← All Phrases

“Section 153(6)”

Section References (mined)Section 153Section 153(6)22 judgments

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2954/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 150Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 153(6)Section 153A

beyond the scope and powers of section 150(1) of the Act read with Explanation (2) to section 153(6) of the Act. 3. That on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) did not appreciate that a finding/direction within the meaning of section

BEST BULL STOCK TRADING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-18, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2953/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 150Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 153(6)Section 153A

beyond the scope and powers of section 150(1) of the Act read with Explanation (2) to section 153(6) of the Act. 3. That on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) did not appreciate that a finding/direction within the meaning of section

SONALBEN SANJAYSINH VIHOL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PATAN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1828/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1827/Ahd/2024 & 1828/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Respectively Sonalben Sanjaysinh Vihol The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/31, Ishan Residency Ward-1, V/S. R C Technical Road Patan – 384 265 Ghatlodia Ahmedabad – 380 061 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Alxpv 4350 Q (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chirag Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Of Even Date 30/07/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2014-2015 & 2016-17. Ita Nos.1827 & 1828/Ahd/2024 Sonalben Sanjaysinh Vihol Vs. Ito Asst.Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Chirag Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 250Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “बी“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद

SONALBEN SANJAYSINH VIHOL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PATAN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1827/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1827/Ahd/2024 & 1828/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Respectively Sonalben Sanjaysinh Vihol The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/31, Ishan Residency Ward-1, V/S. R C Technical Road Patan – 384 265 Ghatlodia Ahmedabad – 380 061 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Alxpv 4350 Q (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chirag Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Of Even Date 30/07/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2014-2015 & 2016-17. Ita Nos.1827 & 1828/Ahd/2024 Sonalben Sanjaysinh Vihol Vs. Ito Asst.Year: 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Chirag Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 250Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "ायपीठ “बी“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD "ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद

ANKIT GUPTA,PUNJABI BAGH vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 44(6) , CIVIC CENTRE,NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5310/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5310/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 बनाम Ankit Gupta, Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, House No.11, Road No.29, Vs. Ward 44(6), Civic Centre, East Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Agypg8404C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 153(6)Section 153CSection 156Section 157ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69A

clarify the objections raised by the Appellant. However, the Ld. AO wrongly considered the limitation date as May 31st 2023, in accordance to Section 153(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. That, the Appellant previously requested that the Ld. AO confirm the status of the Searched Parties

ENVISION SCIENTIFIC PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 228/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 234BSection 270ASection 32ASection 35

necessary for us to set aside the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for this purpose. As per provisions of Section 153(6) of the Act, not-withstanding the time limit provided under Section 153(1), 1(A) & (2) of the Act, effect of the order

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), INDORE, INDORE vs. DIVINE INFRACREATION AND TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly quash the assessment-order made by AO.\nThe assessee's ground is allowed

ITA 272/IND/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2025AY 2010-11
Section 144Section 148Section 68Section 68(1)

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nINDORE BENCH, INDORE\nBEFORE SHRI B.M

SRI.PARAYARUKANDY VETTATH GANGADHARAN,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), CALICUT

In the result, the instant appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 157/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasparayarukandy Vettath Gangadharan Dy. Cit, Circle - 1(1) Kerala Transport Company (Decd., Calicut Vs. Represented By Lrs.) K.T.C. Building, Ymca Calicut 673001 [Pan: Adhpg8318B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar C., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 150(1)Section 153Section 2(22)(e)Section 268A

since attained finality, reference to the Board Circular is of no consequence. 3.4 Even as pointed out by Shri Suresh, albeit w.r.t. section 153(6)(i) r/w Expl. 2, instead of s. 153 (3)(ii) r/w Explanation 3 thereto, i.e., as it stood prior to its substitution by Finance

SMT. MAYA MOHAN DESAI,MUMBAI vs. ITO-WARD-26(2)(6), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed with the above direction

ITA 1257/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kand, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Smt. Maya Mohan Desai Ito Ward-26(2)(6) 604, Marve Queen-2, Mumbai -400 051 Upper Kharodi, Malad (W), Vs. Mumbai – 400 095

For Appellant: Shri Kiran MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Indira Adakil
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50CSection 50C(1)

limitation for reopening the case of Shri Ninad Desai is generally barred, the Bench was of the view to invoke the provisions of section 153(6)(i) read with Explanation 2(b) to section 153 of the Act which provides for assessment or reassessment of any person in consequence

UK PAINTS (OVERSEAS) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-08, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 678/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 292C

order dated 04.05.2022 in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal case (2022 SSC Online SC 543). In view of the specific provisions of section 153(6) of the Act, all the cases reopened u/s 147/148 of the Act will be required to be completed by 30.04.2024." 5. During the course

UK PAINTS (OVERSEAS) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-08, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 677/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 292C

order dated 04.05.2022 in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal case (2022 SSC Online SC 543). In view of the specific provisions of section 153(6) of the Act, all the cases reopened u/s 147/148 of the Act will be required to be completed by 30.04.2024." 5. During the course

UK PAINTS (OVERSEAS) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-08, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 676/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 292C

order dated 04.05.2022 in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal case (2022 SSC Online SC 543). In view of the specific provisions of section 153(6) of the Act, all the cases reopened u/s 147/148 of the Act will be required to be completed by 30.04.2024." 5. During the course

UK PAINTS (OVERSEAS) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-08, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 675/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153CSection 292C

order dated 04.05.2022 in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal case (2022 SSC Online SC 543). In view of the specific provisions of section 153(6) of the Act, all the cases reopened u/s 147/148 of the Act will be required to be completed by 30.04.2024." 5. During the course

DY CIT-1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3916/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Sushil LakhaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Riddhi Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

same plea, after putting these persons to notice, in terms of the provisions of Section 153 in terms of the provisions of Section 153(6)(i) read with (6)(i) read with Explanation 2 (b) to Section 153 Explanation 2 (b) to Section 153- which is materially the same which

M/S THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO. OP BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO-1(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3878/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Sushil LakhaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Riddhi Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

same plea, after putting these persons to notice, in terms of the provisions of Section 153 in terms of the provisions of Section 153(6)(i) read with (6)(i) read with Explanation 2 (b) to Section 153 Explanation 2 (b) to Section 153- which is materially the same which

DCIT CIRCLE-20(1), NEW DELHI vs. PLANETCAST TECHNOLOGIES LTD (FORMELY KNOWN AS ESSEL SHYAM TECHNOLOGIES LTD.), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8519/DEL/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. K. K. Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 153Section 153(3)Section 153(6)Section 250Section 254Section 260Section 262Section 263Section 264

order of the AO taking view that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is time barred as per time limit prescribed in Section 153(6) of the Act, while not appreciating the fact that there was specific direction from the Hon’ble ITAT to the AO to pass ... submitted that the Assessment Order passed by the AO complying with the directions of ITAT is time barred as per the provisions of Section 153(6). 5. The assessee brought to our notice that the ITAT passed its order on 10.06.2016 in the case of the assessee

NAYAN ARVIND LALAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO, 24(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, all these five appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 705/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Mrs. Ruchi M Rathod, ARFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

those persons who entered in to these transactions, after issuing them notices , keeping in mind provisions of section 153(6) of the Act. iv. If the account is found to be operated by the assessee, the assessee is also duty bound to state whether he is an accommodation entry provider

NAYAN ARVIND LALAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO, 24(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, all these five appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 704/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Mrs. Ruchi M Rathod, ARFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

those persons who entered in to these transactions, after issuing them notices , keeping in mind provisions of section 153(6) of the Act. iv. If the account is found to be operated by the assessee, the assessee is also duty bound to state whether he is an accommodation entry provider

NAYAN ARVIND LALAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO, 24(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, all these five appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 703/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Mrs. Ruchi M Rathod, ARFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

those persons who entered in to these transactions, after issuing them notices , keeping in mind provisions of section 153(6) of the Act. iv. If the account is found to be operated by the assessee, the assessee is also duty bound to state whether he is an accommodation entry provider

NAYAN ARVIND LALAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO, 24(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, all these five appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 702/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Mrs. Ruchi M Rathod, ARFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

those persons who entered in to these transactions, after issuing them notices , keeping in mind provisions of section 153(6) of the Act. iv. If the account is found to be operated by the assessee, the assessee is also duty bound to state whether he is an accommodation entry provider

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2