← All Phrases

“Section 147(2)(c)”

Section References (mined)Section 147Section 147(2)(c)8 judgments

DCIT CC 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ASPEN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed\nand all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3594/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2014-15
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 69C

also incorrectly stated that\nprovisions of section 147(2)(b) are applicable, whereas in the\nfacts of the case provisions of section 147(2)(c) are applicable\nwhere the onus on AO is higher to prove escapement of income.\nThe AO, therefore, recorded wrong, incorrect and non-existing\nreasons

DCIT CC 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ASPEN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3593/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 69C

also incorrectly stated that provisions of section 147(2)(b) are applicable, whereas in the facts of the case provisions of section 147(2)(c) are applicable where the onus on AO is higher to prove escapement of income. The AO, therefore, recorded wrong, incorrect and non-existing reasons

DCIT CC 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ASPEN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3591/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 69C

also incorrectly stated that provisions of section 147(2)(b) are applicable, whereas in the facts of the case provisions of section 147(2)(c) are applicable where the onus on AO is higher to prove escapement of income. The AO, therefore, recorded wrong, incorrect and non-existing reasons

DCIT CC 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ASPEN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed\nand all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3589/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2017-18
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 69C

also incorrectly stated that\nprovisions of section 147(2)(b) are applicable, whereas in the\nfacts of the case provisions of section 147(2)(c) are applicable\nwhere the onus on AO is higher to prove escapement of income.\nThe AO, therefore, recorded wrong, incorrect and non-existing\nreasons

ASPEN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed\nand all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3469/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2014-15
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 69C

also incorrectly stated that\nprovisions of section 147(2)(b) are applicable, whereas in the\nfacts of the case provisions of section 147(2)(c) are applicable\nwhere the onus on AO is higher to prove escapement of income.\nThe AO, therefore, recorded wrong, incorrect and non-existing\nreasons

ASPEN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3468/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2015-16
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 69C

also incorrectly stated that provisions of section 147(2)(b) are applicable, whereas in the facts of the case provisions of section 147(2)(c) are applicable where the onus on AO is higher to prove escapement of income. The AO, therefore, recorded wrong, incorrect and non-existing reasons

ASPEN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3467/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 69C

also incorrectly stated that provisions of section 147(2)(b) are applicable, whereas in the facts of the case provisions of section 147(2)(c) are applicable where the onus on AO is higher to prove escapement of income. The AO, therefore, recorded wrong, incorrect and non-existing reasons

ASPEN INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3466/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2017-18
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 69C

also incorrectly stated that provisions of section 147(2)(b) are applicable, whereas in the facts of the case provisions of section 147(2)(c) are applicable where the onus on AO is higher to prove escapement of income. The AO, therefore, recorded wrong, incorrect and non-existing reasons