Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT

336 ITR 136High Court2011#183 most cited

What is Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

In reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148, the Assessing Officer can assess other income not specified in the original notice if the initial ground for reopening assessment is found to be valid. However, if the income for which the assessment was initially reopened is found not to have escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer cannot proceed to assess any other income.

398

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT · Section 147 · Section 148 · reopening of assessment · scope of reassessment · income escaping assessment · other income assessed · initial reason for reopening · quashing reassessment · Jet Airways principle · reassessment proceedings

Also reported as

12 Taxmann.com 74200 Taxmann 242242 CTR 11760 DTR 77

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 68Section 142(1)Section 151Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 148(2)income escaping assessmentreason to believekelvinatorescapement of incomereopening of assessmentchange of opinionnotice under section 148tangible materialreassessment proceedingsregular assessmentservice of notice

Judgments citing Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT

Gorav Footwear, Agra vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle1(1)(1), Agra/CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, Agra

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 503/AGR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.503/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Gorav Footwear Dcit Circle 1(1)(1) बनाम/ 6, Nath Complex, Agra Vs. Dhakran Crossing, Agra – 282 003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahfg-7549-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Deependra Mohan (Ca)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-02-2025

For Appellant: Shri Deependra Mohan (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A

…us. 2. In the above factual background, Ld. AR has cited the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (331 ITR 236) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT (12 Taxmann.com 74) to plead that the law does not empower Ld. AO to make any addition if original ground of reopening fails. In this decision, it was held that though the Explanation 3 to Sec. 147 inserted by the Finance Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01.04.1989 permits the AO to assess or reassess income which has escaped assessment even if the recorded reasons have not…

Bhagirath Pakhria, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 60/AGR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 69A

…by invoking section 50C of the Act, but ended up making section 69A unexplained money addition only which is not sustainable in light of CIT Vs. Mohmed Juned 2 | P a g e Dadani [(2013) 258 CTR 268 (Guj.), Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. Union of India (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del.) and CIT vs. Jet Airways (India) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom.). We, thus quash the impugned reopening on this first and foremost legal issue which renders all other pleadings as academic. Ordered accordingly. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.02.2025 (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dat…

Sunny Tarunkumar Doshi, Jetpur vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 288/AHD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 56(1)(vii)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

…ITA No.288/Ahd/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sunny Tarunkumar Doshi vs. ITO Page 1 of 8 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sunny Tarunkumar Doshi, The Income Tax Officer, 12, Shivani Apartment, Ward-1(1)(1), Amarnagar Road, Ahmedabad. Jetpur – 360 370 Vs. Gujarat [PAN – AORPD 3837 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Mohit Balani, AR Revenue by Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 24.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.02.2025 O R D E R PER SUCHIT…

D.C.I.T., Central Circle, Agra vs. M/S Pnc Infratech Ltd., Agra

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 94/AGR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…e forming subject matter of section 147 reopening for back to back contracts as noted by the CIT(Appeals) in para 6.2 of the lower appellate discussion. He next quotes CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. 331 ITR 236 (Bom) and Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited vs. CIT, 336 ITR 136 (Del) to contend that once reopening in this case is not sustainable in law, no penalty could also be imposed. We find no reason to restore the penalty once it has come on record that 2 | P a g e expenditure disallowance is based on mere assumptions and presumptions than on any actual material against the assessee. This Revenue’s appeal seeking t…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. B.Ramalinga Raju, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 57/HYD/2020[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…apply. Moreover, in which case and when Explanation-3 would be applicable has been decided by various High Courts, namely, Bombay High Court in case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (1) Ltd., (331 ITR 236); Delhi High Court in case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT (336 ITR 136); Chhattisgarh High Court in case of ACIT Vs. Major Deepak Mehta (344 ITR 641) and Gujarat High Court in case of CIT Vs. Mohmed Juned Dadani. In view of the consistent decision of these High Courts, we are not in a position to take a different view and the learned Tribunal has followed the consistent view of those High Courts. Even, we find that…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. B.Ramalinga Raju, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 55/HYD/2020[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…apply. Moreover, in which case and when Explanation-3 would be applicable has been decided by various High Courts, namely, Bombay High Court in case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (1) Ltd., (331 ITR 236); Delhi High Court in case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT (336 ITR 136); Chhattisgarh High Court in case of ACIT Vs. Major Deepak Mehta (344 ITR 641) and Gujarat High Court in case of CIT Vs. Mohmed Juned Dadani. In view of the consistent decision of these High Courts, we are not in a position to take a different view and the learned Tribunal has followed the consistent view of those High Courts. Even, we find that…

Puneet Kumar Gupta, Kamla Nagar Agra vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Sanjay Place Agra

Appeal is allowed

ITA 158/AGR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra10 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalpuneet Kumar Gupta Vs. Dcit, D/579/4 , Kamla Nagar, Sanjay Palace Agra, Uttar Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 282005 282002 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No:Abhpg4032A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Nitin Goyal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…018 ended up in making various disallowance(s), other than the preceding reopening reason. 4. This being clinching factual position emanating from the case file, we quote CIT Vs. Jet Airways (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom.), Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del.) to conclude that such a reopening is not sustainable in law. The instant legal issue is decided in assessee’s favour and against the department in very terms. All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 10.02.2025 (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) JUDICIAL MEMBER…

Neena Commercial Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT(OSD), Ward-1(2), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1367/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Neena Commercial Pvt. Ltd. Acit(Osd), Ward-1(2), Omaxe Square, Plot No.14, 3Rd Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Floor, Jasola District Centre, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Jasola, New Delhi-110025 Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn8914D Assessee By : Shri Amit Agrawal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Praveen Kishore, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri Amit Agrawal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM Neena Commercial Pvt. Ltd. ACIT(OSD), Ward-1(2), Omaxe Square, Plot No.14, 3rd Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Floor, Jasola District Centre, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Jasola, New Delhi-110025 Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAACN8914D Assessee by : Shri Amit Agrawal, AR Revenue by : Shri Praveen Kishore, DR Date of hearing: 20.11.2024 Date of pronouncement : 15.01.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National…

Soyala Gram Sewa Sahakari Samiti Limited, Tonk vs. ITO, Tonk

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1116/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 80A(5)Section 80P

…:- 1. CIT vs Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343 (Raj.) – Relevant Para no. 29 and 32 at case law APB 8. 2. CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom)(HC) – Relevant para no. 16 and 17 at case law APB 17 3. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. - vs. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Delhi High Court) - Relevant para no. 21 at case law APB 28. 4. ITO v Bidbhanjan Investment & Trading CO (P ) Ltd ( 2011) 59 DTR 345 ( Mum) (Trib) – Relevant para no. 17 at case law APB 35. 5. Dy. CIT v. Takshila Educational Society (2016) 378 ITR 520 (Pat.) (HC) – Relevant para is last but one at case law APB 39. 6. Sheela Foam Ltd. v/s DCIT (D…

Shri Rajeshkumar Maheshbhai Manek, Anjar Kutch vs. The ITO Ward-2, Gandhidham-Kutch

In the result, additional legal ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal & Shri Brijesh ParekhFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

…relied on the following judgements: (i)CIT vs. Mohmed Juned Dadani 214 Taxmann 38 (Gujarat H. C.). (ii)Majinder Singh Kang v. CIT [2012] 344 ITR 358 (Punj. & Har.) (iii) CIT v. Jet Airways Ltd. [2011] 331 ITR 236. (iv)Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT [2011] 336 ITR 136/200. 8. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the Revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the Assessing Officer, which we have already noted in our earlier para and is not being repeated for the sake of brevity. 9. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of th…

Rajesh Kumar, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-31(3), Delhi

ITA 4642/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ver which stands upheld in the lower appellate discussion. It is thus clear that both the lower authorities have not made any addition qua the foregoing sole reopening ground of reopening. That being the case, I hereby quote Ranbaxy Laboratories v. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del.) to quash both the impugned reopening (s) in very terms. Ordered accordingly. All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic. 3. These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 4641 & 4642/Del/2025 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in respective case files. Pronounced in open court on 20.08.2025 (SATBEER SIN…

DCIT, Central Circle, Noida vs. Sunny Entertainment P.Ltd, Panchkulla

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4951/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER ITA No.4950, /Del/2024 [Assessment Year: 2016-17] M/s Omega Broadcast Private ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Limited, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh D-220, Sector-63, Vs Noida, 201307 (U.P.) PAN-AABCO5355L Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year:2014-15] M/s Omega Broadcast Private ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Limited, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh D-220, Sector-63, Vs Noida, 201307 (U.P.) PAN-AABCO5355L Assessee Revenue AND [Assessment Year:2013-14] M/s Omega Broadcast Private ACIT, Circle-2…

DCIT, Central Circle, Noida vs. Sunny Entertainment P.Ltd, Panchkulla

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4950/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER ITA No.4950, /Del/2024 [Assessment Year: 2016-17] M/s Omega Broadcast Private ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Limited, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh D-220, Sector-63, Vs Noida, 201307 (U.P.) PAN-AABCO5355L Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year:2014-15] M/s Omega Broadcast Private ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Limited, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh D-220, Sector-63, Vs Noida, 201307 (U.P.) PAN-AABCO5355L Assessee Revenue AND [Assessment Year:2013-14] M/s Omega Broadcast Private ACIT, Circle-2…

Navjyoti Farming Private Limited, Belapur vs. ITO, Ward -3, Panvel

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

ITA 1020/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani KumarFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…ed, the Assessing Officer could not make addition on some other ground which did not form part of reasons recorded by him. He submitted that similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) and the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Mohmed Juned Dadani ((2014) 355 ITR 172 (Guj). 8. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Yashoda Shivappa Nagangoudar vs. ITO (2022) 138 taxmann.com 296 (Bom), he submitted that the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court following the decision in the…

Atiq Ahmed, Hapur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(4), Hapur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3676/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.3675 & 3676/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14& 2014-15 बनाम Atiq Ahmed Income Tax Officer, House No.333, Bhamda Patti, Vs. Ward-2(3)(4), Pattharwalakaun, Aaykarbhawan, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh. Teachers Colony, Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aifpa8796G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

…is not at all added and replied by Assessing Officer and altogether different addition is made. For this purpose the Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. CIT (2011) [336 ITR 136 (Del.)]. He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) [331 ITR 236]. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra) has considered this issue and the Hon’ble High Court held as under: "9. The effect of secti…

Atiq Ahmed, Hapur vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(4), Hapur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3675/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.3675 & 3676/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14& 2014-15 बनाम Atiq Ahmed Income Tax Officer, House No.333, Bhamda Patti, Vs. Ward-2(3)(4), Pattharwalakaun, Aaykarbhawan, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh. Teachers Colony, Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aifpa8796G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

…is not at all added and replied by Assessing Officer and altogether different addition is made. For this purpose the Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. CIT (2011) [336 ITR 136 (Del.)]. He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) [331 ITR 236]. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra) has considered this issue and the Hon’ble High Court held as under: "9. The effect of secti…

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 112/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR 153C - FINAL – 15/12/2024 – 02:35 PM – 86 PAGES BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT MMBER ITA no.108/Nag./2024 ITA no.109/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year – 2009-10) (Assessment Year – 2010-11) ITA no./110/Nag./2024 ITA no.111/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year – 2011-12) (Assessment Year – 2012-13) ITA no.112/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) M/s. Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure Private Limited 697, 1st Floor, Ward no.33 ……………. Appellant Behind 16–Kholi, Tikrapara Bilaspur 495 001 PAN – AAECM9298D v/s Dy. Commiss…

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 111/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR 153C - FINAL – 15/12/2024 – 02:35 PM – 86 PAGES BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT MMBER ITA no.108/Nag./2024 ITA no.109/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year – 2009-10) (Assessment Year – 2010-11) ITA no./110/Nag./2024 ITA no.111/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year – 2011-12) (Assessment Year – 2012-13) ITA no.112/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) M/s. Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure Private Limited 697, 1st Floor, Ward no.33 ……………. Appellant Behind 16–Kholi, Tikrapara Bilaspur 495 001 PAN – AAECM9298D v/s Dy. Commiss…

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication& Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 110/NAG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR 153C - FINAL – 15/12/2024 – 02:35 PM – 86 PAGES BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT MMBER ITA no.108/Nag./2024 ITA no.109/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year – 2009-10) (Assessment Year – 2010-11) ITA no./110/Nag./2024 ITA no.111/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year – 2011-12) (Assessment Year – 2012-13) ITA no.112/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) M/s. Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure Private Limited 697, 1st Floor, Ward no.33 ……………. Appellant Behind 16–Kholi, Tikrapara Bilaspur 495 001 PAN – AAECM9298D v/s Dy. Commiss…

M/S Maheshwari Coal Benefication& Infrastructure P. Ltd, Bilaspur vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 109/NAG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR 153C - FINAL – 15/12/2024 – 02:35 PM – 86 PAGES BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT MMBER ITA no.108/Nag./2024 ITA no.109/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year – 2009-10) (Assessment Year – 2010-11) ITA no./110/Nag./2024 ITA no.111/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year – 2011-12) (Assessment Year – 2012-13) ITA no.112/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) M/s. Maheshwari Coal Benefication & Infrastructure Private Limited 697, 1st Floor, Ward no.33 ……………. Appellant Behind 16–Kholi, Tikrapara Bilaspur 495 001 PAN – AAECM9298D v/s Dy. Commiss…