Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT

328 ITR 148High Court2010#2285 most cited

What is Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT authority for?

When the Assessing Officer has considered an issue and applied his mind during the assessment proceedings, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax cannot invoke jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act to revise the order, as it is not permissible to give another opportunity to the AO. Revision under Section 263 is not meant for substituting the Commissioner's view for the AO's considered view.

50

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT · Section 263 Income Tax Act · revision of assessment order · Pr. CIT jurisdiction · issue considered by AO · application of mind by AO · Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. · Max India Ltd. · scope of revision · prejudicial to interest of revenue

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 142(1)Section 115BBESection 1961Section 69ASection 144BSection 43B

Issues it is cited on

section 115bbasection 114section 147rinadequate enquiryprejudicial to interest of revenuemalabar industriallack of enquiryprincipal commissioner of income-taxrevision u/s 263revision under section 263violation of natural justicesection 69b

Judgments citing Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT

Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Surat vs. PCIT(Central), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 62/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.58 & 59/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The Pcit (Central), Fp 56-57, Tp 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifh9885N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah & P. M. Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.58 & 59/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The PCIT (Central), FP 56-57, TP 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAIFH9885N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.60 to 62/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16 to 2017-18) Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Vs. The PCIT (Central), D-1002, Swastik Tower, Sarthana Surat. Jakatnaka, Varachha Road, S…

Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Surat vs. PCIT(Central), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 61/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.58 & 59/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The Pcit (Central), Fp 56-57, Tp 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifh9885N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah & P. M. Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.58 & 59/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The PCIT (Central), FP 56-57, TP 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAIFH9885N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.60 to 62/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16 to 2017-18) Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Vs. The PCIT (Central), D-1002, Swastik Tower, Sarthana Surat. Jakatnaka, Varachha Road, S…

Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Surat vs. PCIT(Central), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 60/SRT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.58 & 59/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The Pcit (Central), Fp 56-57, Tp 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifh9885N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah & P. M. Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.58 & 59/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The PCIT (Central), FP 56-57, TP 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAIFH9885N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.60 to 62/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16 to 2017-18) Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Vs. The PCIT (Central), D-1002, Swastik Tower, Sarthana Surat. Jakatnaka, Varachha Road, S…

Hilton Group, Surat vs. PCIT(Central), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 59/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.58 & 59/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The Pcit (Central), Fp 56-57, Tp 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifh9885N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah & P. M. Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.58 & 59/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The PCIT (Central), FP 56-57, TP 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAIFH9885N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.60 to 62/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16 to 2017-18) Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Vs. The PCIT (Central), D-1002, Swastik Tower, Sarthana Surat. Jakatnaka, Varachha Road, S…

Hilton Group, Surat vs. PCIT, (Central), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 58/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.58 & 59/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The Pcit (Central), Fp 56-57, Tp 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifh9885N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah & P. M. Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.58 & 59/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The PCIT (Central), FP 56-57, TP 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAIFH9885N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.60 to 62/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16 to 2017-18) Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Vs. The PCIT (Central), D-1002, Swastik Tower, Sarthana Surat. Jakatnaka, Varachha Road, S…

Ramesh Kumar Gordhan Kathiriya, Surat vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 192/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.58 & 59/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The Pcit (Central), Fp 56-57, Tp 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifh9885N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah & P. M. Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.58 & 59/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The PCIT (Central), FP 56-57, TP 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAIFH9885N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.60 to 62/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16 to 2017-18) Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Vs. The PCIT (Central), D-1002, Swastik Tower, Sarthana Surat. Jakatnaka, Varachha Road, S…

Ramesh Kumar Gordhan Kathiriya, Surat vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 191/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.58 & 59/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The Pcit (Central), Fp 56-57, Tp 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaifh9885N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah & P. M. Jagasheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.58 & 59/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2016-17& 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hilton Group, Vs. The PCIT (Central), FP 56-57, TP 37, Block No. Surat. 1168/B, Variyav Adajan, Surat- 394 530, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAIFH9885N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.60 to 62/SRT/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16 to 2017-18) Ashokbhai Narshibhai Patel, Vs. The PCIT (Central), D-1002, Swastik Tower, Sarthana Surat. Jakatnaka, Varachha Road, S…

Smt. Niti Nitinkumar Didwania, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Emtra; - 3, Mumbai

ITA 284/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh F. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

…A.R took us through “Explanation 1(c)” to sub-section (1) of Sec. 263 of the Act. In support of his aforesaid contention the Ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/s. Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT & Anr. [(2010) 328 ITR 148 (Bom)]. It was submitted by the Ld. A.R, that as held by the Hon'ble High Court, as per “Explanation 1(c)” to sub-section (1) of section 263, where any order passed by the A.O had been made a subject matter of any appeal, then, the revisional jurisdiction of the CIT shall thereafter extend only to such matters as had not been considered and decid…

Shri Nitin Kumar Didwania, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Central-3, Mumbai

ITA 281/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh F. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

…A.R took us through “Explanation 1(c)” to sub-section (1) of Sec. 263 of the Act. In support of his aforesaid contention the Ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/s. Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT & Anr. [(2010) 328 ITR 148 (Bom)]. It was submitted by the Ld. A.R, that as held by the Hon'ble High Court, as per “Explanation 1(c)” to sub-section (1) of section 263, where any order passed by the A.O had been made a subject matter of any appeal, then, the revisional jurisdiction of the CIT shall thereafter extend only to such matters as had not been considered and decid…

Smt. Niti Nitin Kumar Didwania, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Central-3, Mumbai

ITA 280/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh F. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

…A.R took us through “Explanation 1(c)” to sub-section (1) of Sec. 263 of the Act. In support of his aforesaid contention the Ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/s. Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT & Anr. [(2010) 328 ITR 148 (Bom)]. It was submitted by the Ld. A.R, that as held by the Hon'ble High Court, as per “Explanation 1(c)” to sub-section (1) of section 263, where any order passed by the A.O had been made a subject matter of any appeal, then, the revisional jurisdiction of the CIT shall thereafter extend only to such matters as had not been considered and decid…

Shri Nitin Kumar Didwania, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Central-3, Mumbai

ITA 278/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh F. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

…A.R took us through “Explanation 1(c)” to sub-section (1) of Sec. 263 of the Act. In support of his aforesaid contention the Ld. A.R had relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/s. Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT & Anr. [(2010) 328 ITR 148 (Bom)]. It was submitted by the Ld. A.R, that as held by the Hon'ble High Court, as per “Explanation 1(c)” to sub-section (1) of section 263, where any order passed by the A.O had been made a subject matter of any appeal, then, the revisional jurisdiction of the CIT shall thereafter extend only to such matters as had not been considered and decid…

Aalidhara Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd, Surat vs. PCIT-1, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/SRT/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.94/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Alidhara Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Pcit-1, Surat. Plot No.168, Udhyog Nagar Road, Udhna, Surat -394210. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacd8469M (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…ssioner (Appeals) and hence, no part of the order of the Assessing Officer could have been revised by the Commissioner under S. 263." 4.6 Further, the reliance is placed upon following decisions for the doctrine of merger:  RankaJewellers v. Addl. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 148 (Bom.) (HC).  CIT v. Ram Kishore Raj Kishore [2004] 135 Taxman 511 (All.) (HC) :  Aerens Infrastructure & Technology Ltd. v. CIT [2004] 271 ITR 15 (Delhi)(HC).  CIT v. RatilalBacharilal& Sons [2006] 282 ITR 457 (Bom.)(HC)  PCIT vs. Oil India Ltd. [103 taxmann.com] (Gun. HC)  Renuka Philip vs ITO, [101 taxmann.com 119), (Madras HC)  CIT vs.…

The Peerless Gen. Fin. & Inv. Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 892/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263Section 50

…ITA No. 892/KOL/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 The Peerless General Finance & Investment Company Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-President & Shri A.T. Varkey, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 892/KOL/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 The Peerless General Finance & Investment Company Limited,.... Appellant Peerless Bhavan, 3, Esplanade East, Kolkata-700069 [PAN:AABCT3043L] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,............................................ Respondent Circle-3(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appear…

Shiva Distilleries Privatelimited, Coimbatore vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore

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

ITA 1788/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1788/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Shiva Distilleries Pvt. The Acit, Ltd., V. Corporate Circle – 2, No.1212, Trichy Road, Income Tax Office, Coimbatore – 641 018. 63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 018. Pan: Aaccs7199B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abani Kantha Nayak,Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.12.2020

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kantha Nayak,CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 1788/CHNY/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s Shiva Distilleries Pvt. The ACIT, Ltd., v. Corporate Circle – 2, No.1212, Trichy Road, Income Tax Office, Coimbatore – 641 018. 63, Race Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 018. PAN: AACCS7199B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ"…

Mr Vaidyanathan Vembu, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC 6(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, we quash the order passed by Ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the Act for the AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16. 21. In the net result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1579/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1577 To 1579/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 To 2016-17)

For Respondent: Shri A. Mohan, DR
Section 127Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 245D(4)Section 253(6)(b)Section 263

…l extend and shall be deemed always to have extended to such matters as had not been considered and decided in such appeal" Reliance is placed on the decision of the Honourable jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT reported in 328 ITR 148 (Bom) (b) The order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer is accepted by the Revenue as no appeal has been preferred to the Tribunal on this issue. The order of the CIT(A) is 26 I.T.A. No 1577 to 1579/Mum/2020 Mr. Vaidyanathan Vembu dated 21.09.2018 which would have been received in the office of the Pr. CIT in the m…

Mr. Vaidyanathan Vembu, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-6(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, we quash the order passed by Ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the Act for the AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16. 21. In the net result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1577/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1577 To 1579/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 To 2016-17)

For Respondent: Shri A. Mohan, DR
Section 127Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 245D(4)Section 253(6)(b)Section 263

…l extend and shall be deemed always to have extended to such matters as had not been considered and decided in such appeal" Reliance is placed on the decision of the Honourable jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT reported in 328 ITR 148 (Bom) (b) The order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer is accepted by the Revenue as no appeal has been preferred to the Tribunal on this issue. The order of the CIT(A) is 26 I.T.A. No 1577 to 1579/Mum/2020 Mr. Vaidyanathan Vembu dated 21.09.2018 which would have been received in the office of the Pr. CIT in the m…

Mr. Vaidyanathan Vembu, 2015-16 vs. ACIT, CC 6(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, we quash the order passed by Ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the Act for the AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16. 21. In the net result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1578/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1577 To 1579/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 To 2016-17)

For Respondent: Shri A. Mohan, DR
Section 127Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 245D(4)Section 253(6)(b)Section 263

…l extend and shall be deemed always to have extended to such matters as had not been considered and decided in such appeal" Reliance is placed on the decision of the Honourable jurisdictional High Court in the case of Ranka Jewellers v. Addl. CIT reported in 328 ITR 148 (Bom) (b) The order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer is accepted by the Revenue as no appeal has been preferred to the Tribunal on this issue. The order of the CIT(A) is 26 I.T.A. No 1577 to 1579/Mum/2020 Mr. Vaidyanathan Vembu dated 21.09.2018 which would have been received in the office of the Pr. CIT in the m…

Padam Kumae Jain, Ranchi vs. CIT, Central, Patna

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

ITA 289/RAN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi08 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Ran/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Padam Kumar Jain Vs. Cit, Central, Cr Building, Beer Chand Patel Marg, Patna – 800001. Ratanlalsurajmal Compound, Main Road, Ranchi – 834001, Jharkhand "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abrpj 0001 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Chaudhury & Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…e in law”. 22. We note that the Ld. Pr. C.I.T. by invoking his jurisdiction u/s. 263 (Second 263 order) of the Act is giving another opportunity to the Ld. A.O., which is not permissible. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of RankaJewellers vs. Addl. CIT (328 ITR 148) relying on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (supra) and CIT vs. Max India Ltd. [(2007) 295 ITR 282 (SC)], has held that once the issue was considered by the A.O., the remedy of the revenue could not lie in invoking of the jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act. Therefore, the order of the Ld. C…

Gouri Shankar Goyal, Siliguri vs. I.T.O.Ward-1(3), Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 517/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.517/Kol/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2014-15) Gouri Shankar Goyal Vs. Pcit, Siliguri

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…er is unsustainable in law”. 22. We note that the Ld. Pr. C.I.T. by invoking his jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act is giving another opportunity to the Ld. A.O., which is not permissible. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ranka Jewellers vs. Addl. CIT (328 ITR 148) relying on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (supra) and CIT vs. Max India Ltd. [(2007) 295 ITR 282 (SC)], has held that once the issue was considered by the A.O., the remedy of the revenue could not lie in invoking of the jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act. Therefore, the order of the Ld. C…

M/S. Y.R. Traders (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. Principal CIT, Kolkata - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1006/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1006/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…Ltd. Assessment Year:2013-14 17. We note that the Ld. Pr. C.I.T. by invoking his jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act is giving another opportunity to the Ld. A.O., which is not permissible. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ranka Jewellers vs. Addl. CIT (328 ITR 148) relying on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (supra) and CIT vs. Max India Ltd. [(2007) 295 ITR 282 (SC)], has held that once the issue was considered by the A.O., the remedy of the revenue could not lie in invoking of the jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act. Therefore, the order of the Ld. C…