“Section 139(5)”

ELECTRONFAB ENGINEERING PVT LTD,SEEPZ SEZ MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

response to the defect notice\nu/s 139(9) issued by the CPC. It is not a revised return under section 139(5) of the Act. This\nreturn was filed to remove the defect as notified vide defect memo dated 22.11.2024 (Ref. Pg.\n107 & 108 of Paper Book).\n\n3. Prior ... n115BAA of the Act, even if the original return was filed otherwise. He further contended that\nunder settled law, a revised return under section 139(5) of the Act substitutes the original return\nand is deemed as filed under section 139(1) of the Act. Thus

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

assessing officer had no jurisdiction to consider the claim made by the assessee in the revised return filed after the time prescribed by Section 139(5) for filing a revised return had already expired. 9. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment of the High Court

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

assessing officer had no jurisdiction to consider the claim made by the assessee in the revised return filed after the time prescribed by Section 139(5) for filing a revised return had already expired. 9. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment of the High Court

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nMUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue’s bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Jagadish

only in this assessment year that it has been characterised as capital gain by way of filing of revised return under section 139(5) of the Act. Thus, the aforesaid CBDT circular has given a concession to the assessee which cannot be denied since circulars issued by the CBDT

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-8(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue’s bearing ITA No

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Jagadish

only in this assessment year that it has been characterised as capital gain by way of filing of revised return under section 139(5) of the Act. Thus, the aforesaid CBDT circular has given a concession to the assessee which cannot be denied since circulars issued by the CBDT

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED (TAGIC),MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nMUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND\nSHRI

TULSIDAS VIRJI CHOTHANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 27(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailtulsidas Virji Chothani, 601, 6Th Floor, Shantrunjay Building, Neelkanth Valley, Ghatkopar East, Mumbai - 400077 ............... Appellant Pan: Aabpc0337M V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(3)(1) It-Office, Vasi Railway Station Building, ……………… Respondent Navi Mumbai - 400703

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH