Page 21 of 29 EscortsMahle Ltd. v. DCIT

119 ITD 119Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#16539 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Judgments citing Page 21 of 29 EscortsMahle Ltd. v. DCIT

Shailaja, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-69(5), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7558/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 7558/Del/2018 (A.Y 2015-16) (Through Video Conferencing) Shailaja Vs Ito B-44, Vishrantika Apartments, Ward-69(5) Plot No. 5-A, Sector-3, Dwarka, Block-D, Pratyakash Kar New Delhi Bhawan, Civic Centre, Bcsps5048B Jln Marg, (Appellant) New Delhi (Respondent)

Section 139(5)Section 54F

…bmitted that that if original return is filed before due date and on discovery of any omission or wrong statement, return can be revised u/s 139(5). The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Escorts Mahle Ltd. vs. CIT 2009 119 ITD 119 (Delhi). The Ld. AR further submitted that the entire process created artificial loss which is set off against subsequent capital gain income of Rs. 34,73,196/- in Assessment Year 2017-18 is incorrect observation by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee incurred loss as on 8/7/2014 and earned capital gain as on 3/1/2017. I…

DCIT, Circle-II(I) vs. I.F.C.I. Ltd

In the result ITA number 2205/Del/2005 filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2205/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2001-2002

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 139Section 142Section 143

…on (5) thereof, again within the prescribed time limit, the Assessing Officer is bound to take cognizance of the revised return, because the original return is replaced by the revised return. (emphasis supplied) Page 21 of 29 EscortsMahle Ltd. v. DCIT [2009] 119 ITD 119 (DEL-Trib.) “5. That takes us to the original question whether the return filed on 27-3-2003 is to be treated as a valid revised return under section 139(5) . The earlier return filed on 31-10-2001 not having been considered as invalid return as can be seen from the fact that the Assessing Officer processed the same under section 143(1) and also…

Ifci Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Circle-11(1)

In the result ITA number 2205/Del/2005 filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2120/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2001-2002

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 139Section 142Section 143

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Splendor Landbase Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2461/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanti.T.A. No.2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner M/S Splendor Landbase Of Income, Central Vs. Limited, Circle-3, F-38/2, Splendor House, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 215/Del/2016 In I.T.A. No. 2461/Del/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 M/S Splendor Landbase Assistant Commissioner Limited, Vs. Of Income, Central Circle- F-38/2, Splendor House, 3, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi Phase-Ii, New Delhi (Pan: Aaeca3986E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kr. Chopra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154

…He submitted further that finally determined loss in the assessment is to be carried forward as per the law. He placed reliance on the following decisions : 1. Sujani Textiles (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2004), 88 ITD 31 (Mad. ) 2. Escorts Mahle Ltd. Vs.DCIT (2009) 119 ITD 119 (Del.) 3. ACIT Vs. Mupnar Films Ltd. (2009) 116 ITD 217 (Indore) 4. ACIT Vs. Mahesh J. Patel (2004)91 TTJ 339 (Mum) 5. Kiran Nagji Nisar Vs. ITO (2008) 114 ITD 319 6. The Ld. D.R., on the other hand, tried to justify the orders of the authorities below on the issue. He submitted that loss determined in assessment cannot be said in pursuance t…

Fedex Express Tranportation and Supply Chain Services (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 9, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3621/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Fedex Express Transportation The Principal Commissioner Of & Supply Chain Services Income Tax – 9 Room No.214, 2Nd Floor, (India) Private Limited Boomerang, Unit No.801, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Wing-A, 8Th Floor, Mumbai - 400020 Chandivali Farm Road, Andheri (East) Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aabcf6516A (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Jain Revenue By : Shri S. Padmaja (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.11.2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra JainFor Respondent: Shri S. Padmaja (CIT-DR)

Section 119Section 139(5)Section 263

…learned AR relied upon the decision of CIT Vs. Nirav Modi 241 Taxmann 255, CIT Vs. Design and Automation Engineers 323 ITR 632, CIT Vs.Fine Jewellery (I) Ltd. 372 ITR 303, Vanshree Builders & Developers (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 63 SOT 30, Escorts Mahle Ltd. Vs. DCIT 119 ITD 119 (Delhi), ACIT Vs. Pratap Rajasthan Special Steels Limited 99 TTJ 67 (Jaipur). 7. The learned DR submitted that the AO passed the order mechanically without application of mind on the basis of revised return income without appreciating that contradictory information has been given in original and revised return. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the AO…