M/S. VENUS INFRABUILD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

195 to 200/Ahd/2019 The DCIT, Cir.(1)(1) Shri Dilip Kumar 2009-10 to 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Lalwani R-649, New Rajendra Nagar New Delhi PAN : AAEPL 5472 F 88 to 94/Ahd/2019 44— Shri Ashok The DCIT, 50 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 to Surendras Vaswani Cent.Cir.1(1) 2015-16 1, Rajdeep Villa Ahmedabad. Opp: Rivera-11 B/h. Chimanbhai Institute Prahalad

SHRI DEEPAK BUDHARMAL VASWANI,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

195 to 200/Ahd/2019 The DCIT, Cir.(1)(1) Shri Dilip Kumar 2009-10 to 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Lalwani R-649, New Rajendra Nagar New Delhi PAN : AAEPL 5472 F 88 to 94/Ahd/2019 44— Shri Ashok The DCIT, 50 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 to Surendras Vaswani Cent.Cir.1(1) 2015-16 1, Rajdeep Villa Ahmedabad. Opp: Rivera-11 B/h. Chimanbhai Institute Prahalad

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI RAJESH SUNDERDAS VASWANI, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

195 to 200/Ahd/2019 The DCIT, Cir.(1)(1) Shri Dilip Kumar 2009-10 to 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Lalwani R-649, New Rajendra Nagar New Delhi PAN : AAEPL 5472 F 88 to 94/Ahd/2019 44— Shri Ashok The DCIT, 50 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 to Surendras Vaswani Cent.Cir.1(1) 2015-16 1, Rajdeep Villa Ahmedabad. Opp: Rivera-11 B/h. Chimanbhai Institute Prahalad

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ASHOK SUNDERDAS VASWANI, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

195 to 200/Ahd/2019 The DCIT, Cir.(1)(1) Shri Dilip Kumar 2009-10 to 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Lalwani R-649, New Rajendra Nagar New Delhi PAN : AAEPL 5472 F 88 to 94/Ahd/2019 44— Shri Ashok The DCIT, 50 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 to Surendras Vaswani Cent.Cir.1(1) 2015-16 1, Rajdeep Villa Ahmedabad. Opp: Rivera-11 B/h. Chimanbhai Institute Prahalad

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI DEEPAK KUMAR VASWANI,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

195 to 200/Ahd/2019 The DCIT, Cir.(1)(1) Shri Dilip Kumar 2009-10 to 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Lalwani R-649, New Rajendra Nagar New Delhi PAN : AAEPL 5472 F 88 to 94/Ahd/2019 44— Shri Ashok The DCIT, 50 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 to Surendras Vaswani Cent.Cir.1(1) 2015-16 1, Rajdeep Villa Ahmedabad. Opp: Rivera-11 B/h. Chimanbhai Institute Prahalad

M/S. VENUS INFRABUILD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

195 to 200/Ahd/2019 The DCIT, Cir.(1)(1) Shri Dilip Kumar 2009-10 to 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Lalwani R-649, New Rajendra Nagar New Delhi PAN : AAEPL 5472 F 88 to 94/Ahd/2019 44— Shri Ashok The DCIT, 50 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 to Surendras Vaswani Cent.Cir.1(1) 2015-16 1, Rajdeep Villa Ahmedabad. Opp: Rivera-11 B/h. Chimanbhai Institute Prahalad

SHRI ASHOK SUNDERDAS VASWANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

195 to 200/Ahd/2019 The DCIT, Cir.(1)(1) Shri Dilip Kumar 2009-10 to 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Lalwani R-649, New Rajendra Nagar New Delhi PAN : AAEPL 5472 F 88 to 94/Ahd/2019 44— Shri Ashok The DCIT, 50 Asstt.Year : 2009-10 to Surendras Vaswani Cent.Cir.1(1) 2015-16 1, Rajdeep Villa Ahmedabad. Opp: Rivera-11 B/h. Chimanbhai Institute Prahalad

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-2, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INT.TAXA.-2, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

M/S. SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. CIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

SHELL INTERNATIONAL B.V., ,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT, INTL. TAXN.-2, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

147 / 148 of the Act, even when the conditions precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings and various applicable timelines and requirements have not been complied with. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed. 2. The learned AO based on the directions of the DRP has erred on the facts

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri T R Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

147. Considering this decision, which is rendered by Hon'ble ITAT in current year itself disallowance under Section 14A does not survive. • Considering these facts Assessee claimed that once addition made by the AO is deleted by the Hon'ble ITAT, disallowance u/s.14A would not survive and AO has already not made other additions based upon reasons recorded. Hence reassessment