S.R. Koshti v. CIT

276 ITR 165High Court2005#414 most cited

What is S.R. Koshti v. CIT authority for?

Tax authorities have an obligation to act in accordance with law and assist assessees who are over-assessed due to mistake, misconception, or lack of proper instruction, ensuring only legitimate taxes are collected.

217

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,312 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

S.R. Koshti v. CIT · assessment procedure · over-assessment · assistance to assessee · correct tax collection · authorities under the Act

Also reported as

146 Taxmann 335

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 131(1A)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 158basection 150unexplained jewellerysection 70beyond four yearssection 18statement under section 132(4)section 149(1)(b)

Judgments citing S.R. Koshti v. CIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Satvinder Singh Washawan, New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal No

ITA 3082/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271Section 271DSection 271E

…ar Nath Shivraj (HUF) (2004) 1 SOT 346 (Agra) g) Sunflower Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (1997) 61 ITD 227 (Pune) h) CIT vs. Sunil Kumar Goyal (2009) 315 ITR 163 (P&H) i) Ramlal & Ors. Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 SC 361 j) S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj.) k) CIT vs. Lokhpat Film Exchange (Cinema) (2008) 304 ITR 172 (Raj.) 7.1 In the following cases, the Ahmedabad Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT have also cancelled the penalties lev,ed u/s 271D even where loans/deposits were taken in cash. a) Shreenathji Corporation vs. ACIT 58 TTJ 611 b) Ganesh Wooden Industries ITA No.1626/Ahd./1997, Bench “…

DCIT, Cir.1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Ardor in-Fin Private Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms above

ITA 2739/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jun 2019AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to ensure that only legitimate tax dues are collected. This is the view which flows from innumerable judgments including CIT vs. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC), S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), Ester Industries vs. CIT (2009) 185 TAXMAN 266 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P.) Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom). The essence of these decisions are that mere admission on the part of the assessee with respect to an addition/disallowance in its original return or in revised return would not ipso facto bar an assessee fr…

Greenland Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 690/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jun 2019AY 2014-15
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 271

…t only legitimate tax dues are collected. This is the view which flows Greenland Infracon Pvt Ltd Vs. DCIT Assessment year: 2014-15 Page 4 of 5 from innumerable judgments including CIT vs. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC), S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), Ester Industries vs. CIT (2009) 185 TAXMAN 266 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P.) Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom). The essence of these decisions are that mere admission on the part of the assessee with respect to an addition/disallowance in its original return or in revised return would not ipso facto bar an assessee fr…

The ACIT, Gnr Circle, Gandhinagar vs. Dahej Sez Ltd., Gandhinagar

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1046/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Appellant: Shri M.S. A Khan, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Shri Mehul K. Patel, A.R

…ate. However, if the income is to be taxed on accrual basis, then similarly, the expenses are also to be allowed on similar basis. 7. In support of its contention, assessee cited a judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the matter of S.R. Koshti reported at 276 ITR 165 (Guj.) wherein it is held that real income is to be taxed and if there are mistakes or omissions or if the real income is not shown in the return, then the authorities under the Act are required to assist assessee and ensure that only legitimate taxes are collected as tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. 8. Respectfully following…

Valecha Badwani Sendhwa Tollways Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 11, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed

ITA 2848/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhvalecha Badwani Sendhwa Pcit-11 Tollways Ltd. 4Th Floor, R.No. 417, Aayakar Bhavan, Valecha Chambers, Andheri M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. New Link Road, Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai-400053. Pan: Aadcv6105B Appellant Respondent Valecha Lm Tools Pvt. Ltd. Pcit-11 4Th Floor, Valecha Chambers, R.No. 417, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri New Link Road, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai-400053. Pan: Aadcv2787M Appellant Respondent : Shri Sumant Chadha With Appellant By Mr. Jitendra Trivedi (Ar) Respondent By : Shri S.K. Poddar (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 01.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2019

For Respondent: Shri Sumant Chadha with
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263Section 32

…nstructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes dues are collected. While holding so, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has relied upon the various decisions e.g. S.R. Koshti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165/146 Taxman 335 (Guj), C.P.A. Yoosuf v. ITO [1970] 77 ITR 237 (Ker.), CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi), CIT v. Smt. Archana R. Dhanwatey [1982] 136 ITR 355/[1981] 7 Taxman 121 (Bom.). In view of the above discussed factual and legal position, we have no hesitation to hold that the assessee is entitled to put his…

Embio Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal for Ay 2013-14 are allowed

ITA 2460/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhembio Limited Acit-15(1)(2), 501, 5Th Floor, Sentinel, Aayakar Bhavan, Hiranandani Garden, Mumbai-400020. Powai, Vs. Mumbai-400076. Pan: Aaace1154C Appellant Respondent Embio Limited Acit-15(1)(1), 501, 5Th Floor, Sentinel, Aayakar Bhavan, Hiranandani Garden, Mumbai-400020. Powai, Vs. Mumbai-400076. Pan: Aaace1154C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Paresh Shaparia (Ar) Respondent By : Shri D.G. Pansari (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Paresh Shaparia (AR)For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR)
Section 254(1)Section 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 37(1)Section 72ASection 72A(2)(iii)

…Mum 2017-Embio Limited assessable in the assessment year 1953-54. It could not, therefore, be taxed in the assessment year 1958-59." Further reliance is placed by us on another judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of, S.R. Koshti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165/146 Taxman 335 in which relief was granted to assessee with following observations: "The authorities under the Act are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee, under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed, is over-assessed, the authorities under t…

Ardor Structures Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 297/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Royardor Structures Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Ardor House, Mondeal Circle – 1(1)(1), Business Park, Ahmedabad. B/S. Gurudwara, Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380059. [Pan No. Aahca 8674 N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Talsania, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sewak, Sr. D.R
Section 10(34)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to ensure that only legitimate tax dues are collected. This is the view which flows from innumerable judgments including CIT vs. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC), S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), Ester Industries vs. CIT (2009) 185 TAXMAN 266 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P.) Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom). The essence of these decisions are that mere admission on the part of the assessee with respect to an addition/disallowance in its original return or in revised return would not ipso facto bar an assessee fr…

The DCIT(Exemption), Bhopal vs. M/S. Indore Education and Service Society, Indore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 63/IND/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 20

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCHE, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT(Exemption), Indore Education and Bhopal Service Society, बनाम/ 04, Sita Building, Y.N. Road, Vs. Indore (Revenue) (Respondent) P.A. No.AAATI3186K Appellant by Shri V.J. Boricha, Sr. DR Respondent by Shri Sudheer Padliya, CA Date of Hearing: 07.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 15.03.2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of In…

ITO, W-4, Panchkula vs. Smt. Seema Bishnoi, Panchkula

In the result appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 103/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargthe Ito Vs. Smt. Seema Bishnoi Ward-4, Panchkula H.No. 906, Sec-08, Panchkula

For Appellant: Shri. A.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri. G.S. Phani Kishore, CI TDR
Section 148Section 54BSection 54F

…ee, under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under theAct are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes due are collected [see S.R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 193 CTR (Guj) 518 : (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), CPA. Yoosuf vs. ITO (1970) 77 ITR 237 (Ker), CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. (1971) 81 ITR 303 (Del), CIT vs. Archana R. Dhanwatey (1981) 24 CTR (Bom) 142 : (1982) 136 ITR 355 (Bom)]. 1. If particular levy is not permitted under the Act, tax cannot be levied applying the doctrine of estoppel [see Dy. CSTvs. Sreeni Printers (198…

Shri Ashokkumar Khimraj (HUF), Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 764/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 764/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Ashokkumar Khimraj (Huf), Ito, बनाम/ 217, 1St Floor, New Cloth Ward – 2(2)(1), Vs. Market, Sarangpur, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacha 6987 N .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Vijay Ranjan & Smt. Ira Kapoor, A.R. Shri Virendra Singh, Sr. D.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By:

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Ranjan & Smt. Ira KapoorFor Respondent: 23/10/2018
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57

…aim for some reason or other, and (b) freely advise them when approached by them as to their rights and liabilities and as to the procedure to be adopted for claiming refunds and reliefs. The Hon'bie Gujarat High Court in the case of S.R. Koshti vs CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj.) has held under: "The authorities under the Income tax Act, 1961 are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assesses, under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure…

Subrata Daw, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-36(2), Kolkata

ITA 2157/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 48Section 50Section 54Section 55A

…n’ble Supreme Court in ITO Vs. CH. Atchaiah (1996) 218 ITR 239 (SC) has held ) has held that the income should be assessed on the right person, right year and it should be on the right income. 10. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in S. R. Costhi Vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (SC) held, inter alia, “the authorities under the Income-tax Act, 1961 are under an obligation to act in accordance with law. Tax can be collected only as provided under the Act. If an assessee, under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed, is over- assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensur…

De La Rue Cash Processing Solution Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Gurgaon

ITA 2671/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A

…declares an income in the return, the Assessing Officer cannot assess it merely on that basis and that he has to consider its taxability in the light of other circumstances de hors the admission made in the return. Reference is made to SR Kosti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165 (Gujarat HC) and CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd, [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi HC). The Ld. AR submitted that since Countervailing Duty of Rs. 18,425,285/- is legitimate deduction in computing the total income for A.Y. 2007-08 therefore, the same deserves to be allowed. The issue whether CVD of Rs. 18,425,285/- paid on imported machinery is…

De La Rue Cash Systems India P, Ltd(Presently Known As - De La Rue Cash Processing Solutins P.Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ITO 1(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 5017/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 145A

…declares an income in the return, the Assessing Officer cannot assess it merely on that basis and that he has to consider its taxability in the light of other circumstances de hors the admission made in the return. Reference is made to SR Kosti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165 (Gujarat HC) and CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd, [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi HC). The Ld. AR submitted that since Countervailing Duty of Rs. 18,425,285/- is legitimate deduction in computing the total income for A.Y. 2007-08 therefore, the same deserves to be allowed. The issue whether CVD of Rs. 18,425,285/- paid on imported machinery is…

M/S. M. Lodha Impex, Ratlam vs. The ITO-1, Ratlam

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 185/IND/2016[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jun 2018AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 185/Ind/2016 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2000-01 M/S.M.Lodha Impex, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, 117-118, Manak Chowk, Ward 1, Ratlam. Ratlam.

For Appellant: Shri Satiksh Solanki, DRFor Respondent: 29.05.2018
Section 119(1)(b)Section 119(2)(b)Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234A

…assesse had filed the revised return on 09/04/2001 which is a regular return. Since the revised return can be filed upto 31/03/2002 therefore it was not a non-est. -: 7 :- M.LODHA IMPEX,RATLAM. In the case of S.R. Koshti v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2005] 276 ITR 165 Gujarat High court held that "the assessee can file revised return even after intimation is served. " The issue is settled to rest by the decision of Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd., 291 ITR 500 (2007) in which it was held that "intimation although deem to the notice of demand u/s 156 can not taken as a…

Thiruvananthapuram Road Development Co. Ltd, Orrissa vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

ITA 622/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

Section 143Section 253Section 32

…nstructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes dues are collected. While holding so, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has relied upon the various decisions e.g. S.R. Koshti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165/146 Taxman 335 (Guj), C.P.A. Yoosuf v. ITO [1970] 77 ITR 237 (Ker.), CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi), CIT v. Smt. Archana R. Dhanwatey [1982] 136 ITR 355/[1981] 7 Taxman 121 (Bom.). In view of the above discussed factual and legal position, we have no hesitation to hold that the assessee is entitled to put his…

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Thirvanthapuram Road Development Company Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is disposed of in terms of the order in ITA

ITA 4346/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Thiruvananthapuram Road Dcit-14(3)(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ (Earlier Dcit-10(1), The Il & Fs Financial Centre, Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Vs. Plot No.C-22, Aayakar Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Kurla M. K. Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aacct0547J Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit-14(3)(1), Thiruvananthapuram Road (Earlier Dcit-10(1), Development Company Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.455, 4Th Floor, The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Plot No.C-22, M. K. Road, G Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aacct0547J

Section 143Section 253Section 32

…nstructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes dues are collected. While holding so, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has relied upon the various decisions e.g. S.R. Koshti v. CIT [2005] 276 ITR 165/146 Taxman 335 (Guj), C.P.A. Yoosuf v. ITO [1970] 77 ITR 237 (Ker.), CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 303 (Delhi), CIT v. Smt. Archana R. Dhanwatey [1982] 136 ITR 355/[1981] 7 Taxman 121 (Bom.). In view of the above discussed factual and legal position, we have no hesitation to hold that the assessee is entitled to put his…

Oricon Enterprises Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 2913/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Swamy-CIT-DR
Section 14Section 148Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(v)Section 40A(7)Section 43Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ई” ” ” ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं पवन "सह पवन "सह,"याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं पवन "सह पवन "सह "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Pawan Singh, Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./2913/Mum/2015, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/s. Oricon Enterprises…

ACIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. Amber Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5176/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri, Amarjit Singh Jm Acit 25(1) Vs. M/S. Amber Enterprises Mumbai – 400 051 7, Taren Compound Behind Krishna Hotel Dahisar (E) Mumbai – 400 068 Pan/Gir No. Aalfa3071G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 80B(10)(f)Section 80FSection 80I

…rn, it can be claimed through revised return only, In this case after filing revised return claim of deduction was put by letter. It may be noted here that intimation u/s. 143 (1) is not assessment order as held in the-case of S.R. Koshti V/S. CIT reported in 276 ITR 165 Gujarat' Revised return can be-filed after intimation is received. (2)B. Revised Computation. At present assessment proceedings for A.Y. 09-10 are in progress. During the course of assessment proceedings, if the income is required to be enhanced, reduced, what is the remedy as the time for filing the revised return is over. The assessing officer…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 534/IND/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes due are collected [see S.R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 193 CTR (Guj) 518 : (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), C.P.A. Yoosuf vs. ITO (1970) 77 ITR 237 (Ker), CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. (1971) 81 ITR 303 (Del), CIT vs. Archana R. Dhanwatey (1981) 24 CTR (Bom) 142 : (1982) 136 ITR 355 (Bom)]. 32. If particular levy is not permitted under the Act, tax cannot be levied applying the doctrine of estoppel [see Dy. CST vs. Sreeni Pr…

The ACIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (I) Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company –

ITA 533/IND/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 347 To 351/Ind/2013, 760 & 761/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" // A.Ys.: 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 To 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Kendra Vikas Nigam Income-Tax, (Indore) Limited, 3(1), Indore. Indore. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "था.ले.सं./Pan: Aadcm7525Q

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Munshi

…under a mistake, misconception or on not being properly instructed is over assessed, the authorities under the Act are required to assist him and ensure that only legitimate taxes due are collected [see S.R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 193 CTR (Guj) 518 : (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), C.P.A. Yoosuf vs. ITO (1970) 77 ITR 237 (Ker), CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. (1971) 81 ITR 303 (Del), CIT vs. Archana R. Dhanwatey (1981) 24 CTR (Bom) 142 : (1982) 136 ITR 355 (Bom)]. 32. If particular levy is not permitted under the Act, tax cannot be levied applying the doctrine of estoppel [see Dy. CST vs. Sreeni Pr…