Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal

469 ITR 46Supreme Court of India2024#72 most cited

What is Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal authority for?

The legal fiction created by the Ashish Agarwal judgment stops the limitation clock for Section 148 notices from the date of the deemed notice. Orders issued without proper jurisdiction, or those inconsistent with statutory prescriptions, are a nullity, and there can be no waiver of such fundamental jurisdictional requirements.

713

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal · Section 148 notice limitation · Ashish Agarwal legal fiction · TOLA applicability · reassessment jurisdiction · time-barred notice · order without jurisdiction · Section 149 · Section 148A

Also reported as

167 Taxmann.com 70301 Taxmann 238

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 148ASection 151Section 149Section 144BSection 250Section 144
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 149a(c)section 149a(d)section 149asection 151(i)section 149(1)(a)section 3(1)section 148a(a)section 148 noticesection 151(ii)section 149(1)section 149(1)(b)order under section 148a(d)

Judgments citing Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal

Uniseven Engineering and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2651/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM] I.T.A. Nos. 2651 & 2652/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Uniseven Engineering & Infrastructure Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-7(1), Kolkata Pvt. Ltd. 30D, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700016. (PAN: AAACU9083G) Appellant Respondent Date of conclusion of Hearing 17.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22.04.2025 For the Assessee Shri Sunil Surana, AR For the Revenue Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM Both these appeals filed by the assessee are…

Mr. Viren Rohitkumar Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 32(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalmr. Viren Rohitkumar Shah, 02/009 Om Heera Pana Mall, Oshiwara, Andheri (W), Mumbai - 400102 ............... Appellant Pan : Aaqps2809B V/S

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh JainFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…31/03/2021, and even if the extension granted by the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (“the TOLA”), in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v/s Rajeev Bansal, reported in (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC), is considered, the AO had time only till 21/06/2022 to issue notice under section 148 of the Act. Therefore, the learned AR submitted that the notice issued under section 148 of the Act on 31/07/2022 for the assessment year 2016-17 is barred by limitation. Hence, it was submitted that the entire re-assessment proceedings culminating in the o…

ACIT, Circlle-34, Kolkata vs. Subhas Kumar Kedia, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1677/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1677/Kol/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Acit, Circle-34, Kolkata Vs Subhas Kumar Kedia, 41, N.S.Road, Kolkata Pan No. :Afnpk 9669 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Shreya Loyalka, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 05.06.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- I) That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order U/S.148A(D) & All Subsequent Proceedings. Ii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Failed To Acknowledge The Fact That The Assesse Had Not Expressed Any Grievance Against The Validity Of Order U/S 148A(D) By Moving Any Writ Petition Which Should Have Been Done In Case Of Any Grievance After Getting The Sald Order U/S.148A(D). Iii) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi, Erred In Quashing The Order When The Ld. Cit(A) Has No Jurisdiction To Deal With The Question Whether The 148A(D) Order Was Passed Validly Or Properly As An Order U/S.148A(D) Is Not An Appealable Order Before Ld. Cit(A) As Per Section 246A.

For Appellant: Ms. Shreya Loyalka, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 246ASection 3Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, बी न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.1677/KOL/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) ACIT, Circle-34, Kolkata Vs Subhas Kumar Kedia, 41, N.S.Road, Kolkata PAN No. :AFNPK 9669 M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Ms. Shreya Loyalka, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 21/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 17/04/2025…

Lalit Surajprakash Garg, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA 6125/Mum/2024 (A

ITA 6126/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Bansal,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia (Sr. DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)

…ral- 3, Mumbai. As such, the approval obtained by the AO is not in accordance with the provisions of section 151(ii).Therefore, the reassessment is liable to be quashed.Reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC).Attention is drawn to paragraph 81 of the hon’ble Supreme Court judgment where it held as under: “Although this court waived off the requirement of obtaining prior approval u/s. 148A(a) and 148A(b), it did not waive the requirement for section 148A(d) and section 148. Therefore, the assessing officer was required to obtain prior approval o…

Lalit Surajprakash Garg, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA 6125/Mum/2024 (A

ITA 6125/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Bansal,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia (Sr. DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)

…ral- 3, Mumbai. As such, the approval obtained by the AO is not in accordance with the provisions of section 151(ii).Therefore, the reassessment is liable to be quashed.Reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC).Attention is drawn to paragraph 81 of the hon’ble Supreme Court judgment where it held as under: “Although this court waived off the requirement of obtaining prior approval u/s. 148A(a) and 148A(b), it did not waive the requirement for section 148A(d) and section 148. Therefore, the assessing officer was required to obtain prior approval o…

Lalit Surajprakash Garg, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA 6125/Mum/2024 (A

ITA 6124/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Bansal,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia (Sr. DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)

…ral- 3, Mumbai. As such, the approval obtained by the AO is not in accordance with the provisions of section 151(ii).Therefore, the reassessment is liable to be quashed.Reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC).Attention is drawn to paragraph 81 of the hon’ble Supreme Court judgment where it held as under: “Although this court waived off the requirement of obtaining prior approval u/s. 148A(a) and 148A(b), it did not waive the requirement for section 148A(d) and section 148. Therefore, the assessing officer was required to obtain prior approval o…

Lalit Surajprakash Garg, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA 6125/Mum/2024 (A

ITA 6123/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Bansal,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia (Sr. DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)

…ral- 3, Mumbai. As such, the approval obtained by the AO is not in accordance with the provisions of section 151(ii).Therefore, the reassessment is liable to be quashed.Reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC).Attention is drawn to paragraph 81 of the hon’ble Supreme Court judgment where it held as under: “Although this court waived off the requirement of obtaining prior approval u/s. 148A(a) and 148A(b), it did not waive the requirement for section 148A(d) and section 148. Therefore, the assessing officer was required to obtain prior approval o…

Lalit Surajprakash Garg, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals in ITA 6125/Mum/2024 (A

ITA 6122/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Bansal,CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia (Sr. DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)

…ral- 3, Mumbai. As such, the approval obtained by the AO is not in accordance with the provisions of section 151(ii).Therefore, the reassessment is liable to be quashed.Reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC).Attention is drawn to paragraph 81 of the hon’ble Supreme Court judgment where it held as under: “Although this court waived off the requirement of obtaining prior approval u/s. 148A(a) and 148A(b), it did not waive the requirement for section 148A(d) and section 148. Therefore, the assessing officer was required to obtain prior approval o…

Kishan Beej, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 384/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.384/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kishan Beej Ito, Wared-2(1) बनाम Kashivishvanath Road Jamnagar – 361 001 Nr. P & T Office Vs. Jamnagar – 361 001 Pan : Aacfk 2114 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 69Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.ITA No.384/RJT/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kishan Beej ITO, Wared-2(1) बनाम Kashivishvanath Road Jamnagar – 361 001 Nr. P & T Office Vs. Jamnagar – 361 001 PAN : AACFK 2114 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, AR राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hearing : 20/01/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Da…

Mark Foods, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-28(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4102/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Shashank Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 153CSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 4102 and 4103/MUM/2024 Assessment Years: 2015-16 and 2016-17 Mark Foods, Income Tax Officer-28(2)(1), J-24, APMC Market-II, Mumbai Sector-19, Vashi, Vs. Navi Mumbai – 400705 (PAN : AAXFM0112C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Shashank Mehta, CA Revenue : Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 13.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.04.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: These two appeals filed by the Assessee are…

Puneet Saggar, Ludhiana, Punjab vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Ludhiana, Punjab

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga, Advocate and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 148Section 148A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 505/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Puneet Saggar, Vs The ITO, Shop No. 2, Miverva Complex, Ward 6(1), Near Clock Tower, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AOYPS1978R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri B.M.Monga, Advocate and Shri Rohit Kaura, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 07.04.2025 Date of Pron…

Income Tax Officer 23 3 6, Piramal Chambers vs. Rahul Hariprasad Tibrewal, Mumbai

ITA 430/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…8A(d) of the Act and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act (new regime) for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. 7. In this regard we deem it appropriate to refer to judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC)[03/10/2024]. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had, while dealing with the issue of approval from specified authority in terms of Section 151 of the Act, made the following observations: “74. The above table indicates that the specified authority is directly co-related to the time when the notice is issued. This plays out as follows under the old reg…

Uniquestar Gems (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The ITO, Ward 13(2)(1), Mumbai.

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1036/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Renu Jauhri ()

Section 148Section 148ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI RENU JAUHRI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 1035/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & I.T.A. No. 1036/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Uniquestar Gems (India) Vs. The ITO, Ward Pvt. Ltd. 13(2)(1), Mumbai Tara Niwas M Block, 2nd Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, J S S Road, Opera Maharshi Karve House, Road, New Marine Maharashtra - 400004 Lines, PAN: AABCM6116D Maharashtra-400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Rajesh Shah Respondent by Shri Alok Kumar (CIT D.R.) Date of Hearing 03.04.2025 Date of Pronou…

Uniquestar Gems (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The ITO, Ward 13(2)(1), Mumbai.

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1035/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Renu Jauhri ()

Section 148Section 148ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI RENU JAUHRI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 1035/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & I.T.A. No. 1036/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Uniquestar Gems (India) Vs. The ITO, Ward Pvt. Ltd. 13(2)(1), Mumbai Tara Niwas M Block, 2nd Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, J S S Road, Opera Maharshi Karve House, Road, New Marine Maharashtra - 400004 Lines, PAN: AABCM6116D Maharashtra-400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Rajesh Shah Respondent by Shri Alok Kumar (CIT D.R.) Date of Hearing 03.04.2025 Date of Pronou…

DCIT-CC(5), Mumbai vs. Larsen & Toubro Limited, Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, appeal by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5745/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ronak Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT DR and Shri Ram Krishn Kedia, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5745 and 5743/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 and 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner of Larsen & Toubro Limited Income Tax L & T House Central Circle 5(4) Narottam Morarji Marg Vs. Mumbai Ballard Estate Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL0140P (Appellant) (Respondent) CO NO. 282/Mum/2024 (Arising out of ITA No. 5743/Mum/2024) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Larsen & Toubro Limited Deputy Commissioner of L & T House Income Tax Narottam Morarji Marg Central Circle 5(4) Vs. Ballard Estat…

DCIT-CC- 5(4), Mumbai vs. Larsen & Toubro Limited, Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, appeal by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5743/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ronak Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT DR and Shri Ram Krishn Kedia, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5745 and 5743/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 and 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner of Larsen & Toubro Limited Income Tax L & T House Central Circle 5(4) Narottam Morarji Marg Vs. Mumbai Ballard Estate Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL0140P (Appellant) (Respondent) CO NO. 282/Mum/2024 (Arising out of ITA No. 5743/Mum/2024) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Larsen & Toubro Limited Deputy Commissioner of L & T House Income Tax Narottam Morarji Marg Central Circle 5(4) Vs. Ballard Estat…

Dalpat Baraiya, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 1692/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 54B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year. 2016-17 Dalpat Baraiya Income Tax Officer C/o. M.S. Chhajed & Co. Ward-3(3)(1), CA, “Kamal Shanti”, Vs Ahmedabad Nr. Sardar Patel Statue, Ahmedabad-380014 Gujarat PAN: CHWPB8348D (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee Represented: Shri Mahesh Chhajed, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 06-02-2025 Date of pronouncement : 03-04-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed…

Amina Aslam Qureshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 22(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 769/MUM/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 234BSection 251(1)Section 274Section 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 769/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Amina Aslam Qureshi Vs. Income Tax Officer 5-A/5, Sangeeta Ward 22(1)(1) Apartment, Juhu Road, Mumbai Santacruz (West), Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400049 Lalbaug, Parel, PAN:AACPQ2403R Mumbai-400012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Jinesh Shah Respondent by Shri Pravin Salukhe, SR. D.R. Date of Hearing 19.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 ORDER Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The present appeal…

Nilesh Satish Shingte, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-41(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result of the file by the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 6145/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 4Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.6145/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Nilesh Satish Shingte Vs. Office of Income 2-54, Juhu Neelsagar Tax Officer, Ward CHS, Gulmohar Cross 41(3)(3), Mumbai Road No.2, JVPD Sheme, Mum W 93, 403, Mumbai Ward 41(3)(3), PAN:BCQPS6601E Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri K. Gopal, Sr. Adv. a/w Ms. Neha Paranjpe Respondent by Shri Pravin Salunkhe, SR. D.R. Date of Hearing 26.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.03.202…

Mahavir Co Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward, 19(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3409/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 3409/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mahavir Co-operative Vs. ITO Ward 19(1)(1), Housing Society Limited Mumbai 2nd Floor, Flat No.16 37, ITO Ward 19(1)(1), Ridge Road, Walkeshwar Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400006 6th Floor, Lalbaug, PAN:AAAAM9751H Mumbai-400012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri V.H. Jariwala Respondent by Shri Pravin Salunkhe, SR. D.R. Date of Hearing 26.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 ORDER Per: Smt. Beena P…