Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT

244 ITR 734High Court2000#579 most cited

What is Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT authority for?

The Revenue is bound by the rule of consistency and cannot adopt a divergent position in a subsequent assessment year unless there is a change in facts or law.

168

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT · 244 ITR 734 · rule of consistency · revenue divergent position · subsequent assessment year · income tax assessment · section 143(3) · assessment procedure · judicial precedent

Also reported as

25 Taxmann.com 340112 Taxmann 363

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 22Section 35ABBSection 142(1)Section 255(4)Section 28(i)Section 10(B)(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 13(2)(c)section 144(b)advancement of general public utilitysection 12a(a)section 80ib(10)section 11(4a)section 13(2)far analysissection 80hsection 13(3)related party transactionsection 13(1)(c)

Judgments citing Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT

Smt. Sangeeta Chhabra, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1853/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.P. Jainassessment Year 2007-08 Vs. Ito, Ward-36(5), New Smt. Sangeeta Chhabra, Prop. M/S. Chhabra Metals, Delhi. D-6/12, 1St Floor, Rana Pratap Bagh, Delhi. Pan: Aeypc 6682C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee(S) By : S/Shri V.K. Sabharwal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri, Sr.D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19/04/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/04/2017 Order This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises From The Order Of Learned Cit(A)- 12, New Delhi, Vide Order Dated 17.02.2017 For The Assessment Year 2007- 08. 2. The Assessee Has Raised As Many Thirteen Grounds Of Appeal. Ground No.1 & 2 Are With The Regard To Initiation Of Re-Assessment Proceedings U/S.147 Of The Act & Rest Of The Grounds Are With Regard To The Addition On Account Of Alleged Purchases Of Bogus Material Amounting To Rs.39,74,698/- & Payment Of Commission Amounting To Rs.19,873/-.

For Respondent: Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri
Section 131Section 132Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year 2007-08 Vs. ITO, Ward-36(5), New Smt. Sangeeta Chhabra, Prop. M/s. Chhabra Metals, Delhi. D-6/12, 1st Floor, Rana Pratap Bagh, Delhi. PAN: AEYPC 6682C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee(s) by : S/Shri V.K. Sabharwal, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Bedobani Chaudhuri, Sr.D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 19/04/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 21/04/2017 ORDER This appeal of the assessee arises from the order of learned CIT(A)- 12, New Delhi, vide order dated 17.02.2017 for the assessm…

Asst CIT Cir 2, Thane vs. Salasar Developers, Thane

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4513/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

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

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ई, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member ITA NOs.4511 to 4513/Mum/2014 Assessment Years: 2004-05 to 2006-07 ACIT, M/s Salasar Developers, Circle-2, Ground Floor, Vrindavan, बनाम/ Thane Salasar Brijbhoomi, Temba Vs. Hospital Road, Bhayandar(W), Dist:-Thane-401101 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) PAN. No. AAKFS6465R "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Virag H. Shah Shri H.N. Singh CIT-DR…

Asst CIT Cir 2, Thane vs. Salasar Developers, Thane

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4512/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

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

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ई, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member ITA NOs.4511 to 4513/Mum/2014 Assessment Years: 2004-05 to 2006-07 ACIT, M/s Salasar Developers, Circle-2, Ground Floor, Vrindavan, बनाम/ Thane Salasar Brijbhoomi, Temba Vs. Hospital Road, Bhayandar(W), Dist:-Thane-401101 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) PAN. No. AAKFS6465R "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Virag H. Shah Shri H.N. Singh CIT-DR…

Asst CIT Cir 2, Thane vs. Salasar Developers, Thane

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4511/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

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

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ई, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member ITA NOs.4511 to 4513/Mum/2014 Assessment Years: 2004-05 to 2006-07 ACIT, M/s Salasar Developers, Circle-2, Ground Floor, Vrindavan, बनाम/ Thane Salasar Brijbhoomi, Temba Vs. Hospital Road, Bhayandar(W), Dist:-Thane-401101 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) PAN. No. AAKFS6465R "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Virag H. Shah Shri H.N. Singh CIT-DR…

Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas), Delhi vs. ADIT(Exemption), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2267/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri N. C. Swain, CIT [DR]
Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 13Section 142Section 2(15)

…he Courts have held that though the doctrine of res judicata does not strictly apply to the income-tax proceedings but in order to maintain consistency, the Revenue cannot be permitted to rake up settled issues. - DIT (E) vs. Apparel Export Promotion Council: 244 ITR 734 (Del) - CIT V. Neo Polypack (P) Ltd: 245 ITR 492 (Del.) - CIT V. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd: 281 ITR 346 (Del.) - DIT v. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital: 300 ITR 75 (Del.) - CIT vs. P. KhrishnaWarrier: 208 ITR 823 (Ker) - CIT vs. Harishchandra Gupta 132 ITR 799 (Ori) - CIT vs. SewaBharti Haryana Pradesh: 325 ITR 599 (P&H) In the impugn…

Gandhi College of Pharmacy, Karnal vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3476/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. C. M. Garg, Jm Ita No. 3476/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Gandhi College Of Pharmacy, Vs Acit, Near Iti Chowk, G. T. Road, Circle, Karnal Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5629D Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Ashish Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.03.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A), Karnal. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Is Bad Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts. 2(I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Action Of A.O. In Holding That The Assesses Is Not Eligible For Exemption Under Section 10(23C)(Iiiad) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., & Ashish Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 139Section 143(3)Section 2(31)Section 263(1)

…4) 87 TTJ (Del.) 93 v) Aquel Charities (Aquel Sewa Sang) Vs. ITO (1988) 31 TTJ (Del) 160. vi) Birla Vidhya Vihar Trust Vs. CIT (1982) 136 ITR 445 Cal. vii) ACIT Vs. Rajasthan State Text Book Board (2000) 244 ITR 667 (Raj) viii) CIT Vs. Lagan Kala Upvan (2003) 259 ITR 489 (Del) ix) CIT Vs. Vidya Vikas Vihar (2004) 265 ITR 489 (Bom) x) Gujarat State Co.Op. Union Vs. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 279 (Guj.) f) That under the Act, the institution claiming exemption of income under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act was required to file their return mandatorily w.e.f. A.Y. 2006-07. In the case of assessee neither any notice U/S 1…

DCIT 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 515/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri N. K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit 4(2)(2), Smt. Vimal S. Jajoo, R.No.642, 6Th Floor, 7/10, Botawala Bldg., Vs. 1St Floor, Horniman Circle, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Adapj 8747J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Ojha, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Indra C. Anand, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2016 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Ojha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Indra C. Anand, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 111A

…he view taken in one year should be followed in subsequent years unless the facts or the legal position justify departure there from; reliance can be placed in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 9. In view of our above discussion of the matter, we are of the view that the assessee is to be treated as an investor for the A.Y. 2005-06 to A.Y. 2008-09 also. We hold accordingly. The AO, therefore, is directed to treat the income from sale and purchase of shares as short term c…

Kiran D. Khandelwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT 24(2)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 335/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Smt. Kiran D. Khandelwal, Vs. Dcit – 30(2) 24(2), A-701, Sahyadri Mumbai Tower,Upper Govind Nagar, Malad (E), Mumbai – 400 007 Pan/Gir No. Acspk8289P Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…he view taken in one year should be followed in subsequent years unless the facts or the legal position justify departure there from; reliance can be placed in this respect on the authorities of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in ‘CIT vs. Darius Pandole’ [(2011 330 ITR 485 (Bom.)] and in ‘CIT vs. Gopal Purohit [(2011) 336 ITR 287 (Bom.). 7. The shares held as investment for more than 12 months were accepted by the AO as long term investment, under these facts and circumstances, 4 Smt. Kiran D. Khandelwal we do not find any merit for not accepting the capital gain earned in respect of shares held for less than 12 m…

Hero Motocorp Limited, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-2‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hero MotoCorp Limited, JCIT, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi PAN: AAACH0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, M/s. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, M/s. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Page 2 of 484 New Delhi Vs. Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Hero Moto Corp. D…

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1162/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1162/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Trent Ltd., Dcit-Range-2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai. Mumbai-400 001. Pan:Aaacl 1838 J आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1725/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 वष" Dcit-Range-2(3) Trent Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri Sathya Moorthy-Dr Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Joshi सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:24.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 06/12/2010 Of The Cit (A)-6,Mumbai The Assessing Officer(Ao) & The Assessee Have Filed The Cross-Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Retailing For Ready- Made Garments Etc.Filed Its Original Return Of Income On 27.10.2005,Declaring Total Income At Rs. 12.75 Crores.The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3)Of The Act, On 05.10.2007,Determining Its Income At Rs. Nil,After Setting Off Loss Of The Earlier Years.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23Section 24Section 254(1)

…d by the AO to prove that the earlier order was not based on facts or that because of the later judgments of the Hon’ble Courts the legal position has changed.Thus,there is clear violation of principle of consistency.We find that in the cases of Ashok Mittal (360 ITR 12), Mohan Meakin Ltd.(189Taxman377)India Habitat Centre(203Taxman 510)the rule of consistency have been discussed and followed. 5.1.We would Like to refer to the case of JCB India Ltd.(376 ITR 621)the Hon’ble Delhi Court has dealt with the principle of consistency.Facts of the case were that the Tribunal,for the AY.s.2007-08 and 2008-09, deleted t…

A.C.I.T.19(2), Mumbai vs. Alka Kiritkumar Upadhyay, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

ITA 2617/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2617/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) A.C.I.T. – 19(2), Smt. Alka Kiritkumar बनाम/ Room No. 315, 3 Rd Floor, Upadhyay, V. Piramal Chambers, Alka Bldg., 6T H Floor, Lalbaug, Parel, Santacruz (W), Mumbai – 400 012. Mumbai –400 054. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaapu0228Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A. Ramachandran
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “A” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2617/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) A.C.I.T. – 19(2), Smt. Alka Kiritkumar बनाम/ Room No. 315, 3 rd floor, Upadhyay, v. Piramal Chambers, Alka Bldg., 6t h floor, Lalbaug, Parel, Santacruz (W), Mumbai – 400 012. Mumbai –400 054. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAAPU0228Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue by : Shri A. Ramachandran Assessee by : Shri Nishit Gandhi सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Dat…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ganesha Securities Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals preferred by the revenue stand

ITA 1747/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Beena A. Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Agrawal CA
Section 10(38)Section 112(1)Section 44A

…by the assessee. 5. Principle of consistency requires that the view taken in one year should be followed in subsequent years, unless the facts or the legal position justifies departure therefrom. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Darius Pandole [(2011) 330 ITR 485 (Born.)} has held that income from sale of shares treated as business income in earlier years by way of assessment u/s 143(3) cannot be taken as capital gain in subsequent year. The essence of the judgment is that the principle of consistency should be followed and the parties should not be allowed to register departure from the existing position…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ganesha Securities Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals preferred by the revenue stand

ITA 1279/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Beena A. Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Agrawal CA
Section 10(38)Section 112(1)Section 44A

…by the assessee. 5. Principle of consistency requires that the view taken in one year should be followed in subsequent years, unless the facts or the legal position justifies departure therefrom. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Darius Pandole [(2011) 330 ITR 485 (Born.)} has held that income from sale of shares treated as business income in earlier years by way of assessment u/s 143(3) cannot be taken as capital gain in subsequent year. The essence of the judgment is that the principle of consistency should be followed and the parties should not be allowed to register departure from the existing position…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ganesha Securities (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals preferred by the revenue stand

ITA 1563/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Beena A. Pillai:

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Agrawal CA
Section 10(38)Section 112(1)Section 44A

…by the assessee. 5. Principle of consistency requires that the view taken in one year should be followed in subsequent years, unless the facts or the legal position justifies departure therefrom. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Darius Pandole [(2011) 330 ITR 485 (Born.)} has held that income from sale of shares treated as business income in earlier years by way of assessment u/s 143(3) cannot be taken as capital gain in subsequent year. The essence of the judgment is that the principle of consistency should be followed and the parties should not be allowed to register departure from the existing position…

ACIT 21(1), Mumbai vs. Nailesh P. Dalal, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6169/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 Acit-21(1), Shri Nailesh Dalal, 6Th Floor, C-10, 5-6, Viram, 62, बनाम/ Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Hatkesh Society, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, N. S. Road No.8, Bandra (East) Jvpd Scheme, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400049 (राज"व /Revenue ) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aacpd9844N Cross Objection No.49/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.6169/Mum/2014) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Nailesh Dalal, Acit-21(1), 5-6, Viram, 62, 6Th Floor, C-10, बनाम/ Hatkesh Society, Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Vs. N. S. Road No.8, Bandra Kurla Complex, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400049 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue ) Pan. No.Aacpd9844N

…ntum was high or the number of transactions was high. Following more judgments along with copies of the orders were furnished by the ld. A.R. of the appellant. ITA No.6169/Mum/2014 & 9 CO No.46/Mum/2014 Nailesh P Dalal a) CIT vs. Lagan Kala Upavan : (2003) 259 ITR 489(Del) Pg 70-71 b) CIT vs. A.R.J.Security Printers : (2003) 264 ITR 276 (Del) Pg72-73 c) DIT vs. Lovely Bal Shiksha : (2004) 236 ITR(Del) Pg 74-75 d) CIT vs. H.P.Cotton Textile Mills Ltd : IT Appeal No. 264 of 2007 Pg 76.77 e) DIT vs. Escorts Cardiac Diseases Hospital Society IT Appeal No.28/2006 Pg 78-79 f) CIT vs. Dalmia Promoters Developers:…

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, we direct the AO to reduce the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act by the amount of reversal of the provision of Rs

ITA 196/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I. C.Sudhir Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishia.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Acit 12Th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacr0127N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: 1. Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 92D

…Page 1 of 134 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I. C.SUDHIR JudicialMember AND SH. PRASHANT MAHARISHI, Accountant Member A.Y.: - 2008-09 Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs ACIT 12th Floor, Devika Tower, Range -15 6, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi PAN No. AAACR0127N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Date of pronouncement 25/04/2016 Assessee by: 1. Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. with Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv.and Ms. Deepanvee Rao,Adv. on corporate tax issues 2. Sh. Rahul Mitra, C.A. with Sh. Derendra Gulari, C.A and Sh. Vinay Verma, C.A. on transfer pricing issues Revenue by: Shri Amrendra Kumar…

DDIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Msv International Inc., Gurgaon

In the result appeal of the revenue for both the years are dismissed

ITA 1231/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiddit, Msv International Inc., Circle-3(2), International D-7, South City-I, Taxation, New Delhi Vs. Gurgaon Pan:Aadcm1304M (Appellant) (Respondent) Ddit, Msv International Inc., Circle-3(2), Room No.411, D-7, South City-I, Vs. International Taxation, Drum Gurgaon Shaped Building, Pan:Aadcm1304M New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh.P Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 44DSection 9

…essment made u/s 143(3) of the Act. Principle of consistency has been accepted by the courts in many judicial precedents and some of the landmark decisions in the cases are of Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT: (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC), CIT v. Lagan Kala Upwan: (2003) 259 ITR 489 (Del), Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries v. CIT: (1980) 123 ITR 669 (Guj), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Paul Brothers: (1995) 216 ITR 548 (Bom) and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Modi Industries Limited: [2010] 327 ITR 570. Therefore on this ground too assessee deserves relief. 22. In view of above, we are of the view that according to the…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3195/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…or material change, hence, consistency needs to be followed in the income tax proceedings. The assessee relied on the following case laws to support its contentions:- “(i) Radha Swami Satsang v. ClT (1962) 193 ITR 321 (SC) (ii) ClT v. Darius Pandole (2011) 330 ITR 485 (Bom) (iii) DCIT v. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (De…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3194/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…or material change, hence, consistency needs to be followed in the income tax proceedings. The assessee relied on the following case laws to support its contentions:- “(i) Radha Swami Satsang v. ClT (1962) 193 ITR 321 (SC) (ii) ClT v. Darius Pandole (2011) 330 ITR 485 (Bom) (iii) DCIT v. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (De…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3193/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…or material change, hence, consistency needs to be followed in the income tax proceedings. The assessee relied on the following case laws to support its contentions:- “(i) Radha Swami Satsang v. ClT (1962) 193 ITR 321 (SC) (ii) ClT v. Darius Pandole (2011) 330 ITR 485 (Bom) (iii) DCIT v. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (De…