DSection 43BSection 68

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time- bound by this Court, the period for which…

Megha Property Developers Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 398/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Megha Property Vs. Ito-4(2)(4) Room No.647, 6Th Floor Developers Ltd., 701A, Niranjan Aayakar Bhavan 99, Marine Drive M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 002 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaffm5593B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 73

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time- bound by this Court, the period for which…

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2(2)2, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1449/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Sa No.462/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1449/Mum/2016) (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Mahindra & Mahindra Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax Corporation Taxation, Circle-2(2)(2) P.K. Kurne Chowk, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, Mumbai – 400020 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Sa No.461/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.7382/Mum/2017) (Assessment Year : 2013-14) Mahindra & Mahindra Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax Corporation Taxation, Circle-2(2)(2) P.K. Kurne Chowk, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, Mumbai – 400020 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Income-Tax Corporation Taxation, Circle-2(2)(2) P.K. Kurne Chowk, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, Mumbai – 400020 M.K.Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Mahindra & Mahindra Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Limited, Income-Tax Corporation Taxation, Circle-2(2)(2) P.K. Kurne Chowk, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, Mumbai – 400020 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacm3025E (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…le 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon’ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon’ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed “while calculating the time for disposal of matters made time- bound by this Court, the period for which…