“initial assessment year”

BHAGWANDAS SURAJKARAN SOMANI HUF,THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THANE

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

said section initially and such option exercised would thereafter be applicable for subsequent years. Thus, once the option has been exercised in the initial assessment year, the same would be applicable for subsequent assessment years. 9 Bhagwandas Surajkaran Somani HUF (Batch appeals) 9. The limited issue under consideration is whether ... delayed filing of Form 10-IE beyond the prescribed date for the initial assessment year would invalid the assessee claim to be taxed in terms of section 115BAC for the initial and subsequent assessment years. The fact that there were technical glitches has been acknowledged by the department and where

BHAGWANDAS SURAJKARAN SOMANI HUF,THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THANE

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

said section initially and such option exercised would thereafter be applicable for subsequent years. Thus, once the option has been exercised in the initial assessment year, the same would be applicable for subsequent assessment years. 9 Bhagwandas Surajkaran Somani HUF (Batch appeals) 9. The limited issue under consideration is whether ... delayed filing of Form 10-IE beyond the prescribed date for the initial assessment year would invalid the assessee claim to be taxed in terms of section 115BAC for the initial and subsequent assessment years. The fact that there were technical glitches has been acknowledged by the department and where

BHAGWANDAS SURAJKARAN SOMANI HUF,THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THANE

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

said section initially and such option exercised would thereafter be applicable for subsequent years. Thus, once the option has been exercised in the initial assessment year, the same would be applicable for subsequent assessment years. 9 Bhagwandas Surajkaran Somani HUF (Batch appeals) 9. The limited issue under consideration is whether ... delayed filing of Form 10-IE beyond the prescribed date for the initial assessment year would invalid the assessee claim to be taxed in terms of section 115BAC for the initial and subsequent assessment years. The fact that there were technical glitches has been acknowledged by the department and where

MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO CIRCLE 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

relevant assessment year [placed at page 94 to 98 of the paper- book], Assessment Year 2010-2011 has been stated to be initial assessment year for claim of deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act. We note that the Assessing Officer has recorded in paragraph 6.1 of the Assessment

JCIT(OSD)-14(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION CO. LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

relevant assessment year [placed at page 94 to 98 of the paper- book], Assessment Year 2010-2011 has been stated to be initial assessment year for claim of deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act. We note that the Assessing Officer has recorded in paragraph 6.1 of the Assessment

ANTONY LARA ENVIRO SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PCIT- 1 , THANE

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2020-21

issue of transition amount of Rs.41,40,28,675/ transition amount of Rs.41,40,28,675/- is scrutinized is scrutinized during the initial assessment year 2018 during the initial assessment year 2018-19 relevant to 19 relevant to FY 2017 FY 2017-18, the scrutiny of the same issue ... issue of transition amount of Rs.41,40,28,675/ Rs.41,40,28,675/- is scrutinized during the initial assessment is scrutinized during the initial assessment year 2018-19 relevant to FY 2017 19 relevant to FY 2017-18, the scrutiny of the same 18, the scrutiny of the same issue

DCIT-CC-8(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SAVITA OIL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit-Cc-8(4), Savita Oil Technologies Limited Mumbai 66-67 Nariman Bhavan, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai 400021, Pan: Aaacs7934A (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Yogesh Thar & Shri Chaitanya Joshi, Cas Revenue : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Cit (A) 50, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025-26/1075632908(1), Dated 15.04.2025 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Acit,Cc- 8(4), Mumbai, U/S.143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 24.08.2021 For Ay 2018-19. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Hon'Ble Cit(A) Was Justified In Law In Allowing Deduction Under Section 80-Ia(4) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Without Adjusting The Losses Incurred By The Eligible Undertaking Prior To The Initial Assessment Year, Contrary To The Provisions Of Section 80-Ia(S)? 2. Whether The Hon'Ble Cit(A) Was Correct In Law In Relying Upon Cbdt Circular No. 1/2016 & The Decision Of The Hon'Ble Madras High Court In The Case Of Vcllayudhaswamy Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. (340 Itr 477) When There Exist Contrary Binding Judicial Precedents Mandating That Losses Of Earlier Years, Even

under section 80-IA(4) of the Income- tax Act, 1961, without adjusting the losses incurred by the eligible undertaking prior to the initial assessment year, contrary to the provisions of section 80-IA(S)? 2. Whether the Hon'ble CIT(A) was correct in law in relying upon CBDT ... justified in law in granting deduction under section 80-IA(4) merely based on the assessee's discretion to choose the initial assessment year, overlooking the statutory requirement to compute profits as per the deeming fiction contained in section 80-IA(5) from the year of commencement of eligible business

GANDHI SPECIAL TUBES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CIRCLE 5(1)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Ms. Padmavathy S, Hon’Blegandhi Special Tubes Limited, Asst. Cit Circle 5(1)(1), 201-204, 2Nd Floor Plaza 55, Mumbai. Vs. Hughes Road, Next To Dharam Palace, Mumbai 400 007. Pan Aaacg1261C (Appellant) (Respondent)

alternatively submitted that the allowance/deduction cannot be disturbed in the subsequent year unless and until the deduction for the initial assessment year is upset/withdrawn. 7. The learned DR has supported the impugned order. It is submitted that the Assessing Officer has rightly come to the conclusion that the rate