Vipan Khanna v. CIT

255 ITR 220High Court2002#718 most cited

What is Vipan Khanna v. CIT authority for?

Assessment proceedings conclude and become final if a scrutiny notice under Section 143(2) is not served within the prescribed statutory period. This case also clarified the historical position that reassessment under Section 147/148 was restricted to issues for which reasons were recorded, a view superseded by Explanation 3 to Section 147.

140

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Vipan Khanna v. CIT · 255 ITR 220 · Section 143(2) notice · time limit scrutiny assessment · finality of assessment · Section 147 reassessment · scope of reassessment · reasons to believe · unconnected issues · Explanation 3 Section 147 · superseded by amendment

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 148Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 13(1)(c)(ii)section 13(1)(b)section 164(2)section 13(1)(d)section 148(2)section 158bb(1)section 11(5)section 164retraction of statementsection 13(1)(c)section 158bbsection 13(1)

Judgments citing Vipan Khanna v. CIT

Vasu Agencies, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1623/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Vasu Pharma Distributors Vs. Acit,Circle-4(1) 3-6-516, Street No.6 Hyderabad Vasu Pharma House Himayatnagar Hydrabad-500 029

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…ITR 147 vi. CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 256 ITR 001(Del.HC) vii. Prakriya Pharmacem vs. ITO reported in 238 taxman 185(Guj.HC) viii.Ratna Trayi Relaity Service Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO reported in 356 ITR 493(Guj.HC) ix.Vipan Khanna vs.CIT reported in 255 ITR 220(P&H) x. Dell India Pvt.Ltd.Jt.CIT,LTU reported in 432 ITR 212 (Kar.HC) xi. Indian and Eastern News paper society vs. CIT reported in 119 ITR 996 xii. Maharaj kumar Kamal singh vs CIT reported in 35 ITR 1 (SC) xiii.CIT vs. A.Raman & Co. reported in 67 ITR 11 (SC) xiv. Bankipur club Ltd. vs CIT reported in 82 ITR 831(SC) xv. Mukesh Modi vs. DCIT re…

Vasu Pharma Distributors, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1622/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Vasu Pharma Distributors Vs. Acit,Circle-4(1) 3-6-516, Street No.6 Hyderabad Vasu Pharma House Himayatnagar Hydrabad-500 029

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…ITR 147 vi. CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 256 ITR 001(Del.HC) vii. Prakriya Pharmacem vs. ITO reported in 238 taxman 185(Guj.HC) viii.Ratna Trayi Relaity Service Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO reported in 356 ITR 493(Guj.HC) ix.Vipan Khanna vs.CIT reported in 255 ITR 220(P&H) x. Dell India Pvt.Ltd.Jt.CIT,LTU reported in 432 ITR 212 (Kar.HC) xi. Indian and Eastern News paper society vs. CIT reported in 119 ITR 996 xii. Maharaj kumar Kamal singh vs CIT reported in 35 ITR 1 (SC) xiii.CIT vs. A.Raman & Co. reported in 67 ITR 11 (SC) xiv. Bankipur club Ltd. vs CIT reported in 82 ITR 831(SC) xv. Mukesh Modi vs. DCIT re…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata vs. B.P.Poddar Foundation for Education

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITAT/143/2021HC Calcutta13 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(b)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…the proceedings though the reasons for such issue were not included in the notice under Section 148(2). The decisions of the Kerala High Court in Travancore Cements Ltd. [2008] 305 ITR 170 and of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vipan Khhanna [2002] 255 ITR 220 would, therefore, no longer hold the field. However, in so far as the second line of authority is concerned, which is reflected in the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343, Explanation 3 as inserted by Parliament would not take away the basis of that decision. The view which was taken by the Rajasthan Hi…

N Jaideep Reddy, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 623/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. M. Narmada, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 224Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…16, the time limit for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) expired on 30.09.2015 and the entire proceedings stood terminated on 30.09.2015. 12. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vippin Khanna reported in 255 ITR 220 and the CBDT Circular No.549 of 31/10/1989 reported in 182 ITR (ST)001, he submitted that the assessment stood terminated and no proceedings were pending as on 30.09.2015. He submitted that when the entire assessment were subject to search u/s 132 on 18.2.2016 and no proceedings were pending in respect of the above mentioned assessees, the ques…

N Jaiveer Reddy, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 622/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. M. Narmada, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 224Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…16, the time limit for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) expired on 30.09.2015 and the entire proceedings stood terminated on 30.09.2015. 12. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vippin Khanna reported in 255 ITR 220 and the CBDT Circular No.549 of 31/10/1989 reported in 182 ITR (ST)001, he submitted that the assessment stood terminated and no proceedings were pending as on 30.09.2015. He submitted that when the entire assessment were subject to search u/s 132 on 18.2.2016 and no proceedings were pending in respect of the above mentioned assessees, the ques…

K Laxma Reddy, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 621/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. M. Narmada, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 224Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…16, the time limit for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) expired on 30.09.2015 and the entire proceedings stood terminated on 30.09.2015. 12. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vippin Khanna reported in 255 ITR 220 and the CBDT Circular No.549 of 31/10/1989 reported in 182 ITR (ST)001, he submitted that the assessment stood terminated and no proceedings were pending as on 30.09.2015. He submitted that when the entire assessment were subject to search u/s 132 on 18.2.2016 and no proceedings were pending in respect of the above mentioned assessees, the ques…

K Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 619/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. M. Narmada, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 224Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…16, the time limit for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) expired on 30.09.2015 and the entire proceedings stood terminated on 30.09.2015. 12. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vippin Khanna reported in 255 ITR 220 and the CBDT Circular No.549 of 31/10/1989 reported in 182 ITR (ST)001, he submitted that the assessment stood terminated and no proceedings were pending as on 30.09.2015. He submitted that when the entire assessment were subject to search u/s 132 on 18.2.2016 and no proceedings were pending in respect of the above mentioned assessees, the ques…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Sri C Gangadhara Murthy, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2400/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Shri C. Gangadhara Murthy Income-Tax, No. 322, 3Rd A Corss, 2Nd Block Circle - 6(2)(1) 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore . Bangalore 560079. Pan – Agipg 2668 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2

…a), CIT v. Abad Fisheries [2002] 258 ITR 641 (Ker.), Aditya & Co. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 47 (Punj. & Har.), Elegant Chemicals Enterprises (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (supra), Pradeep Kumar Har Saran Lal (supra), Vipan Khanna v. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 220 (Punj. & Har.), Deepak Kumar Poddar v. Union of India [1997] 224 ITR 95 (Pat.), A. Pusa Lal v. CIT [1988] 169 ITR 215 (AP) and Jorawar Singh Baid v. Asstt. CIT [1992] 198 ITR 47 (Cal.). 15. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. In our considered view, the ld. AR is proceeding on the presumption that a procee…

Gunti Ashwin Kumar, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2365/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…B.N. Sharma Vs. CIT, 226 ITR 442, (SC) 8. Engineering Impex (P) Ltd. Vs. DD Sharma, 244 ITR 247 (Delhi HC) 9. CIT Vs. Onkar Saran & Sons, 195 ITR 001 (SC) 10. Pr. CIT Vs. Control & Switchgear Contractors Ltd., 377 ITR 215 (Delhi HC) 11. Vipan Khanna Vs. CIT, 255 ITR 220 (P&H HC) :- 11 -: ITA Nos. 2360 to 2365/Hyd/18 Gunti Prasad and others, Hyd. 16. The ld. DR, on the other relied on the orders of revenue authorities and objecting to the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that since in this case specific document containing incriminating evidence was found in the course of search and undisclo…

Gunti Naveen Kumar, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2364/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…B.N. Sharma Vs. CIT, 226 ITR 442, (SC) 8. Engineering Impex (P) Ltd. Vs. DD Sharma, 244 ITR 247 (Delhi HC) 9. CIT Vs. Onkar Saran & Sons, 195 ITR 001 (SC) 10. Pr. CIT Vs. Control & Switchgear Contractors Ltd., 377 ITR 215 (Delhi HC) 11. Vipan Khanna Vs. CIT, 255 ITR 220 (P&H HC) :- 11 -: ITA Nos. 2360 to 2365/Hyd/18 Gunti Prasad and others, Hyd. 16. The ld. DR, on the other relied on the orders of revenue authorities and objecting to the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that since in this case specific document containing incriminating evidence was found in the course of search and undisclo…

Gunti Anil Kumar, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2363/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…B.N. Sharma Vs. CIT, 226 ITR 442, (SC) 8. Engineering Impex (P) Ltd. Vs. DD Sharma, 244 ITR 247 (Delhi HC) 9. CIT Vs. Onkar Saran & Sons, 195 ITR 001 (SC) 10. Pr. CIT Vs. Control & Switchgear Contractors Ltd., 377 ITR 215 (Delhi HC) 11. Vipan Khanna Vs. CIT, 255 ITR 220 (P&H HC) :- 11 -: ITA Nos. 2360 to 2365/Hyd/18 Gunti Prasad and others, Hyd. 16. The ld. DR, on the other relied on the orders of revenue authorities and objecting to the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that since in this case specific document containing incriminating evidence was found in the course of search and undisclo…

Gunti Prasad, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2362/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…B.N. Sharma Vs. CIT, 226 ITR 442, (SC) 8. Engineering Impex (P) Ltd. Vs. DD Sharma, 244 ITR 247 (Delhi HC) 9. CIT Vs. Onkar Saran & Sons, 195 ITR 001 (SC) 10. Pr. CIT Vs. Control & Switchgear Contractors Ltd., 377 ITR 215 (Delhi HC) 11. Vipan Khanna Vs. CIT, 255 ITR 220 (P&H HC) :- 11 -: ITA Nos. 2360 to 2365/Hyd/18 Gunti Prasad and others, Hyd. 16. The ld. DR, on the other relied on the orders of revenue authorities and objecting to the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that since in this case specific document containing incriminating evidence was found in the course of search and undisclo…

Gunti Prasad, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2361/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…B.N. Sharma Vs. CIT, 226 ITR 442, (SC) 8. Engineering Impex (P) Ltd. Vs. DD Sharma, 244 ITR 247 (Delhi HC) 9. CIT Vs. Onkar Saran & Sons, 195 ITR 001 (SC) 10. Pr. CIT Vs. Control & Switchgear Contractors Ltd., 377 ITR 215 (Delhi HC) 11. Vipan Khanna Vs. CIT, 255 ITR 220 (P&H HC) :- 11 -: ITA Nos. 2360 to 2365/Hyd/18 Gunti Prasad and others, Hyd. 16. The ld. DR, on the other relied on the orders of revenue authorities and objecting to the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that since in this case specific document containing incriminating evidence was found in the course of search and undisclo…

Gunti Prasad (HUF), Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2360/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahusl.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…B.N. Sharma Vs. CIT, 226 ITR 442, (SC) 8. Engineering Impex (P) Ltd. Vs. DD Sharma, 244 ITR 247 (Delhi HC) 9. CIT Vs. Onkar Saran & Sons, 195 ITR 001 (SC) 10. Pr. CIT Vs. Control & Switchgear Contractors Ltd., 377 ITR 215 (Delhi HC) 11. Vipan Khanna Vs. CIT, 255 ITR 220 (P&H HC) :- 11 -: ITA Nos. 2360 to 2365/Hyd/18 Gunti Prasad and others, Hyd. 16. The ld. DR, on the other relied on the orders of revenue authorities and objecting to the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that since in this case specific document containing incriminating evidence was found in the course of search and undisclo…

La Cera Mall Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 12 (3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 337/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 337/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2010-11) La Cera Mall Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ The Income Tax Officer Plot No.44/A, Govt. Ind. Ward-12(3)(3) Vs. Est., Opp. Ipca Room No.224, Aayakar Laboratories, M. G. Road, Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai- Charkop, Kandiwali (West), 400020. Mumbai-400067. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 461/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer बिधम/ La Cera Mall Pvt. Ltd. Ward-12(3)(3) Plot No.44/A, Govt. Ind. Vs. Room No.224, Aayakar Est., Opp. Ipca Bhavan, M. K. Road, Laboratories, M. G. Road, Mumbai-400020. Charkop, Kandiwali (West), Mumbai-400067. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacl9996K (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Revenue By: Shri Mehul Jain सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/10/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/11/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm): The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 30.10.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -21, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2010-11. 461/M/2020 A.Y. 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…settled the reopening of the assessment could not be made for making 11 461/M/2020 A.Y. 2010-11 fishing and roving inquiry. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Harayana High Court in the case of Vipan Khanna Vs. CIT Reported 255 ITR 220. 8. On appraisal of the above mentioned finding, we are of the view that the AO has no tangible material with entitle him or to even suspect that the income has escaped assessment. Accordingly, the finding of the CIT(A) on this legal issue is not liable to be sustainable, hence, we set aside the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue and decide thes…

M/S Shivalika Realities P Ltd, Indore vs. ITO 5(1), Indore

In the result of appeals of the assessee for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 vide ITA no

ITA 95/IND/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10

…n where no addition has been made on the sole issue for which notices u/s. 148 were issued but, the additions have been made on some other grounds. In similar circumstances, the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Vipin Khanna vs. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 220 (P&H) was pleased to quash the entire additions made in an assessment framed in pursuance to a notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act. The similar views have been expressed by the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Travancore Cements Ltd. vs. ACIT & Anr. (2008) 305 ITR 170 (Ker.), Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories L…

M/S Shivalika Realities P Ltd, Indore vs. ITO 5(1), Indore

In the result of appeals of the assessee for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 vide ITA no

ITA 94/IND/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10

…n where no addition has been made on the sole issue for which notices u/s. 148 were issued but, the additions have been made on some other grounds. In similar circumstances, the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Vipin Khanna vs. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 220 (P&H) was pleased to quash the entire additions made in an assessment framed in pursuance to a notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act. The similar views have been expressed by the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Travancore Cements Ltd. vs. ACIT & Anr. (2008) 305 ITR 170 (Ker.), Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories L…

Anil K Shah (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 23 (2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 214/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Shri Anil K. Shah (Huf), The Ito Ward – 23(2)(1), 703, Supershav, Nahur Road, 111, Matru Mandir, Sarvodaya Nagar, Mulund (West), Tardeo, Grant Road, Mumbai - 400080 Vs. Mumbai Pan: Aadha5072M (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Shri Anil K. Shah, The Ito Ward – 23(2)(1), 703, Supershav, Nahur Road, 111, Matru Mandir, Sarvodaya Nagar, Mulund (West), Tardeo, Grant Road, Mumbai - 400080 Vs. Mumbai Pan: Aapps6042M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devendra Jain (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Jernold Michel (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 21/08/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 10/09/2020

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain (AR)For Respondent: Shri Jernold Michel (DR)
Section 142Section 143Section 144Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Shri Anil K. Shah (HUF), The ITO Ward – 23(2)(1), 703, Supershav, Nahur Road, 111, Matru Mandir, Sarvodaya Nagar, Mulund (West), Tardeo, Grant Road, Mumbai - 400080 Vs. Mumbai PAN: AADHA5072M (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Shri Anil K. Shah, The ITO Ward – 23(2)(1), 703, Supershav, Nahur Road, 111, Matru Mandir, Sarvodaya Nagar, Mulund (West), Tardeo, Grant Road, Mumbai - 400080 Vs. Mumbai PAN: AAPPS6042M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : S…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the ld AO on the limited issue that order passed by the ld AO is barred by limitation. Ground No. 1 is dismissed

ITA 6079/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(Ltu), Vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd, Circle-1, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place, Nbcc Plaza Pusp Vihar, Rk Puram, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263

…ravels Ltd.. Vs. DCIT: 258 ITR 533 (Cal.) 20. Berger Paints India Ltd., Vs. ACIT: 322 ITR 369 (Cal) 21. Aventis Pharma Limited, 323 ITR 570(Bom) 23. Usha International Limited, 348 ITR 485 (Del) 24. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 292 ITR 49 (Del) 25. Vipan Khanna, 255 ITR 220 (P&H) 26. NYK Line (India) Ltd. 68 DTR 90(Bom) 27. Bhor Industries Ltd, 267 ITR 161 (Bom) 28. Hindustan Lever Ltd, 268 ITR 332 (Bom ) 29. Bhogwati Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, 269 ITR 186(Bom) 30. Ajanta Pharma Ltd. 267 ITR 200 (Bom ) 31. Grindwell Norton , 267 ITR 673 (Bom) 32. Feather Foam Ent.(P) Ltd. 296 ITR 342(Del) 33. Abdul Rahman Sail. 3…

Anurag, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1023/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhui.T.A. No. 1023/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Anurag, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), E-26, Shastri Nagar, Ghaziabad Meerut Uttar Padesh Pin: 250002 (Pan: Aawpa7602C) (Assessee) (Respondent Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1023/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 ANURAG, vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), E-26, SHASTRI NAGAR, GHAZIABAD MEERUT UTTAR PADESH PIN: 250002 (PAN: AAWPA7602C) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR. ORDER The Assessee has filed this appeal against the impugned order dated 04.11.2018 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Ghaziabad on the following grounds:- 1. That there was no valid assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1…