SC) (ii) IL & FS Investment Managers Ltd. vs. ITO, 298 ITR 32 (Bom) (iii) Trent Ltd. v. DCIT

382 ITR 574High Court2016#12765 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10AA Section 11 Section 115JB Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 144C Section 147 Section 147(proviso)

Issues it is cited on

full and true disclosure section 80ib kelvinator section 80ia change of opinion tangible material escapement of income regular assessment reason to believe reopening of assessment notice under section 148 reassessment proceedings

Judgments citing SC) (ii) IL & FS Investment Managers Ltd. vs. ITO, 298 ITR 32 (Bom) (iii) Trent Ltd. v. DCIT

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3705/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Reliance Industries Ltd., Room No. 559, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor Maker Chamber Iv, Aayakar Bhavan, New Marine Vs. Nariman Point, S.O. Lines, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacr 5055 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal/Ms. MokshaFor Respondent: Ms. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 115JSection 144BSection 144CSection 147Section 801B(9)

…is own belief and thus reopening of the assessment is based on the borrowed satisfaction of the Audit Wing. The Ld. counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon‘ble Bombay High Court in assessee‘s own case for assessment year 2004-05 reported in 382 ITR 574, wherein audit objection claimed allowed u/s 80IA of the Act, to which the AO disagreed with and responded that the deduction u/s 80IA was correct. However, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment on the same ground Reliance Industries Ltd 30 ITA No. 3705/MUM/2024 & CO No. 153/MUM/2024 as raised in the audit objection. The Ld. CIT(A) quas…

MERCK PERFORMANCE MATERIALS PVT LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 15(2)(2) , MUMBAI

ITA 1210/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Rahul Chaudharyआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1210/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Merck Performance Materials बिधम/ The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., (Formerly Known As Commissioner Of Income Vs. Chemtreat Composites India Tax – 15(2)(2), Mumbai, Pvt. Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Godrej One, Pirojsha Nagar, M.K. Road, Eastern Express Highway, Mumbai - 400020 Vikhroli (East), Mumbai- 400079 Pan : Aabcc5609B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी) / Respondent) For The Appellant/Assessee: Arati Vissanji For The Respondent/Revenue: C.T. Mathews सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary: 1. By Way Of The Present Appeal The Appellant/Assessee Has Challenged The Order Dated, 02.12.2019 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 24, Mumbai (Hereafter Referred To As „The Cit(A)‟] Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereafter Referred To As „The Act‟), Whereby The Ld. Cit(A) Had Dismissed The Appeal Against The Assessment Order, Dated 29.12.2017, Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Arati VissanjiFor Respondent: C.T. Mathews

Section 10ASection 10BSection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…the Appellant in the return of income and/or the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act. ITA. No. 1210/Mum/2020 A.Y. 2011-12 11. The jurisdiction High Court, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU) vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2016) 382 ITR 574 relied upon by the Authorised Representative of the Appellant, has held as under: “11. So far as failure to disclose fully and truly all facts are concerned, it is noticed from the reasons recorded that its basis for issuing the reopening notice is the records of the Assessee in possession of the Assessing Officer during regular assessment proce…

DY CIT-CC-6(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. MARATHON NEXTGEN REALTY LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 798/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Vikas Awasthy & Shri Prashant Maharishiआअसं. 797/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2012-13 ) आअसं. 798/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2011-12 ) आअसं. 799/मुं/2021 ("न. व. 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 6(3), Room No.1926, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ..... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Marathon Nextgen Realty Limited, Marathon Futurex Mafatlal Mill Compound, N.M.Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013. Pan: Aaacp-8032-E ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.P. Bairagra With Ms. Rupa Nanda ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri C.T. Mathews सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 23/02/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 25/03/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: These Three Appeals By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-54, Mumbai [In Short ‘ The Cit(A)’], For The 2

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra with Ms. Rupa NandaFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews

Section 147Section 148

…nter-alia placed reliance on following decisions: (i) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., 320 ITR 561 (SC) (ii) IL & FS Investment Managers Ltd. vs. ITO, 298 ITR 32 (Bom) (iii) Trent Ltd. vs. DCIT, 135 taxmann.com 222(Bom) (iv) CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 382 ITR 574(Bom) 5.4. The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee summed up his arguments supporting the impugned order and stated that the CIT(A) has rightly held reassessment proceedings are bad in law for the reasons: (i) Reopening is based on audit objections; (ii) Reopening is a result of change of opinion; and 5 ITA NO.798/MUM/2021 (A.Y.2011-…

DY CIT, CC-6(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. MARATHON NEXTGEN REALTY LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 797/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra with Ms. Rupa NandaFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews

Section 147Section 148

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUPERIOR FILMS (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed; accordingly, Revenue’s appeal is

ITA 4938/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gurjit Batra and Shri S.M. Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Vodaphone Essar Gujarat Ltd. vs. CIT 342 ITR 135 (Guj.) 29. Bharti Infratel Limited 411 ITR 403 (Delhi) 30. Hitech Outsourcing Services vs. Pr. CIT 408 ITR 129(Guj.) 31. Munjal Showla Ltd. vs. DcIT 382 ITR 555 (Delhi) 32. CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 382 ITR 574(Bom.) Page 9 of 29 FIT FOR PUBLICATION (ANM) (BS) ITA No.- 4938/Del/2012. (AM) (JM) M/s Superior Films Pvt. Ltd. 33. CIT vs. Central Warehousing Corpn. Ltd. 382 ITR 172(Delhi) 34. Priya Desh Gupta vs. DCIT 385 ITR 452 (Delhi) 35. Ranglal Bagaria (HUF) vs. ACIT 384 ITR 477 (Cal.) 36. Director of Income Tax International Taxation-II vs. Rolls…

THE DCIT-3(1), INDORE vs. KUMARI SHEETAL GARG, INDORE

In the result Ground No. 1& 2 of the

ITA 254/IND/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2008-09 Dcit-3(1), Kumari Sheetal Garg, Indore Vs. 8/2, New Palasia, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Afhpg9179G Revenue By Shri K.C. Selvamani, Sr.Dr Assessee By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ca Date Of Hearing 07.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2019 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 53ASection 54F

…Sheetal Garg आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON'BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year 2008-09 DCIT-3(1), Kumari Sheetal Garg, Indore Vs. 8/2, New Palasia, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) PAN No.AFHPG9179G Revenue by Shri K.C. Selvamani, Sr.DR Assessee by Shri S.S. Solanki, CA Date of Hearing 07.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement 10.01.2019 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The above captioned appeal is filed at the instance of Revenue pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09 and is directed…

M/S. RICHA INDUSTRIES LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1476/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singh & Sh.Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 36Section 80I

…. 28. HARYANA ACRYLIC MANUFACTURING CO. vs. CIT AND ANOTHER [2009] 308 ITR 38 (Del) 29. WEL INTERTRADE P. LTD. AND ANOTHER vs. ITO [2009] 308 ITR 22 (Del) 30. NESTLE INDIA LTD. vs.DCIT [2016] 384 ITR 334 (Del) 31. CIT (LTU) vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. [2016] 382 ITR 574 (Bom) 32. MUNJALSHOWA LTD. vs.DCIT AND ANOTHER [2016] 382 ITR 555 (Del) 33. NIRMAL BANG SECURITIES PVT. LTD. vs.ACIT AND OTHERS [2016] 382 ITR 93 (Bom) 34. SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LTD.(Earlier known as Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd.) us.DCIT AND ANOTHER[2016] 381 ITR 387 (Del) 35. BHARAT JAYANTILAL PATEL vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS S.C. DHARMA…

DCIT 5(2), MUMBAI vs. JNJ HOLDINGS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 707/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Ashwani Taneja (Acountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA (ACOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.ITA No.707/Mum/2014 (Assessment year : 2005-06) Dy.CIT 5(2), Mumbai vs M/s JN Holdings Pvt Ltd Raval Building No.1, 2nd Floor, 423, Bhadkamkar Marg, Mumbai 04 PAN :AACJ2047D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Asghar Zain V.P. Respondent by Shri Hiro Rai Date of hearing : 02-06-2016 Date of pronouncement : 15-06-2016 O R D E R Per ASHWANI TANEJA, AM This appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income-tax (A…