“reopening of assessment”

P and Y Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5 (2) 1, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Ito P & Y Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Ward 5 (2) 1 123, A Wing Mittal Court, Aayakar Bhavan, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai 400021 M K Road, Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcp2579B Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ar Revenue By : Shri H M Bhatt, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.04.2024

same income. Thereafter, notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 27th February 2021. Assessee objected to the reopening of assessment, which was disposed off as per order dated 30th March 2021. v. The reason for reopening states that information is received from the office

V.K.Nanavaty Share and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2614/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13) V. K. Nanavaty Share & बिधम/ Ito, Ward-4(2)(4) R. No. 647, 6Th Floor, Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd Vs. R-709, Rotunda Building, Aaykar Bhavan, Bombay Stock Exchange, Maharishi Karve Road, M. S. Marg, Fort, Mumbai- Churchgate, Mumbai- 400023. 400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacv9670N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ravikant Pathak Revenue By: Dr. Yogendra T. Wakare सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/04/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi, Dated 30.05.2023 For Ay. 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of The Reopening By Ao (Jurisdiction) U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). So The Legal Issue Is Taken Up First.

impugned action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is before us and first of all raised the legal issue against the reopening of assessment. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. Since the assessee has challenged the jurisdiction of AO to have reopened the assessment ... conditions precedent necessary for re- opening the assessment u/s Section 147 of the Act i.e. Firstly whether AO has recorded the reasons before reopening the assessment. And if so, whether the reasons recorded fulfil the requirement of law or not. The fundamental requirement of law as stipulated

Aspen International Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Central Circle 4(4), Mumbai

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

case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Learned Assessing Officer in reopening the assessment completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2.On the facts and circumstances

Goldiam International Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC 1(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed partly

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Goldiam International Limited Plot No.16/17 Gems & Dcit, Central Circle 1(2) Vs. Jewelry Complex Seepz Sez Mumbai Andheri East, Mumbai-400 096 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacg2271J

circumstances of the Appellant’s case and in law the learned CIT (A) erred in confirming the action of learned Assessing Officer in reopening the assessment under Section 147 by issue of notice dated 29.06.2021 under Section 148 of the Act which is bad in law and without jurisdiction ... circumstances of the Appellant’s case and in law the learned CIT (A) erred in confirming the action of Learned Assessing Officer of reopening the assessment under Section 147 by issue of notice dated 29.06.2021 under Section 148 which is merely due to change of opinion and therefore reopening

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Aadhaar Wholesale Trading and Distribution Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri, S Rifaur Rahman

return filed on 27.09.2011 may be treated as return filed u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee requested to provide the reasons for reopening the assessment which was duly supplied to it. Objections of the assessee to the reassessment proceedings were rejected in accordance with the decision

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Aadhaar Wholesale Trading and Distribution Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri, S Rifaur Rahman

return filed on 27.09.2011 may be treated as return filed u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee requested to provide the reasons for reopening the assessment which was duly supplied to it. Objections of the assessee to the reassessment proceedings were rejected in accordance with the decision

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Aadhaar Wholesale Trading and Distribution Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri, S Rifaur Rahman

return filed on 27.09.2011 may be treated as return filed u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee requested to provide the reasons for reopening the assessment which was duly supplied to it. Objections of the assessee to the reassessment proceedings were rejected in accordance with the decision

ACIT, Mumbai vs. Aadhaar Wholesale Trading and Distribution Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri, S Rifaur Rahman

return filed on 27.09.2011 may be treated as return filed u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee requested to provide the reasons for reopening the assessment which was duly supplied to it. Objections of the assessee to the reassessment proceedings were rejected in accordance with the decision

Parasmal Bheraram Solanki, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

prays that the order passed by the 110 be struck down as bad in law. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO. I: Ground II: Reopening of assessment bad in law 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC erred in confirming the action ... reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961 ('the Acr') 2. The Appellate prays that reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is void ab-initio and/or otherwise bad-in-law.” 4. During the hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (“learned AR”), at the outset

Shweta Infrastructure & Housing (I) Pvt. Ltd., Nashik vs. DCIT, Circle 13(2)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shweta Infrastructure & Housing Dy. Cit, Circle 13(2)(2), (I) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Samraat Head Quarters, A33, 7Th Marine Lines, Lane, Satpur Midc Road, Nice Mumbai-400020. Area, Nashik-422007. Pan No. Aajcs 4306 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 03/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 04/04/2024

reasons recorded for reopening of respect of objections raised on reasons recorded for reopening of respect of objections raised on reasons recorded for reopening of assessment proceedings. Section 220(6) Stay of demand on the essment proceedings. Section 220(6) Stay of demand on the essment proceedings. Section