Smt. Renuka Philip v. ITO

409 ITR 567High Court2018#1350 most cited

What is Smt. Renuka Philip v. ITO authority for?

Revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act is barred if the issue in question is already pending appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), as per Explanation 1(c) to Section 263.

85

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Smt. Renuka Philip v. ITO · Section 263 revision · PCIT revisional jurisdiction · appeal pending before CIT(A) · Explanation 1(c) to Section 263 · bar to revision · assessment order · plausible view by AO · prejudicial to interest of revenue · Chennai High Court

Also reported as

101 Taxmann.com 119

Sections most often in play

Section 263Section 143(3)Section 68Section 142(1)Section 147Section 69CSection 234ASection 115BBE

Issues it is cited on

section 263(1)revision under section 263revision u/s 263section 54fprejudicial to interest of revenuerectification u/s 154section 120section 54section 144ainterest u/s 234alack of enquirymalabar industrial

Judgments citing Smt. Renuka Philip v. ITO

Remy Diamonds Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 5, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3898/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3898 To 3900/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Principal Commissioner Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Of Income Tax-5 Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5481 To 5483/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 To 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-5(3)(1) Gw-1060, G- Block, Bharat Room No.573, Aayakar Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Bhavan, M. K. Road, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr2195R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hiren Vepari Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Hiren VepariFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 132Section 147Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 3898 to 3900/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 to 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Principal Commissioner GW-1060, G- Block, Bharat of Income Tax-5 Vs. Diamond Bourse, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400051. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 5481 to 5483/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 to 2010-11) Remy Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ DCIT, Circle-5(3)(1) GW-1060, G- Block, Bharat Room No.573, A…

Jagabandhu Das, Kolkata vs. PCIT, Burdwan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/KOL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54B

…s) is seized of the issue and therefore jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act has been invalidly exercised by the Ld. PCIT. The case of the assessee finds support from the several decisions of various High Courts namely Smt. Renuka Philip vs. ITO reported in [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Mad), decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vam Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All). In both the above decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts has held that when the appeal is pending before the Commissioner (appeals), the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act is not available to the Ld. PCIT. Accor…

M/S. R M Tradelink, Rajkot vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 68/RJT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Sept 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 206CSection 263Section 40Section 69C

…in issues, then the same issue again cannot be re-agitated by taking recourse to proceedings under section 263 of the Act as held in the case of CIT v. Vam Resorts and Hotels Private Limited 418 ITR 723 (Allahabad) and in the case of Smt. Renuka Philip v. ITO 409 ITR 567 (Madras) where it is not held that when an appeal is pending before Commissioner (Appeals), exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 by Principal Commissioner would be barred. Thirdly, it is a well-settled law that every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to interests of Revenue. I…

Rabi Pal, Bankura vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Bankura

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 193/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 69A

…s) is seized of the issue and therefore jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act has been invalidly exercised by the Ld. PCIT. The case of the assessee finds support from the several decisions of various High Courts namely Smt. Renuka Philip vs. ITO reported in [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Mad), decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vam Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All). In both the above decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts has held that when the appeal is pending before the Commissioner(appeals), the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act is not available to the Ld. PCIT. Accord…

Think and Learn Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 418/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Think & Learn Private Limited, Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, 4/1, 6Th Floor, Tower D, Ibc Bengaluru. Knowledge Park, Bannerghatta Main Road, Opposite Fire Station, Bengaluru – 560 029. Pan : Aaect 0931 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Manjunath Karkihalli, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 24.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.03.2022 Of The Principal Cit – 3 (Pcit), Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1962 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’) In Relation To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Providing Online Learning Platform In The Name Of “Byju” For Kindergarten To 12Th Standard Students & Other Related Services. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2017-18 Declaring Total Income Of Page 2 Of 10

For Appellant: Shri. T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 245RSection 245R(2)(i)Section 263Section 40Section 56(2)(vii)

…n this regard, learned Counsel placed reliance on the following decisions: i. CIT Vs. Vam Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd., [2019] 111 taxmann.com 62 (Allahabad) ii. CIT Vs. Sampathmal Chordia, [2003] 127 Taxman 525 (Madras) iii. Smt. Renuka Philip Vs. ITO [2019] 409 ITR 567 (Madras) (b) It was submitted by him that if the order passed by the AO contrary to the mandate laid down in section 245R(2)(i) of the Act, such an order would be a void order and the PCIT in exercise of his powers under section 263 of the Act cannot set aside such void order and give a fresh innings to the AO to pass a fresh Order of Assessment.…

Kathiravan Srinivasan, Perambalur vs. DCIT, Circlre-1, Tiruchirapalli

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 341/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 340/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19) Kathiravan Ananthalakshmi Acit बनाम/ No. 274C, Thuraiyur Road, Central Circle -1, Perambalur, Trichy. Vs. Tamil Nadu – 621 212. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Asmpa-6568-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 341/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18) Kathiravan Srinivasan Acit बनाम/ No. 274C, Thuraiyur Road, Central Circle -1, Perambalur, Trichy. Vs. Tamil Nadu – 621 212. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Ajspk-6687-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2022

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 68

…) of Explanation (1) to section 263 of the Act will come into play and the doctrine of merger will apply. Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Smt. Renuka Philip vs ITO, Business Ward-XV(2) [2019] 409 ITR 567 (Madras) and also the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Vam Resorts & Hotels (P) Ltd [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All). 6. On the other hand, Ld. CIT(DR) heavily relied on the revision order and stated that the Assessing Officer while framing assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act has not examined the issue of applicability of rate…

Kathiravan Ananthalakshmi, Perambalur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Tiruchirapalli

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 340/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 340/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19) Kathiravan Ananthalakshmi Acit बनाम/ No. 274C, Thuraiyur Road, Central Circle -1, Perambalur, Trichy. Vs. Tamil Nadu – 621 212. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Asmpa-6568-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 341/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18) Kathiravan Srinivasan Acit बनाम/ No. 274C, Thuraiyur Road, Central Circle -1, Perambalur, Trichy. Vs. Tamil Nadu – 621 212. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Ajspk-6687-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2022

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 68

…) of Explanation (1) to section 263 of the Act will come into play and the doctrine of merger will apply. Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Smt. Renuka Philip vs ITO, Business Ward-XV(2) [2019] 409 ITR 567 (Madras) and also the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Vam Resorts & Hotels (P) Ltd [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All). 6. On the other hand, Ld. CIT(DR) heavily relied on the revision order and stated that the Assessing Officer while framing assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act has not examined the issue of applicability of rate…

Kumar Urban Development P Ltd, Pune vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax-4, Pune

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

ITA 264/PUN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.264/PUN/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Kumar Urban Development Vs. Pr.CIT-4, Pune. P. Ltd., 10th Floor, Kumar Business Center, CTS No.29, Bund Garden Road, Pune- 411001. PAN : AAACK7659N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Revenue by : Shri Deepak Garg Date of hearing : 14.07.2022 Date of pronouncement : 02.08.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed agai…

Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt Ltd, Rajkot vs. The PCIT, Rajkot-1, Rajkot

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

ITA 110/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Name of Sr. ITA No. Name of Appellant Year Respondent No. M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, ACIT, Circle-5, 1. No.139/Rjt/2015 2011-12 Lodhika GIDC, Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, No.156/Rjt/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Lodhika GIDC, 2. Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energ…

The Deputy Commr. Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Rajkot vs. M/S Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot

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

ITA 322/RJT/2017[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Name of Sr. ITA No. Name of Appellant Year Respondent No. M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, ACIT, Circle-5, 1. No.139/Rjt/2015 2011-12 Lodhika GIDC, Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, No.156/Rjt/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Lodhika GIDC, 2. Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energ…

The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S. Radhe Renewable Energy Developement Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat

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

ITA 156/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Name of Sr. ITA No. Name of Appellant Year Respondent No. M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, ACIT, Circle-5, 1. No.139/Rjt/2015 2011-12 Lodhika GIDC, Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, No.156/Rjt/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Lodhika GIDC, 2. Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energ…

M/S Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Asstt. Commr. Income Tax, Circle-5, Rajkot-Gujarat

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

ITA 139/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Name of Sr. ITA No. Name of Appellant Year Respondent No. M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, ACIT, Circle-5, 1. No.139/Rjt/2015 2011-12 Lodhika GIDC, Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.2621/22, No.156/Rjt/2015 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-1(1), Lodhika GIDC, 2. Rajkot Metoda, Rajkot. PAN: AACCR7723E M/s Radhe Renewable Energ…

M/S Bhaktvastal Sadguru Yogiraj Vasantrao Gopalrao Ghonge Maharaj Nyas, Wardha vs. Dy. C.I.T. Centrl Cir.-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 40/NAG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am 1) Ita No.: 040/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2011-12 2) Ita No.: 036/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2007-08 3) Ita No.: 037/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2008-09 4) Ita No.: 151/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2009-10 5) Ita No.: 152/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2010-11 6) Ita No.: 038/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2009-10 (143 R.W.S. 263) 7) Ita No.: 039/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2010-11 (143 R.W.S. 263) Bhaktvastal Sadguru Yogiraj Vasantrao Vs. The Dcit Gopalrao Ghonge Maharaj Nyas Central Circle 2(2) Mukteshwar, Behind Rashtrabhasha Nagpur Gharpure Layout, Nagri Bank Colony Wardha Pan No.:Aabtb 2675 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 26/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…(3) r.w.s. 153 on 26/04/2013 for Asstt. Years 2009-10 & 2010-11 are pending for disposal even as on date. No order u/s 263 can be passed in respect to pending matter before CIT(A). Reliance on: i) 418 ITR 0723 (All.) CIT vs. Vam Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd. ii) 409 ITR 567 (Mad.) Renuka Philip vs. ITO. iii) 98 TTJ 628 (Jodhpur) Harisingh & Associates (AOP) vs. ITO” 22 ITA 40,36,37,151,152,38 & 39/NAG/2017 BHAKTVASTAL SADGURU YOGIRAJ VASANTRAO GOPALRAO GHONGE MAHARAJ NYAS VS DCIT,CC-1(1), NAGPUR 26. The learned DR relied upon the order passed by CIT, Central u/s 263 and submitted that learned CIT has correctly exer…

Smt. Mamta Sharma, Bargarh vs. Principal CIT (Central), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 33/CTK/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shrichandra Mohan Garg & Manish Boradassessment Year :2012-13 Smt. Mamta Sharma, Ward Vs. Pr. Cit(Central), Visakhapatnam No.10, Near Govt. Bus Stand, Dist: Baragarh Pan/Gir No.Agvps 4382 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 21/10/ 2021 Date Of Pronouncement :10/12/2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 153CSection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRICHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2012-13 Smt. Mamta Sharma, Ward Vs. Pr. CIT(Central), Visakhapatnam No.10, Near Govt. Bus Stand, Dist: Baragarh PAN/GIR No.agvps 4382 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, AR Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 21/10/ 2021 Date of Pronouncement :10/12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order u/s 263 of the Act of the Pr. CIT(A), Visakhapatnam dated 11.3.2019 for the…

Vikas Oil Products, Dausa vs. PCIT-1, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 28/JPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…of the revenue." 15. We noticed from perusal of the record that vide its letter dated 15.09.2021, the ld. AR has relied upon the following judicial pronouncements: * CIT Vs. Vain Resorts & Hotels P Ltd [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All) * Renuka Philip Vs. ITO [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Madras) * ACC Limited Vs. CIT(LTU) in ITA No. 3576/Mum/2019. 20 ITA 26/JP/2021_ JR Industries Vs PCIT & 2 Ors. In this regard, we noticed that the judicial pronouncements as relied upon by the ld. AR, the important words "considered and decided in such appeal” appears to have skipped the attention of their lordships. In fact, it appears that in…

Om Industries, Dausa vs. PCIT-1, Jaipur, Jiapur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 27/JPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…of the revenue." 15. We noticed from perusal of the record that vide its letter dated 15.09.2021, the ld. AR has relied upon the following judicial pronouncements: * CIT Vs. Vain Resorts & Hotels P Ltd [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All) * Renuka Philip Vs. ITO [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Madras) * ACC Limited Vs. CIT(LTU) in ITA No. 3576/Mum/2019. 20 ITA 26/JP/2021_ JR Industries Vs PCIT & 2 Ors. In this regard, we noticed that the judicial pronouncements as relied upon by the ld. AR, the important words "considered and decided in such appeal” appears to have skipped the attention of their lordships. In fact, it appears that in…

Jr Industries, Dausa vs. PCIT-1, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 26/JPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…of the revenue." 15. We noticed from perusal of the record that vide its letter dated 15.09.2021, the ld. AR has relied upon the following judicial pronouncements: * CIT Vs. Vain Resorts & Hotels P Ltd [2019] 418 ITR 723 (All) * Renuka Philip Vs. ITO [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Madras) * ACC Limited Vs. CIT(LTU) in ITA No. 3576/Mum/2019. 20 ITA 26/JP/2021_ JR Industries Vs PCIT & 2 Ors. In this regard, we noticed that the judicial pronouncements as relied upon by the ld. AR, the important words "considered and decided in such appeal” appears to have skipped the attention of their lordships. In fact, it appears that in…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE 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) Assessee by : Shri Mehul Shah, CA Revenue by : Shri Ritesh Mishra, CIT(DR) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 08/04/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 28/05/2021 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: By…

Skan Enterprise, Kolkata vs. Pr.C.I.T.-12, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 840/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2020AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 263

…contention that the reopening is bad in relied on the following case law in support of his contention that the reopening is bad in law:-  Smt. Renuka Philip vs. Income Smt. Renuka Philip vs. Income-tax Officer, Business Ward-XV(2)Chennai XV(2)Chennai [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Madras) [2018] 409 ITR 567 (Madras)  Commissioner of Income Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ludhiana vs. Max India Ltd tax (Central), Ludhiana vs. Max India Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 282 (SC) 295 ITR 282 (SC) 5.3. On the issue of allowability of claim On the issue of allowability of claim of expenditure on commission payments of expenditure on…

M/S. Abc Engineering Works, Vijayawada vs. The Dy. CIT, Vijayawada

ITA 75/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Aug 2019AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/S Abc Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar, Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No. 210/Viz/2015 & 75/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) M/S Abc Engineering Works Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Plot No.24, 2Nd Road Vijayawada Autonagar , Vijayawada [Pan : Aaffa7383K] Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1) Vijayawada (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)

Section 143(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1) Vs. M/s ABC Engineering Works Vijayawada Plot No.24, 2nd Road Autonagar, Vijayawada [PAN : AAFFA7383K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.79/Viz/2013 (Arising out of I.T.A.No.112/Viz/2013) (निर्धारण वर्ा…