← All Phrases

“settlement application”

Settlement & AmnestySection 245CSection 245C247 judgments

The decision most relied on for settlement application is CIT v. CPR Capital Services Ltd. (331 ITR 483), cited in 29 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on settlement application

CIT v. CPR Capital Services Ltd.
331 ITR 483 · 2011 · High Court
29
citing judgments

If there is a change in the assessing officer, a new notice under section 143(2) should be issued, especially after a settlement application is filed or jurisdiction is transferred.

Star Television News Limited v. UOI & Others
317 ITR 66 · 2009 · High Court
22
citing judgments

The Settlement Commission must hear applications where delay in disposal before March 31, 2008, is not attributable to the applicant. Section 245HA(1)(iv) is arbitrary and unreasonable if an applicant faces hardship due to the Settlement Commission's inability to dispose of applications by a specified date.

Nanji Enterprise Ltd. v. DCIT
84 Taxmann.com 155 · 2017 · High Court
15
citing judgments

Income offered to tax under a settlement application with the Income Tax Settlement Commission cannot be taxed again in the hands of the assessee, as the settlement order by its statutory scheme is final.

Dolat Investments Ltd. v. DCIT
38 SOT 123 · 2010 · ITAT
13
citing judgments

Confidential information disclosed to the Settlement Commission cannot be used by the Assessing Officer to make additions if the settlement application is not admitted under section 245D(1).

Ram Jethmalani v. Union of India
219 ITR 618 · 1996 · Supreme Court
12
citing judgments

Penalty proceedings do not fall within the ambit of Section 245E of the Income-tax Act, and the Settlement Commission exceeds its jurisdiction if it drops penalty proceedings while deciding a settlement application.

Omaxe Ltd. v. ACIT
254 CTR 370 · 2012 · High Court
11
citing judgments

Once an application is admitted by the Settlement Commission, it has exclusive jurisdiction over the assessee's case until a final order is passed, precluding the Assessing Officer and Commissioner (Appeals) from invoking reassessment provisions.

Komalkant Faikirchand Sharma v. DCIT
108 Taxmann.com 50 · High Court
10
citing judgments

Once an application for settlement is made under Section 245C(1) and accepted by the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), and a final order is passed under Section 245D(4), the Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. An order under Section 245D(4) is distinct from a regular assessment under Sections 143(1), 143(3), or 144.

Gupta Perfumers (P.) Ltd. v. ITSC
348 ITR 86 · 2012 · High Court
10
citing judgments

Seized papers referred to in a settlement application, even if they belong to third persons, can be used and utilized against those third persons.

Judgments citing settlement application

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Gurusamy Dhanasekaran, Palani

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 196/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.196/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Gurusamy Dhanasekaran बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abtpd-3576-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.197/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Saravanakumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Azcps-8604-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.198/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Satishkumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Auhps-8894-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 144Section 153C

other hand, referred to the findings of Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order as well as outcome of Settlement Application filed by the assessee- group. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. Assessment Proceedings 3.1 The assessee is stated ... establish the source of the same. 3.3 The assessee submitted that his major source of income was from partnership firms. Since the firms preferred settlement application, the source could be explained only from additional income earned and offered in the hands of the firms.The assessee stated that

M/S Swastik Construction, Thane vs. I.T.O., Ward-4(4), Thane

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4818/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2024AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Shreyash Shah a/w Shri Kunal ShahFor Respondent: Shri. R. R. MakwanaSr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI. SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER MS. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 805/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

attention to the copy of ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024 (AYs 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 to 2020-21) M/s. Metal Impex :: 44 :: the Settlement Application filed by Shri Kamlesh Jain before the Income- tax Settlement Commission ('ITSC') on 12-03-2021, copy of which is found placed ... also paid taxes thereon. The Ld. AR also pointed out that, although the Interim Board of ITSC had initially refused to admit the Settlement Application vide their order dated 30.07.2023 [Pages 90 to 96 of paper book], but the Hon’ble Madras High Court vide their order dated

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 804/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

attention to the copy of ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024 (AYs 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 to 2020-21) M/s. Metal Impex :: 44 :: the Settlement Application filed by Shri Kamlesh Jain before the Income- tax Settlement Commission ('ITSC') on 12-03-2021, copy of which is found placed ... also paid taxes thereon. The Ld. AR also pointed out that, although the Interim Board of ITSC had initially refused to admit the Settlement Application vide their order dated 30.07.2023 [Pages 90 to 96 of paper book], but the Hon’ble Madras High Court vide their order dated

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 803/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

attention to the copy of ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024 (AYs 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 to 2020-21) M/s. Metal Impex :: 44 :: the Settlement Application filed by Shri Kamlesh Jain before the Income- tax Settlement Commission ('ITSC') on 12-03-2021, copy of which is found placed ... also paid taxes thereon. The Ld. AR also pointed out that, although the Interim Board of ITSC had initially refused to admit the Settlement Application vide their order dated 30.07.2023 [Pages 90 to 96 of paper book], but the Hon’ble Madras High Court vide their order dated

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 802/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

attention to the copy of ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024 (AYs 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 to 2020-21) M/s. Metal Impex :: 44 :: the Settlement Application filed by Shri Kamlesh Jain before the Income- tax Settlement Commission ('ITSC') on 12-03-2021, copy of which is found placed ... also paid taxes thereon. The Ld. AR also pointed out that, although the Interim Board of ITSC had initially refused to admit the Settlement Application vide their order dated 30.07.2023 [Pages 90 to 96 of paper book], but the Hon’ble Madras High Court vide their order dated

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 801/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

attention to the copy of ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024 (AYs 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 to 2020-21) M/s. Metal Impex :: 44 :: the Settlement Application filed by Shri Kamlesh Jain before the Income- tax Settlement Commission ('ITSC') on 12-03-2021, copy of which is found placed ... also paid taxes thereon. The Ld. AR also pointed out that, although the Interim Board of ITSC had initially refused to admit the Settlement Application vide their order dated 30.07.2023 [Pages 90 to 96 of paper book], but the Hon’ble Madras High Court vide their order dated

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 800/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

attention to the copy of ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024 (AYs 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 to 2020-21) M/s. Metal Impex :: 44 :: the Settlement Application filed by Shri Kamlesh Jain before the Income- tax Settlement Commission ('ITSC') on 12-03-2021, copy of which is found placed ... also paid taxes thereon. The Ld. AR also pointed out that, although the Interim Board of ITSC had initially refused to admit the Settlement Application vide their order dated 30.07.2023 [Pages 90 to 96 of paper book], but the Hon’ble Madras High Court vide their order dated

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 799/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

attention to the copy of ITA Nos.799 to 805/Chny/2024 (AYs 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 to 2020-21) M/s. Metal Impex :: 44 :: the Settlement Application filed by Shri Kamlesh Jain before the Income- tax Settlement Commission ('ITSC') on 12-03-2021, copy of which is found placed ... also paid taxes thereon. The Ld. AR also pointed out that, although the Interim Board of ITSC had initially refused to admit the Settlement Application vide their order dated 30.07.2023 [Pages 90 to 96 of paper book], but the Hon’ble Madras High Court vide their order dated

Rajesh Products, Tonk, Rajasthan vs. ACIT, Jaipur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 626/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jul 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Jain, CA (Th. V.C)For Respondent: Shri Bhanwar Singh Ratnu, (CIT-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक

Gargi Global Academy Sansthan, Sikar vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 260/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anil Dhaka (CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 69

unexplained investment done by the appellant. The explanations of the appellant would have remained the same irrespective of whether the other taxpayers filed settlement applications or not and similarly irrespective of the orders of the honorable IBS. The statements (if recorded) of the two individuals or the office bearers ... offered for tax before the Hon’ble Settlement Commission, New Delhi. In support of the same Vivekanand Shiksha Samiti vs. DCIT copy of settlement application and cash flow statement filed by Sh. Jogendra Singh Sunda (PB 30-50) and Sh. Piyush Sunda (PB 51-64) before the Settlement Commission

Vivekanda Shiksha Samiti, Palwas Road, Sikar vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 203/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anil Dhaka (CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 69

unexplained investment done by the appellant. The explanations of the appellant would have remained the same irrespective of whether the other taxpayers filed settlement applications or not and similarly irrespective of the orders of the honorable IBS. The statements (if recorded) of the two individuals or the office bearers ... additional income for FY 2016-17 offered for tax before the Hon'ble Settlement Commission, New Delhi. In support of the same copy of settlement application and cash flow statement filed by Sh. Jogendra Singh Sunda (PB 30-50) and Sh. Piyush Sunda (PB 51-64) before the Settlement Commission

M/S. Patanjali Foods Ltd (Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd), Mumbai vs. Dy Comm of Income Tax- Central Circle-7(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal and cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 320/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1172/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1175/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1176/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar & Shri BFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade (DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN

DCIT, CC-7(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Patanjali Foods Ltd., ( Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1175/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1172/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1175/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1176/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit, Central Circle-7(2) Room No. 637, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020. बनाम / M/S. Patanjali Foods Ltd Vs. (Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd) 616, Tulsiani Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. Cross Objection No.51/Mum/2023 (Arising Out Of I.T. A. No. 1172/Mum/2023) (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Patanjali Foods Ltd (Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd) 616, Tulsiani Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. बनाम / Dcit, Central Circle-7(2) Vs. Room No. 637, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 320/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Patanjali Foods Ltd (Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd) बनाम / Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-7(2) Room No. 637, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020. 616, Tulsiani Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaci1220M 2

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar & Shri BFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade (DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN

DCIT, CC-7(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Patanjali Foods Ltd., ( Formerly Known As Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal and cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1172/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1172/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1175/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1176/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar & Shri BFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade (DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN

ACIT, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai vs. M/S Scope Ingredients Pvt. Ltd, Chennai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 23/CHNY/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Poonam Jain (CA) - Ld.AR
Section 143(3)

Aggrieved as aforesaid, the assessee preferred further appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Appellate Proceedings 4.1 The assessee drew attention to the fact that a settlement application was preferred by Shri Umed Mehta wherein he surrendered an additional income of Rs.970.02 Lacs towards transactions with the concerns of Umed Mehta group ... rendered clear finding that the impugned credits brought to tax by Ld. AO had already been subjected to tax in settlement application of assessee group. The impugned amount was part of additional income disclosed by assessee’s group concerns viz. M/s Kawarlal & Sons and M/s D.K. Enterprises. Therefore

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1254/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

amount of tax determined on the total income determined under section 143(1) or on assessment or reassessment or total income declared in a settlement application was the tax payer's true liability right from the beginning and it was with reference to that amount the advance tax should have ... Annexure that interest u/s 234B is to be charged up to the date of order u/s 245D (1) on the income disclosed in the settlement application is with reference to first component (a) of the total interest to be charged u/s 234B (2A) (a) which was otherwise to be charged

Maharashtra Feeds P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1253/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 154Section 208Section 234ASection 234CSection 243CSection 245CSection 245DSection 245D(1)Section 245D(4)

amount of tax determined on the total income determined under section 143(1) or on assessment or reassessment or total income declared in a settlement application was the tax payer's true liability right from the beginning and it was with reference to that amount the advance tax should have ... Annexure that interest u/s 234B is to be charged up to the date of order u/s 245D (1) on the income disclosed in the settlement application is with reference to first component (a) of the total interest to be charged u/s 234B (2A) (a) which was otherwise to be charged

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 718/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

Mohan Thakurdas Guranani 143 (2) before the old assessing officer lapsed in any case on filing of settlement application and also on transfer of jurisdiction when there is new officer, necessary notice u/s 143 (2) should have been issued. He specifically referred to the decision of the Hotel blue moon

Mohan Thankurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 713/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

Mohan Thakurdas Guranani 143 (2) before the old assessing officer lapsed in any case on filing of settlement application and also on transfer of jurisdiction when there is new officer, necessary notice u/s 143 (2) should have been issued. He specifically referred to the decision of the Hotel blue moon