“Section 170(1)(a)”

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. DNJ CREATION LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing)

which is not applicable in the present case. Further, Chapter-XV (section 159-170) provides the mechanism for assessment in case of succession. Section 170(1)(a) of the Act mandates that predecessor shall be assessed in respect of income up to the date of succession, in the name

ACIT-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. BANK OF BARODA (E- VIJAYA BANK), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

previous year preceding the date of succession would be Previous Year 2019- 2020 [relevant to Assessment Year 2020-2021]. Therefore, Section 170(1)(a), 170(1)(b) and 170(2) of the Act would have application for the purpose of framing assessment for the Assessment Year 2019-2020 relevant

BANK OF BARODA (ERSTWHILE VIJAYA BANK),MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is\ndismissed

nprevious year preceding the date of succession would be Previous Year 2019-\n2020 [relevant to Assessment Year 2020-2021]. Therefore, Section 170(1)(a)\n170(1)(b) and 170(2) of the Act would have application for the purpose of\nframing assessment for the Assessment Year 2019-2020 relevant

DCIT CC 4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BIRLA GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all\n

ground that, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal\nwithout discussing merits, and without appreciating provision of\nsection 292B of the Act, section 170(1)(a) of the Act. The revenue\nalso placed reliance on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case\nof PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors Private ... appeal primarily on the technical ground that assessment was\ncompleted in the name of a non-existent company, and that the provisions of Sections 170(1)(a) and\n292B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were not properly appreciated by the Assessing Officer (AO). The\nCIT(A) did not decide

DCIT CC 4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BIRLA GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all\n

ground that, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal\nwithout discussing merits, and without appreciating provision of\nsection 292B of the Act, section 170(1)(a) of the Act. The revenue\nalso placed reliance on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case\nof PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors Private ... appeal primarily on the technical ground that assessment was\ncompleted in the name of a non-existent company, and that the provisions of Sections 170(1)(a) and\n292B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were not properly appreciated by the Assessing Officer (AO). The\nCIT(A) did not decide

DCIT CC 4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BIRLA GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all\n

ground that, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal\nwithout discussing merits, and without appreciating provision of\nsection 292B of the Act, section 170(1)(a) of the Act. The revenue\nalso placed reliance on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case\nof PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors Private ... appeal primarily on the technical ground that assessment was\ncompleted in the name of a non-existent company, and that the provisions of Sections 170(1)(a) and\n292B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were not properly appreciated by the Assessing Officer (AO). The\nCIT(A) did not decide

DCIT CC 4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BIRLA GROUP HOLDING PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all assessment years under consideration stands dismissed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), while deciding the appeal, has not appreciated the provision of section 170(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (iv) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in appreciating ... ground that, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal without discussing merits, and without appreciating provision of section 292B of the Act, section 170(1)(a) of the Act. The revenue also placed reliance on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors Private

DCIT CC 4(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BIRLA GROUP HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for all\n

ground that, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal\nwithout discussing merits, and without appreciating provision of\nsection 292B of the Act, section 170(1)(a) of the Act. The revenue\nalso placed reliance on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case\nof PCIT v. Mahagun Realtors Private ... appeal primarily on the technical ground that assessment was\ncompleted in the name of a non-existent company, and that the provisions of Sections 170(1)(a) and\n292B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, were not properly appreciated by the Assessing Officer (AO). The\nCIT(A) did not decide