SB) in ITO v. Ekta Promoters P. Ltd.

113 ITD 719Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#10987 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing SB) in ITO v. Ekta Promoters P. Ltd.

Grasim Industries Ltd vs. Addl. CIT Range 6(3)

In the result, appeal filed by the assesse and revenue are partly allowed

ITA 4753/MUM/2004[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blegrasim Industries Limited V. Addl. Cit, Range 6(3) Corporate Finance Division 5Th Floor, Room No. 505 Aditya Birla Centre “A” Wing Aayakar Bhavan 2Nd Floor, S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Mumbai Mumbai-400025 Pan: Aaacg4464B Appellant Respondent Dy. Cit, Range 6(3), V. Grasim Industries Limited, 5Th Floor, Room No. 505, Corporate Finance Division, Aayakar Bhavan, Aditya Birla Centre, “A” Wing, Mumbai-20. 2Nd Floor, S.K. Ahire Marg Worli, Mumbai-400025 Pan: Aaacg4464B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri J.D. Mistry Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Raj & Shri Vijay Kumar Menon

For Appellant: Shri J.D. MistryFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj &

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43BSection 80Section 80H

…., Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd [93 TTJ 965 (AHD)], Glaxo Smithkline Asia (P.) Ltd., v. ACIT [97 TTJ 108 (Del), Glaxo Smithkline Asia (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [6 SOT 113 (Del)], Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., v. ACIT [10 SOT 106 (Del)] and Ekta Promotors (P.) ltd., [113 ITD 719 (Del) and requested the same be adopted in the case of assessee also. 117. Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 70 ITA No. 4753 & 5584/MUM/2004 (A.Y. 2002-03) Grasim Industries Limited, 118. Considered the submissions and material placed on record, we observe that this issue is considered by the Hon’ble jurisdictional…

Tcs-E-Serve Ltd ( Earlier Known As E-Sereve Internaiontal Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 9(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed since the only issue in revenue’s appeal is deduction u/s 10A

ITA 5089/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5089/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5090/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Tata Consultancy Services Limited Dcit- 9(1) / 9(3) (Upon Merger Of Tcs E-Serve Ltd Aaykar Bhawan बिाम With Tata Consultancy Services Ltd) M.K.Road / Vs. 9Th Floor, Nirmal Building Mumbai-400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-4480-F (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4928/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4929/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5478/Mum/2014 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7446/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7447/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Acit, Range-9(3) / Circle-9(3) Tata Consultancy Services Limited Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road (Upon Merger Of Tcs E-Serve Ltd बिाम Mumbai-400 020 With Tata Consultancy Services Ltd) / Vs. 9Th Floor, Nirmal Building Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-4480-F (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla-Ld. Sr.CounselFor Respondent: Shri Vinay Sinha – Ld. CIT-DR & Shri

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234DSection 271(1)(c)Section 80H

…t,2012 being declaratory in nature would be retrospective. This amendment make it cleat that it shall apply assessment years even prior to 1/06/2003. 27. In view of the above, we hold that the decision of the Tribunal in /TO v. Ekta Promoters (P.) Ltd. [2008] 113 ITD 719 (Delhi) (SB) which has been followed in the impugned order by the Tribunal is not correct. One more aspect of the matter which must be borne in mind is that till such time as the assessment proceedings are completed in respect of any assessment year, the amendment made to the Act would be applicable even in case of pending proceedings. It is not…

Rose Rock Real Estate India Pvt., Mumbai vs. ITO (TDS) 2(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals are allowed

ITA 4824/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Section 154Section 190Section 200ASection 203ASection 204Section 234ESection 285

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pavankumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 4824/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 4823/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Vs. 1. ACIT-TDS- Rose Rock Real Estate India Pvt. Ltd. CPC,Ghaziabad 1, Gordhan Building, 2nd Floor, Behind Girguam 2. ITO(TDS)-2(1)(3) Court, Off Dr Parekh Street 6th Floor, Room No. Opp. HN (Reliance) Hospital 610, K.G. Mittal Prathna Samaj Ayurvedic Hospital Mumbai-400 004. Charni Road West Mumbai-400 002. PAN : AAGCR7537L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajesh Mehta Department by Shri Manoj K…

Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 3379/MUM/2009[2001-02]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2021AY 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. Mistry (Ld. SrFor Respondent: Shri Salil Mishra-CIT DR and Shri Tharian Oommen-Ld. Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…ind that the same would squarely apply to the assessee in terms of decision of Jurisdictional High Court in CIT V/s Indian Oil Corp. Ltd. (25 Taxmann.com 284) wherein Hon'ble Court has negated the view of Delhi Tribunal (SB) in ITO V/s Ekta Promoters P. Ltd. (113 ITD 719) and held as under: - 22. It must be borne in mind that refund which is granted under section 143(1) of the Act to an assessee is qua an assessment proceeding for a particular assessment year. The refund granted is qua an assessment year. The refund emanates from assessment proceedings for a particular assessment year. The refund granted cannot b…

Lustre Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6396/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09 Lustre Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, Circle 4(1), A-1/25, Sector-15, New Delhi. Rohini, Delhi. Pan: Aaacl2457D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate, Revenue By : Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21St September, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-5, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. This Is The Second Round Of Litigation Before The Tribunal.

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Lustre Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, C/o Kapil Goel, Advocate, Circle 4(1), A-1/25, Sector-15, New Delhi. Rohini, Delhi. PAN: AAACL2457D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate, Revenue by : Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 29.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 30.10.2019 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 21st September, 2015 of the CIT(A)-5, New Delhi,…

Cosmos Industries Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3730/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11 Cosmos Industries Ltd., Vs. Dcit, C/O Garg R. Kumar & Associates, Cas, Circle-3(1), 7, Advocate Chambers, New Delhi. Raj Nagar District Centre, Above Dominos Pizza, Ghaziabad. Pan: Aaacc6682R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Anil Katoch, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18Th March, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-14, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Sugar. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 31St March, 2011 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,36,93,430/- & Income U/S 115Jb At Rs.4,01,70,500/-. This Case Was Selected For Scrutiny By Issue Of Statutory Notices. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Katoch, Sr.DR

Section 115JSection 2(14)Section 37

…....................................................................... 24. Having heard the rival contentions, we find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of ITAT Delhi (SB) in the case of ITO v. Ekta Promoters (P)Ltd., (2008) 113 ITD 719 (Delhi)(SB), wherein, it has been held that section 223D will have application only w.e.f. A.Y. 2004-05 and cannot be applied to A.Y. 2003-04. The assessment year under consideration in this case is 2003-04. We also find that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case CIT v. M/s. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd in Income Tax Appeal No.198 of 2009 , held t…

ITO 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Central; Bank of India, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 910/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.8581/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Deputy Commissioner Of Central Bank Of India Income Tax 2(1) Central Office बनाम/ Central Accounts Deptt. Aaykar Bhavan Vs. Chandermukhi, 4Th Floor Room No. 575, 5Th Floor Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-2498-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No. 153/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.8581/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Central Bank Of India Deputy Commissioner Of Central Office Income Tax 2(1) बनाम/ Central Accounts Deptt. Aaykar Bhavan Chandermukhi, 4Th Floor Room No. 575, 5Th Floor Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-2498-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

…Court rendered in CIT Vs. Indian Oil Coproration Ltd. [2012 25 taxmann.com 284] where Hon’ble court has clinched the issued in the following manner:- 27. In view of the above, we hold that the decision of the Tribunal in ITO v. Ekta Promoters (P.) Ltd. [2008] 113 ITD 719 (Delhi) (SB) which has been followed in the impugned order by the Tribunal is not correct. One more aspect of the matter which must be borne in mind is that till such time as the assessment proceedings are completed in respect of any assessment year, the amendment made to the Act would be applicable even in case of pending proceedings. It is not…

ACIT, CC-Xx, Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Limited, Kolkata

In the result, this ground is allowed

ITA 1370/KOL/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Navin Verma & Nitin Agarwal, ARs

Section 143(3)

…t is applicable only from Asst Year 2004-05 and onwards as the same was introduced only with effect from 1.6.2003 and assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ITO vs Ekta Promoters P Ltd reported in (2008) 113 ITD 719 (Delhi) (SB) wherein it was held that the provisions of section 234D of the Act are substantive and so they cannot be applied retrospectively. The ld CITA relied on the said decision and directed the ld AO not to charge any interest u/s 234D of the Act. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on the following ground:- “8. On the facts and…

M/S. Mico Steels (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1669/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N. Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. KC Singhal, A.RFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chander Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 234DSection 282(2)(b)

…thout prejudice the same are excessive. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that section 234D was introduced with effect from 01.06.2003 and being prospective is applicable from A.Y. 2004-05, as has been held in the case of (a) ITO vs. Ekta Promoters (P) Ltd, 113 ITD 719(Delhi) (SB) and (b) Glaxo Smithkline Asia ( P ) LtC! vs. ACIT (2005) 97 TTJ (Del) 108. 2 8. The Id. CIT(A) erred in not admitting the additional evidence. 9. The observations as well as the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) are against the facts as well as law and are without providing proper opportunity of hearing to…