Smt. Sohani Devi Jain v. ITO (109 ITR 130)

RAMESH GUPTA,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 30(4), DELHI

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

ITA 930/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 127Section 127(2)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

…566 (Pat.); Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC); Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC); Rai Bahadur Seth Teomal [1959]36 ITR 9 (SC); Sarupchand and Hukumchand [1953] 23 ITR 382 (MP) and Smt. Sohani Devi Jain v. ITO [1977] 109 ITR 130 (Gau), submitted that the jurisdictional issues could not be raised after the 7 completion of assessment as the same was not within the time prescribed under section 124(3) of the Act. 8. We heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex parte due to non-prosecution. The…

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

ITA 6772/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

…sent case) that the time limitation u/s.124(3) will be applicable where jurisdiction of Addl. CIT making the assessment u/s.143(3) is under question. Finally, as held by the Hon'ble full bench of Guwahati High Court in the case of Smt. Sohani Devi Jain (1977) 109 ITR 130 (Guwahati) Sec. 124(3) has no relationship to territorial jurisdiction since the provisions of sec. 124 is clear and unambiguous. as jurisdiction has been challenged u/s.124(3)(a) and not u/s.124(3)(c). While the former provisions u/s.124(3)(a) relates to jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer where notices u/s.142(1) or 143(2) issued, as in the p…

M/S. LAIRY DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees stand allowed on legal grounds Nos

ITA 6947/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chandra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 153C

…aid provision clearly comes in the way of assessee to raise the plea of assessment on non existing company without raising the same before AO at a later stage and heavily relied on Full Bench decision of Guwathi High Court in Smt. Sohani Devi Jain reported in 109 ITR 130. After much deliberation, we are unable to subscribe to the views of Ld CIT-DR for the simple reason that Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of S.S.Ahluwalia in ITA 255/2002 (order dated 14/3/2014) reported in 2014 (88) CCH (158) Delhi H.C. in turn relying on another Delhi High court decision in case of K.K. Loomba reported in 24…