VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. v. CIT & Annr

360 ITR 682High Court2014#997 most cited

What is VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. v. CIT & Annr authority for?

The Tribunal should not be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings, particularly when those questions are purely legal and jurisdictional.

108

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2025.

Also referred to as

VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. v. CIT · assessment proceedings · questions of law · Tribunal jurisdiction · National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 132(4)Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)section 32(1)(i)closely held companycost plus methodaccumulated profitssection 43arelated party transactioninitial assessment yearsection 80hdeduction under section 80iaenhanced compensationsection 80a(5)

Judgments citing VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. v. CIT & Annr

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 20/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 19/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 18/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 2913/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 2912/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 2911/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 2910/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 2909/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

Panna Lal & Co., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee for AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19 are allowed and all the four appeals of the Revenue for AYs 2014-

ITA 2908/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 145(3)Section 153A

…cisions: i) CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC). ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). iii) VMT Spinning Co. Ltd. vs. CIT & Annr. (2016) 389 ITR 326 (P&H). iv) CIT vs. Sam Global Securities (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Delhi). v) Siksha vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 0112 (Orissa). vi) Inventors Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 548 (Bom.). 4.2. Additional ground No. 1, 2 and 4 have not been pressed by the assessee. Hence these grounds are not being considered by us for admission thereof. 5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties. The…

Jammat-E-Islami Hind, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1289/DEL/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2023

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: Na Jammat-E-Islami Hind, Vs Cit (Exemptions), D-321, Dawat Nagar, New Delhi. Abul Fazal Enclave, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi – 110 025. Pan: Aaatj3324L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Waseem Arshad, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT, DR
Section 12ASection 148Section 292B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: NA Jammat-E-Islami Hind, Vs CIT (Exemptions), D-321, Dawat Nagar, New Delhi. Abul Fazal Enclave, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi – 110 025. PAN: AAATJ3324L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 09.11.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 20.11.2023 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 31.03.2023…

Phool Chand, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-6(4), Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 513/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 54

…on does not restrict the power of the Appellate Authorities to allow a claim even if it is not made by way of filing the revised return before the AO. For this proposition, reliance is placed on the following cases:- CIT Vs. Sam Global Securities Ltd. (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Del.) (HC) Claim not made in the return could not be rejected by CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee had not filed a revised return within the time allowed under sec. 139(5) but had only filed a revised computation. Tribunal also has power to allow a claim which is not made in the return. CIT Vs. Mitesh Impex & Ors. (2014) 104 DTR 169 (Guj.)…

DCIT, CC- 1, Faridabad vs. Sadjyoti Traders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection

ITA 3854/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganeshasstt. Yr: 2006-07

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…1 ITA no. 3854/Del/2017 & CO no. 31/Del/2021 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Yr: 2006-07 DCIT, Central Circle-1, Vs M/s sadjyoti Traders Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad. 5, Village Tajpur, Badarpur, New Delhi. PAN- AAICS7343F APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O. No. 31/Del/2021 ( In ITA No. 3854/DEL/2017) Asstt. Yr: 2006-07 M/s sadjyoti Traders Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, Central Circle-1, 5, Village Tajpur, Badarpur, Faridabad. New Delhi. PAN- AAICS7343F Cross objector RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Dr. Rakesh G…

Magna Automations Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 16(1), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1109/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaa.Y. 2019-20

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2019-20 M/s Magna Automations Limited, Vs DCIT, Circle-16(1), B-9, Ground Floor, D/S Quarters, New Delhi. West Patel Nagar, New Delhi-110048 PAN- AAACM0255E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Sh. Yudhister Mehani, CA Department represented by Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR Date of hearing 10.10.2023 13.10.2023 Date of pronouncement O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The assessee has come in appeal against the order dated 16.02.2023, for the assessmen…

Sara International Pvt.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Add. CIT, Range-22, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 3307/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ing refund of taxes paid by him in the return of income. We find the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Page 7 of 16 ITA Nos.3307 & 1974/Del/2019 Sara International Pvt. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT / JCIT CIT vs. Sam Global Securities Ltd. reported in 360 ITR 682 (Delhi) had considered the similar issue and had applied all the decisions and given a comprehensive judgment as under: “5. The tribunal has reversed the said findings after referring to the factual matrix. Reference was made to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Mr. P. Firm, (1965) 56 ITR 67 (SC) and Circular No. 114 XL-35 of 1955…

JCIT, Circle-22(1), New Delhi vs. Sara International Pvt.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 1974/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ing refund of taxes paid by him in the return of income. We find the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Page 7 of 16 ITA Nos.3307 & 1974/Del/2019 Sara International Pvt. Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT / JCIT CIT vs. Sam Global Securities Ltd. reported in 360 ITR 682 (Delhi) had considered the similar issue and had applied all the decisions and given a comprehensive judgment as under: “5. The tribunal has reversed the said findings after referring to the factual matrix. Reference was made to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Mr. P. Firm, (1965) 56 ITR 67 (SC) and Circular No. 114 XL-35 of 1955…

Jatinder Pal Singh, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 18, New Delhi

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

ITA 1670/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT DR
Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1670/Del./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) Jatinder Pal Singh, vs. DCIT, C/o D-6/13, Vasant Vihar, Central Circle 18, New Delhi – 110 057. New Delhi. (PAN : ALPPS9874G) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 19.06.2023 Date of Order : 22.06.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the or…

M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 334/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

…laims need not be those which became available on account of change of circumstances of law but which were even available when the return was filed. 36. The Delhi High Court once again in recent judgment in the case of CIT v. Sam Global Securities Ltd. [2014] 360 ITR 682/[2013] 38 taxmann.com 129 observed that the Courts have taken a pragmatic view and not a technical one as to what is required to be determined in taxable income. In that sense assessment proceedings are not adversarial in nature. With these observations Court confirmed the view of the Tribunal reversing the decision of the assessing officer rejec…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 273/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

…laims need not be those which became available on account of change of circumstances of law but which were even available when the return was filed. 36. The Delhi High Court once again in recent judgment in the case of CIT v. Sam Global Securities Ltd. [2014] 360 ITR 682/[2013] 38 taxmann.com 129 observed that the Courts have taken a pragmatic view and not a technical one as to what is required to be determined in taxable income. In that sense assessment proceedings are not adversarial in nature. With these observations Court confirmed the view of the Tribunal reversing the decision of the assessing officer rejec…

Prashant Chandra Sadh, Mumbai vs. ITO International Tax-4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 619/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleprashant Chandrasadh, Ito,(Intltax),C4(2)(1), C-1804, Oberoi Woods, Room.No.1708, बनाम/ Off Western Express Air India Building, Vs. Highway,Goregaon East, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400063. Mumba-400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Biips5544N (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.ARFor Respondent: Mr.Soumendu Kumar Dash.DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 194ISection 68

…ords straight, we are submitting herewith a REVISED COMPUTATION OF INCOME for your perusal and record. (Annexure A). We are submitting this additional information before the completion of assessment as per the ratio of CIT v. Sam Global Securities Ltd [2014] 360 ITR 682 (DELHI) wherein it was decided that the assessee has the right to make a claim before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. We also rely on the judgment in the case of Balmukund Acharya vs. DCIT ITA No.217 of 2001 dated 19/12/2008. (Bombay High court) and CBDT Circular No.14-XL (35) dated 11-04-1955...wherein it was commented that…

Asian Hotels (North) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 3(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 6983/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: C. AFor Respondent: Ms. Suman Malik
Section 43B

…e power to entertain the claim of the assessee, which was not made by way of revised return. Reliance was placed on the following decisions:- (i) CIT Vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. (2008) 172 Taxman 258 (Del.); (ii) CIT Vs. Sam Global Securities Ltd. (2014) 360 ITR 682 (Del.); (iii) PCIT Vs. E-Funds International India Pvt. Ltd. 379 ITR 292 (Del). 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. The ld. DR submits that the issue may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. 5. Heard rival parties perused various orders of the autho…