“reassessment proceedings”

ACIT 17 (3), Mumbai vs. Vijay N. Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Acit – Circle – 17(3) V. Shri Vijay N. Mehta Room No. 137, 1St Floor Room No. 13, 338 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road N.N. Street, Masjid Bunder Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400009 Pan: Aadpm8512G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manoj Mundra Department By Shri S.N. Kabra

availed accommodation entries from various dealers who are said to be providing accommodation entries without there being transportation of any goods. In the reassessment proceedings, the assessee was required to prove the genuineness of the purchases made from various parties as mentioned in the Assessment Order. In response, assessee vide

Shri Parasnath H Bharti, Mumbai vs. ITO 23 (1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

referred that the 4 Shri Parasnath H. Bharti assessee has not brought this issue before the AO during the course of reassessment proceedings. I find that in several case laws it has been settled by Honourable higher courts that non issuance of the notice

Mr. Mayank Jayantilal Desai, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 648/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Mayank Jayantilal Desai बिधम/ Cit(A), Nfac 20/20, Praveen Terrace, Dr. Delhi-110503. Vs. D.D Sathe Marg, Mumbai- 400004. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapd9253A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Ms. Bhoomika Patel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 27.02.2021 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2010- 11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “ 1. Natural Justice 1.1 It Is Submitted That, In The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Appellate Order So Framed Be Held As Bad & Illegal, As:

Learned Commissioner of Income - tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, ["Ld. CIT (A)"], erred in confirming the action of the A.O. in initiating reassessment proceedings and framing the assessment of the Appellant by invoking the provisions of section 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Income

DCIT 1 (1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross

validity of a notice under section 148 of the Act has to be tested on the basis of the reasons recorded for initiating the reassessment proceedings. The reasons recorded cannot be supplemented by affidavits and other material. In this regard, Mr Murlidharan's reliance upon the judgment of this Court

Hathway Investment Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle-12 (2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, in terms aforesaid

Private Limited (1992) 198 ITR 297(SC) was in context of re-assessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 wherein Hon‟ble Supreme Court held that reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 are for the benefit of revenue and not the assessee, wherein the mandate is to bring to tax income which

Dy CIT - CC-2(3), Mumbai vs. Avinash Nivrutti Bhosale, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed for A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Dy. Commissioner

Podar Education Sports Trust, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, CC-1(4), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals for AY 2012-13 & 2013-14 are allowed and appeals for AY 2015-16 & 2016-17 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Kuldip Singh (Jm)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Kuldip Singh (JM) I.T.A. Nos

DCIT (Ex) - 1(1), Mumbai vs. The Lohar Chawl Dawoodi Bohra Merchants Association, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishithe Dy. Commissioner Of The Lohar Chawl Dawoodi Income Tax (Ex) -1(1) Bohra Merchants’ Association Room No. 506, 5 Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, 56/62, Chandabai Bldg., Vs. Lalbaug, Parel, 2Nd Floor, Mangaldas Road, Lohar Chawl, Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 002 Pan No. Aaatl0024D Appellant .. Respondent

therefore submitted that complete information was duly confirmed submitted before the assessing officer. He further referred to paragraph number 9 wherein, during the reassessment proceedings for assessment year 2008 – 09 the learned assessing officer summoned u/s 131 of the Act to 78 members randomly who appeared and filed confirmation ... that the assessee was given an opportunity from January 2015 to substantiate claims but assessee did not submit the same till the conclusion of reassessment proceedings in the month of March. We find that the show cause notice was issued to the assessee only on 13.03.2015, which was replied

Gemological Research (Thailand) Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The ACIT (International Taxation) Centre-2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

having PE in India, is decided in favour of the assessee, there would be no need to decide ground No.1 challenging validity of reassessment proceedings. Even the other grounds in appeal assailing attribution and estimation of gross profit, raised without prejudice to primary ground would become academic. 3. Shri Sanjay

The Board of Control for Cricket in India, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cent. Cir. 35, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 2851 & 2852/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07) The Board Of Control For बिधम/ Dcit Central Circle-6(2) 19Th Floor, Air India Cricket In India Vs. Wankhede Stadium, „D‟ Road, Building, Nariman Point, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatb0186A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwalla Revenue By: Shri A. K. Kardam (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 09.01.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -54, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2005- 06 & 2006-07. Ita. No.2851/Mum/2017 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 09.01.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -54, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2005- 06. Ita Nos. 2851 & 2852/M/2017 A.Ys.2005-06 & 2006-07 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

take place because of the records not being kept well but that lapse, according to the learned Departmental Representative, would not vitiate the reassessment proceedings. In support of this claim, learned Departmental Representative has submitted certain material, including a copy of the note sheet recording proceedings before the Assessing Officer ... Officer at the point of time when notice under section 143(2) was issued. Such a notice thus can not be relevant for the reassessment proceedings in question. There is no other reference to issuance of the notice under section 143(2) on the proceedings sheet. There is a reference

Ferani Hotels Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 4 (1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal is allowed

noted that the real intent behind providing the reasons recorded to the assessee is to facilitate in contesting the matter during the course of reassessment proceedings and not to use it in raising objections in order to stop the due process of law. 4. Without prejudice to the above ... Page 5 of 7 5. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) on several issues including on validity of the impugned reassessment proceedings. Learned CIT(A) upheld, inter alia, validity of reassessment proceedings. While doing so, learned CIT(A) observed as follows:- 5. Ground

Advanced Enzyme Technologies Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle - 1, Thane

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Advanced Enzyme The Asst. Commissioner Of Technologies Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-1, Room No.22, 6Th Floor, B – Wing, Sun Magnetica, „A‟ Wing, Ashar It Partk, Ambika Vs. 5Th Floor, Lic Service Road, Nagar, Road No.16Z, Wagle Louiswadi, Thane(W) Estate, Thane (W), Mumbai-400 604 Mumbai- 400 604 Pan No. Aacfe7262L Appellant .. Respondent

issued notice u/s 142 (1) asking for the details which were already available with him during original assessment proceedings. He therefore submitted that the reassessment proceedings are bad in law if the objections were disposed of in a cursory/mechanical manner without dealing with the various objections raised by the assessee ... been issued u/s 148 of the act without obtaining appropriate sanction of the concerned authority u/s 151 of the act and therefore the reassessment proceedings itself is invalid. He also challenged the approval granted u/s 151 of the act on the ground of non-application of the mind on part