Vodafone Idea Ltd. v. CPC

160 Taxmann.com 536High Court2024#14628 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153BSection 13Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 153bfaceless assessmentsection 144c(13)section 144cfinal assessment ordersection 144bsection 153section 15section 13section 144transferopportunity of being heard

Judgments citing Vodafone Idea Ltd. v. CPC

DCIT, MUMBAI vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

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

ITA 4819/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 35D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No.4819/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) DCIT vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited 552, 5TH Floor Aaykar Bhavan, C-27, G Block 27 BKC, Bandra (E) M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 S.O. Mumbai-400051 PAN : AAACK4409J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Madhur Agrawal a/w Shri Bhargav Parekh Respondent by : Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR) Date of hearing : 08/01/2026 Date of pronouncement : 29/01/2026 O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (JM): The instant appeal of the revenu…

EXPRESS FREIGHT RAILWAY CONSORTIUM,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 28(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3120/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year 2021-22 Express Freight Railway Vs. Dcit Consortium Circle – 28 (1) Room No.22, C4 District New Delhi Centre C/O Ircon International Limited Saket South Delhi, New Delhi Pan No. Aabae0055F Appellant Respondent Appellant Sh. Parshant Merharchandani, Advocate Ms. Kanika Jain, Advocate Respondent Sh. Dharm Veer Singh, Cit (Dr)

Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 153BSection 234ASection 270A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘I’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year 2021-22 Express Freight Railway Vs. DCIT Consortium Circle – 28 (1) Room No.22, C4 District New Delhi Centre C/o IRCON International Limited Saket South Delhi, New Delhi PAN No. AABAE0055F Appellant Respondent Appellant Sh. Parshant Merharchandani, Advocate Ms. Kanika Jain, Advocate Respondent Sh. Dharm Veer Singh, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 11.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.01.2026 ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, JM, This appeal is filed by the assessee aga…

EATON POWER QUALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,PUDUCHERRY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 231/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.231/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 v. M/s. Eaton Power Quality Pvt. Ltd., The DCIT, No.2, EVR Street, Sedarpet, Circle-1, Puducherry-605 111. Puducherry. [PAN: AAACC 6943 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.Vishal Kalra, Advocate (Virtual) ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Mr. ARV S…

HUKAM CHAND SINGLA,PANIPAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, PANIPAT

Appeal is allowed

ITA 6171/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 6171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Hukam Chand Singla, Vs Income Tax Officer, House No. 33-A, Shanti Nagar, Ward-1, Model Town, Panipat, Panipat, Haryana-132103 Haryana-132103 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Bdqps7971C Assessee By: Sh. Suresh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2025 Order

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

…. 4. Faced with this situation, the Revenue could hardly dispute that the learned PCIT’s sanction obtained herein comes under section 151(1) than clause (ii) applicable in the assessee’s case. Learned counsel further quotes Vodafone Idea Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2024) 468 ITR 346 (Bom.) quashing a similar notice. I therefore find merit in the assessee’s instant legal ground to quash the impugned reopening itself in very terms therefore. 5. All other pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 30/10/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara) Judici…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION- 2, NEW DELHI vs. HYUNDAI ROTEM COMPANY

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/304/2025HC Delhi29 Oct 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil Agarwal, SSC Mr. ViplavFor Respondent: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Ms. Soumya Singh
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 144C(13)Section 260ASection 92C

…ITA No.304/2025 Page 1 of 46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 29.10.2025 + ITA 304/2025 & CM APPL. 50009/2025 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2, NEW DELHI .....Appellant versus HYUNDAI ROTEM COMPANY .....Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case For the Appellant: Mr. Sunil Agarwal, SSC Mr. Viplav Acharya, Ms. Priya Sarkar, JSC and Mr. Utkarsh Tiwari, Advocates. For the Respondent: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Ms. Soumya Singh and Mr. S…

TRANSUNION INTERNATIONAL INC.,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMM. OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-4(1)(2), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2698/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Adv. a/w
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 47

…n of the AO's order being time barred the ld. AR relied on the following decisions – (1) Vodafone India Ltd. [2023] 156 Taxmann.com 258 (Bom. HC). (2) Louis Dreyfus Company India Pvt. Ltd. [2024] 464 ITR 595 (Del. HC) (3) Taeyang Metal India Pvt. Ltd. [2024] 160 Taxmann.com 536 (Madras HC). (4) Rapiscan Systems Pvt. Ltd. (W.P. Nos. 44891 and 44915 of 2022 dated 09.01.2025 (Telangana HC) (5) Ramco Cements Ltd (TCA No.192 of 2024) (Madras HC) dated 19.12.2024 8. The ld. AR without prejudice to the above submissions alternatively argued that if the Department’s contention that the DRP directions were actually issu…

ALOK KUMAR JAIN ,PEARL PLEASURE vs. ACIT CIR-6, JAIPUR, NEW CERNTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, BHAGWAN DASS ROAD, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN,

ITA 1191/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…pal Director General. In the present case, there is no such approval from the competent authority and as such impugned reassessment is bad in law and liable to be dropped. Case law:- Vodafone Idea Ltd. vs Deputy commissioner of Income Tax and Others [ 2024 ] 468 ITR 346 ( Bombay ) Balkrishna Barsha Sutar vs Income Tax Officer and Others [ 2024 ] 468 ITR 348 ( Bombay ) WS1-23 3. Recourse of Re-assessment proceedings were based on the information Section 147 that search and survey action were carried out in case of taken instead the Tyagi Group and Dutta Group on 16.05.2018. Therefore, of Section Assessing Office…

Vodafone Idea Ltd. v. CPC (160 Taxmann.com 536) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax