Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd. v. ITO

374 ITR 485High Court2015#5618 most cited
21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also reported as

107 Taxmann.com 215

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153C

Issues it is cited on

borrowed satisfactionsection 10(38)non-application of minddocuments seizedsection 153dreason to believesection 151unexplained moneysection 139(1)reassessment proceedingssection 153csection 132(4)

Judgments citing Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd. v. ITO

LASCO CHEMIE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(2), NEW DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…emie (P) Ltd. (AY 2012-13) - Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company v. CIT: [2009] 308 ITR 38 (Del.) - CIT v. Purolator India Ltd.: [2012] 343 ITR 155 (Del.) - Titanor Components Ltd. v. ACIT: [2012] 343 ITR 183 (Bom.) - Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd v. ITO: [2015] 374 ITR 485 (Bom.) - Kalpataru Sthapatya (P.) Ltd v. ITO: [2013] 215 Taxman 479 ( Guj.) - Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. v. ACIT: [1995] 216 ITR 371 (Guj.) 11. Without prejudice, it is most respectfully submitted that there was, even otherwise, on the facts of the case and in law, no failure on the part of the assessee in disclosing fu…

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), NEW DEL;HI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4853/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

…has been held in the following decisions: Atma Ram Properties (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT: [2012] 343 ITR 141 (Del) CIT vs. Purolator India Ltd.: [2012] 343 ITR 155 (Del) Titanor Components Ltd. v. ACTT: [2012] 343 ITR 183 (Bom) Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd vs. ITO: [2015] 374 ITR 485 (Bom) Kalpataru Sthapatya (P.) Ltd vs. ITO: [2013] 215 Taxman 479 (Guj) Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. vs. ACIT: [1995] 216 ITR 371 (Guj) 32. Applying the aforesaid settled legal position to the facts of the present case, it is respectfully submitted that on perusal of reasons recorded [refer pages 88 to 89 of PB]. it will k…

BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 5(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4852/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

…has been held in the following decisions: Atma Ram Properties (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT: [2012] 343 ITR 141 (Del) CIT vs. Purolator India Ltd.: [2012] 343 ITR 155 (Del) Titanor Components Ltd. v. ACTT: [2012] 343 ITR 183 (Bom) Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd vs. ITO: [2015] 374 ITR 485 (Bom) Kalpataru Sthapatya (P.) Ltd vs. ITO: [2013] 215 Taxman 479 (Guj) Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. vs. ACIT: [1995] 216 ITR 371 (Guj) 32. Applying the aforesaid settled legal position to the facts of the present case, it is respectfully submitted that on perusal of reasons recorded [refer pages 88 to 89 of PB]. it will k…

MAHESH NARAYAN JOGLEKAR ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6376/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…person not searched, which information originates in different searches at different times on different persons as well. 11. The ld. counsel also he relied on the judgments of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd vs ITO 374 ITR 485(Bombay), and other judgments viz., Best Cybercity (India) (P) Ltd [2019]107 taxmann.com215(Delhi), Tajendra Kumar Ghai 2017-TIOL-961-ITAT-DEL, Piramal Enterprises Ltd 2017-TIOL-363-HC-MUM-IT,Bhanumati Malraj Kabali 2019-TIOL-289-HC-MUM-IT, Styric Chem (P) Ltd 2019- TIOL-2243-ITAT-DEL, Dr Ajit Gupta[2017] 79 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi), Kumar Dugar (H…

MAHESH NARAYAN JOGLEKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6210/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…on not searched, which information\noriginates in different searches at different times on\ndifferent persons as well.\n11. The ld. counsel also he relied on the judgments of the\njurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food\nPac Ltd vs ITO 374 ITR 485(Bombay), and other judgments viz.,\nBest Cybercity (India) (P) Ltd [2019]107 taxmann.com215(Delhi),\nTajendra Kumar Ghai 2017-TIOL-961-ITAT-DEL,\nPiramal\nEnterprises Ltd 2017-TIOL-363-HC-MUM-IT,Bhanumati Malraj\nKabali 2019-TIOL-289-HC-MUM-IT, Styric Chem (P) Ltd 2019-\nTIOL-2243-ITAT-DEL, Dr Ajit Gupta[2017] 79 taxmann.com 316\n(Delhi), Kumar D…

MAHESH NARAYAN JOGLEKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6209/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…person not searched, which information originates in different searches at different times on different persons as well. 11. The ld. counsel also he relied on the judgments of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd vs ITO 374 ITR 485(Bombay), and other judgments viz., Best Cybercity (India) (P) Ltd [2019]107 taxmann.com215(Delhi), Tajendra Kumar Ghai 2017-TIOL-961-ITAT-DEL, Piramal Enterprises Ltd 2017-TIOL-363-HC-MUM-IT,Bhanumati Malraj Kabali 2019-TIOL-289-HC-MUM-IT, Styric Chem (P) Ltd 2019- TIOL-2243-ITAT-DEL, Dr Ajit Gupta[2017] 79 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi), Kumar Dugar (H…

MAHESH NARAYAN JOGLEKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6208/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…person not searched, which information originates in different searches at different times on different persons as well. 11. The ld. counsel also he relied on the judgments of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd vs ITO 374 ITR 485(Bombay), and other judgments viz., Best Cybercity (India) (P) Ltd [2019]107 taxmann.com215(Delhi), Tajendra Kumar Ghai 2017-TIOL-961-ITAT-DEL, Piramal Enterprises Ltd 2017-TIOL-363-HC-MUM-IT,Bhanumati Malraj Kabali 2019-TIOL-289-HC-MUM-IT, Styric Chem (P) Ltd 2019- TIOL-2243-ITAT-DEL, Dr Ajit Gupta[2017] 79 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi), Kumar Dugar (H…

MAHESH NARAYAN JOGLEKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6207/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…person not searched, which information originates in different searches at different times on different persons as well. 11. The ld. counsel also he relied on the judgments of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd vs ITO 374 ITR 485(Bombay), and other judgments viz., Best Cybercity (India) (P) Ltd [2019]107 taxmann.com215(Delhi), Tajendra Kumar Ghai 2017-TIOL-961-ITAT-DEL, Piramal Enterprises Ltd 2017-TIOL-363-HC-MUM-IT,Bhanumati Malraj Kabali 2019-TIOL-289-HC-MUM-IT, Styric Chem (P) Ltd 2019- TIOL-2243-ITAT-DEL, Dr Ajit Gupta[2017] 79 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi), Kumar Dugar (H…

MAHESH NARAYAN JOGLEKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6206/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…on not searched, which information\noriginates in different searches at different times on\ndifferent persons as well.\n11. The ld. counsel also he relied on the judgments of the\njurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food\nPac Ltd vs ITO 374 ITR 485(Bombay), and other judgments viz.,\nBest Cybercity (India) (P) Ltd [2019]107 taxmann.com215(Delhi),\nTajendra Kumar Ghai 2017-TIOL-961-ITAT-DEL,\nPiramal\nEnterprises Ltd 2017-TIOL-363-HC-MUM-IT,Bhanumati Malraj\nKabali 2019-TIOL-289-HC-MUM-IT, Styric Chem (P) Ltd 2019-\nTIOL-2243-ITAT-DEL, Dr Ajit Gupta[2017] 79 taxmann.com 316\n(Delhi), Kumar D…

MAHESH NARAYAN JOGLEKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6205/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…person not searched, which information originates in different searches at different times on different persons as well. 11. The ld. counsel also he relied on the judgments of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd vs ITO 374 ITR 485(Bombay), and other judgments viz., Best Cybercity (India) (P) Ltd [2019]107 taxmann.com215(Delhi), Tajendra Kumar Ghai 2017-TIOL-961-ITAT-DEL, Piramal Enterprises Ltd 2017-TIOL-363-HC-MUM-IT,Bhanumati Malraj Kabali 2019-TIOL-289-HC-MUM-IT, Styric Chem (P) Ltd 2019- TIOL-2243-ITAT-DEL, Dr Ajit Gupta[2017] 79 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi), Kumar Dugar (H…

MAHESH NARAYAN JOGLEKAR,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6204/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 69A

…person not searched, which information originates in different searches at different times on different persons as well. 11. The ld. counsel also he relied on the judgments of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd vs ITO 374 ITR 485(Bombay), and other judgments viz., Best Cybercity (India) (P) Ltd [2019]107 taxmann.com215(Delhi), Tajendra Kumar Ghai 2017-TIOL-961-ITAT-DEL, Piramal Enterprises Ltd 2017-TIOL-363-HC-MUM-IT,Bhanumati Malraj Kabali 2019-TIOL-289-HC-MUM-IT, Styric Chem (P) Ltd 2019- TIOL-2243-ITAT-DEL, Dr Ajit Gupta[2017] 79 taxmann.com 316 (Delhi), Kumar Dugar (H…

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…(A.Y: 2010-11) ITA.No. 3177/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) M/s. ACC Limited 6. The Ld AR has also stated that in absence of no 'new' tangible material, reopening is bad-in-law for which he relied upon following decisions: (i) Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd. v. ITO [2015] 374 ITR 485 (Bombay) (ii) CIT v. Amitabh Bachchan [2013] 349 ITR 76 (Bombay) (iii) Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT (2009) (308 ITR 195) (Bombay) (iv) Kalpataru Ltd. v. DCIT [2021] 439 ITR 284 (Bombay) (v) Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2021] 439 ITR 168 (Bombay) 7. In addition to above, Ld. AR has also stated that when the subject matter is in appeal, reasses…

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT(LTU) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3137/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…(A.Y: 2010-11) ITA.No. 3177/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) M/s. ACC Limited 6. The Ld AR has also stated that in absence of no 'new' tangible material, reopening is bad-in-law for which he relied upon following decisions: (i) Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd. v. ITO [2015] 374 ITR 485 (Bombay) (ii) CIT v. Amitabh Bachchan [2013] 349 ITR 76 (Bombay) (iii) Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT (2009) (308 ITR 195) (Bombay) (iv) Kalpataru Ltd. v. DCIT [2021] 439 ITR 284 (Bombay) (v) Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2021] 439 ITR 168 (Bombay) 7. In addition to above, Ld. AR has also stated that when the subject matter is in appeal, reasses…

JAEE VISHWAS JOSHI,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIRCLE-21(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1028/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodjaee Vishwas Joshi Vs. Acit,Circle-21(1) 8Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan 1002, Om Co-Op.Housing Society Limited Bkc M.B.Raut Road Mumbai-400 051 Shivaji Park, Dadar Mumbai-400 028 Pan/Gir No.Aelpa7074L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 144ASection 147Section 148

…cision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ankitha Choksi vs ITO (2009) (411 ITR 207). The assessee has also relied upon the following judicial precedents:- i) Prashanth S.Joshi vs CIT (2010) (324 ITR 154) ii) Plus Paper Food Pack Ltd. Vs ITO (2015) (374 ITR 485) (Bom.) iii) ACIT vs Dhariya Construction Company (supreme Court) iv) CIT (Delhi) vs Kelvinator of India (SC) v) Akshar Builders vs ACIT,28(1), dated 17/01/2019 (Bom.) vi) Pr.CIT vs G &G Pharma Ltd., dated 08/10/2015 (Delhi High court) vii) Chhugamal Rajpal vs. SP Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 viii) ACITvs Dhariya Construction Co. (2010) 328 ITR 515…

DCIT 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4395/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhdcit-14(2)(1) M/S Idea Cellular Ltd. 432, 4Th Floor, (Successor To M/S. Spice Communications Ltd.), 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. M.K. Road, East Wing, Windsor Off. Cst Mumbai 400020 Road, Kalina, Near Vidya Nagari, Kalina, Santacruz (West), Mumbai 400 098 Pan – Aagcs6070H Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Pooja Swaroop With Shri M.K. Singh (Dr) Respondent By : Ms. Krupa Gandhi With Vidhi Doshi (Ar)

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja Swaroop with Shri M.K. Singh (DR)For Respondent: Ms. Krupa Gandhi with Vidhi Doshi (AR)
Section 127Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 254(1)Section 37

…igh Court), GKN Sinter Metal Ltd versus ACIT (WP No.2639 of 2007) (Bombay High Court), German Remedies Ltd versus DCIT 285 ITR 26 (Bombay High Court), Aroni Commercials Ltd versus JCIT 362 ITR 403 (Bombay High Court) and Plus Paper food Pac Ltd versus ITO 374 ITR 485 (Bombay High Court). 9. In other alternative submission the learned AR submits that merely because there is no discussion of the issue in the assessment order under section 143(3), it does not mean that assessing officer has not applied his mind. The learned AR for the assessee submits that the assessee furnished all details during the origina…

DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI vs. ICICI BANK LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5191/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5191/Mum/2009 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit-Circle 3(1) Icici Bank Limited बनाम Room No.607, 6Th Floor नाम/ नाम नाम Icici Bank Towers Aaykar Bhavan Bandra-Kurla Complex Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-1195-H (अपीलाथ" / Appellant) (ू"यथ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No.127/Mum/2010 [Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.5191/Mum/2009] (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Icici Bank Limited Dcit-Circle 3(1) बनाम नाम नाम/ नाम Room No.607, 6Th Floor Icici Bank Towers Bandra-Kurla Complex Aaykar Bhavan Vs. Mumbai-400 051. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci 1195 H (""ा"ेप ""ा"ेप ""ा"ेप /Cross Objector) ""ा"ेप (ू"यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray -Ld.DR
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35DSection 36(1)(vii)

…ion cannot be allowed. In our opinion, therefore, in the present case also, it was not permissible for respondent No. 1 to issue notice under Section 148. Similar is the observation of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd. V/s ITO [374 ITR 485] & Pr.CIT V/s Century Textiles and Industries Ltd. [412 ITR 228]. 6.7 Enumerating the term “reasons to believe”, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT V/s Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 291 ITR 500 held as under: - 16. Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has rea…

ACIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA CHEMICALS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7377/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7325/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) Tata Chemicals Limited The Deputy Commissioner Bombay House, Fort, Of Income Tax Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaact4059M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7377/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) The Deputy Commissioner Of Tata Chemicals Limited Income Tax Bombay House, Fort, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12-02-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-05-2019 Aadosa / O R D E R महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य/ Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80ISection 80M

…as escaped from tax. Hence, we are of the view that this is clearly a change of opinion. 14. For this proposition, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of Plus Paper Food PAC Ltd. vs. ITO (2015) 374 ITR 485 (Bom), wherein Hon’ble High Court has considered that the original assessment order passed and taken into consideration the aspect of depreciation on perusal of documents and details called for and which were filed. It was further observed that there did not appear tangible material / reason to reopen the assessment proceedings by the AO in the f…

TATA CHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7325/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7325/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) Tata Chemicals Limited The Deputy Commissioner Bombay House, Fort, Of Income Tax Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaact4059M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7377/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) The Deputy Commissioner Of Tata Chemicals Limited Income Tax Bombay House, Fort, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12-02-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-05-2019 Aadosa / O R D E R महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य/ Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80ISection 80M

…as escaped from tax. Hence, we are of the view that this is clearly a change of opinion. 14. For this proposition, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of Plus Paper Food PAC Ltd. vs. ITO (2015) 374 ITR 485 (Bom), wherein Hon’ble High Court has considered that the original assessment order passed and taken into consideration the aspect of depreciation on perusal of documents and details called for and which were filed. It was further observed that there did not appear tangible material / reason to reopen the assessment proceedings by the AO in the f…

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(3)(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 681/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 1Section 115WSection 147Section 36

…346 ITR 361 (Bombay) 3. Direct Information (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer [2012] 349 ITR 150 (Bombay) 4. Purity Techtextile (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bombay) 5. Plus Paper Food Pac Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer [2015] 374 ITR 485 (Bombay) 8. The ld. Counsel of the assessee further referred to PB pg. 19. He referred that in notes, the matter was duly disclosed. The ld. Counsel of the assessee Shri F. V. Irani further submitted that the second reason for reopening has become infructuous as the A.O. has allowed the same in the giving effect order. 9. The ld. Departmental R…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2277/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Ms. Krupa R. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri L.K.S. Dehiya-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 195Section 254(1)Section 37Section 40

…did not amount to fees for technical services, that if there was no human intervention during roaming process the payment was not for FTS. He relied upon the cases of Kelvinator of India Ltd.(320 ITR 561)Idea Cellular Ltd (301ITR407),Plus Paper Food Pvt. Ltd.(374 ITR 485), ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd (348 ITR 299) Asian Paints Ltd (308ITR195),Idea Cellular Ltd. (ITA 168 of 2015, dated 11/07/2017),Idea Cellular Ltd.(ITA/ 648-651/Bangalore/2014,dated 6/11/2015),Estel Communication Private Limited (217 CTR 102), Bharti Cellular and Others (175 taxman 573). 2.4.Before proceeding further,we would like to…

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2