BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

155 results for “reassessment”+ Permanent Establishmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi595Mumbai330Chennai155Bangalore91Jaipur64Kolkata59Raipur45Amritsar37Telangana29Cochin27Ahmedabad24Cuttack17Chandigarh16Lucknow16Dehradun8Pune7Karnataka7Guwahati7Indore6Jodhpur5SC5Kerala4Hyderabad4Rajkot3Orissa3Surat3Jabalpur1Patna1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 153A67Section 13258Section 14858Section 143(1)47Limitation/Time-bar45Condonation of Delay43Reopening of Assessment33Addition to Income28Section 147

M.CT.M.GLOBAL INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 115/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

M/S M.CT.M. GLOBAL INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

Showing 1–20 of 155 · Page 1 of 8

...
23
Section 143(3)22
Disallowance16
Reassessment16

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 1873/CHNY/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. M CT M GLOBAL INVESTMENTS P. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 1954/CHNY/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S M.CT.M.GLOBAL INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 1438/CHNY/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. M.CT.M.GLOBAL INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 1654/CHNY/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. M.CT. M GLOBAL INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 1465/CHNY/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

M.CT.M.GLOBAL INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 1102/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

M/S M.CT.M. GLOBAL INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 456/CHNY/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

M.CT.M. GLOBAL INVESTMENTS P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 1936/CHNY/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. MCTM GLOBAL INVESTMENTS PVT LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, while the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 1285/CHNY/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1873/Mds/2008 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Mds/2009 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1102/Mds/2011 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.115 & 1936/Mds/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/S M.Ct.M. Global Investments Pvt. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., V. Income Tax, 761, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iv(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aabcm 9738 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Anita Sumanth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

permanent establishment in terms of Article 5 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement between India and Malaysia. Therefore, the income of Malaysian branch is not liable for taxation. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the assessment. 25. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the income

M/S. CASTLEWICK FZE,DUBAI vs. ACIT,INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 459/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 148Section 201Section 201(1)Section 234ASection 9(1)(vii)

reassessment\nproceedings against the assessee has been reversed by the CIT(A).\nThe DRP however, vide its order dated 29.11.2024 reiterated the\nsame view of the AO in the draft assessment order. Pursuant to the\nDRP's directions dated 29.11.2024, the impugned final assessment\norder was passed on 06.12.2024. Aggrieved by the final assessment\norder, assessee filed the present appeal

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. DOOSAN POWER SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1149/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1149/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Doosan Power Systems India Income Tax, V. Private Limited, Corporate Circle -1(1), 18/2A, Sennerkuppam, Bye Chennai. Pass Road, Poonamallee, Chennai – 600 056. [Pan:Aabcb-5946-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, CA
Section 144BSection 147Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vi)

permanent establishment.” 9.2 As stated above, given that HSC (non-resident logistics company) does not have any place of business/office in India through which business activities of the Company are carried on and thereby, the profits arising from logistics services would be :-9-: ITA. No: 1149/Chny/2023 taxable only in the resident state i.e., Korea. Thereby, the ld.AR submitted that since

DCIT, KARAIKUDI vs. M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD., KARAIKUDI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2946/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

permanent establishment the income from the plantation would be taxable only in Malaysia and not in India. The assessee already filed its return of income and the return filed for all these assessment years which was kept in record. Accordingly, in our opinion the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is to be confirmed. This appeal

DCIT, KARAIKUDI vs. M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD., KARAIKUDI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2947/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

permanent establishment the income from the plantation would be taxable only in Malaysia and not in India. The assessee already filed its return of income and the return filed for all these assessment years which was kept in record. Accordingly, in our opinion the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is to be confirmed. This appeal

M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, MADURAI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2772/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

permanent establishment the income from the plantation would be taxable only in Malaysia and not in India. The assessee already filed its return of income and the return filed for all these assessment years which was kept in record. Accordingly, in our opinion the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is to be confirmed. This appeal

M.R.M.PLANTATIONS P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, MADURAI

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2773/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

permanent establishment the income from the plantation would be taxable only in Malaysia and not in India. The assessee already filed its return of income and the return filed for all these assessment years which was kept in record. Accordingly, in our opinion the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is to be confirmed. This appeal

MAHINDRA HOLIDAYS AND RESORTS INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU 1 , CHENNAI

In the result the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1012/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.936 To 941/Chny/2018 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील & आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.1012/Chny/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years:2009-2010 To 2015-2016) वष" M/S Mahindra Holidays & Resorts Ltd Vs The Dcit (Ltu), Chennai-600001 Mahindra Towers, 2Nd Floor, 17/18, Pattulos Road, Chennai-600002 Pan No. :Aaacm 6469 L (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. & आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.942 To 944/Chny/2018 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील & आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.1089/Chny/2018 अपील (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years:2011-2012 To 2014-2015) वष" The Dcit (Ltu), Chennai-600001 Vs M/S Mahindra Holidays & Resorts Ltd Mahindra Towers, 2Nd Floor, 17/18, Pattulos Road, Chennai-600002 Pan No. :Aaacm 6469 L (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" ..

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

reassessment proceedings as contemplated under the provisions of the Act. 57. As elaborately discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs, disposal of objections submitted by the petitioner on the reasons furnished is to be done based on objective satisfaction and not on subjective satisfaction. An elaborate adjudication is required and such adjudications are to be done during the course of reopening proceedings

DCIT LTU-1 , CHENNAI vs. MAHINDRA HOLIDAYS & RESORTS (P) LTD., CHENNAI

In the result the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 944/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.936 To 941/Chny/2018 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील & आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.1012/Chny/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years:2009-2010 To 2015-2016) वष" M/S Mahindra Holidays & Resorts Ltd Vs The Dcit (Ltu), Chennai-600001 Mahindra Towers, 2Nd Floor, 17/18, Pattulos Road, Chennai-600002 Pan No. :Aaacm 6469 L (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. & आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.942 To 944/Chny/2018 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील & आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.1089/Chny/2018 अपील (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years:2011-2012 To 2014-2015) वष" The Dcit (Ltu), Chennai-600001 Vs M/S Mahindra Holidays & Resorts Ltd Mahindra Towers, 2Nd Floor, 17/18, Pattulos Road, Chennai-600002 Pan No. :Aaacm 6469 L (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" ..

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

reassessment proceedings as contemplated under the provisions of the Act. 57. As elaborately discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs, disposal of objections submitted by the petitioner on the reasons furnished is to be done based on objective satisfaction and not on subjective satisfaction. An elaborate adjudication is required and such adjudications are to be done during the course of reopening proceedings

DCIT LTPU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S MAHINDRA HOLIDAYS & RESORTS (P) LTD, CHENNAI

In the result the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1089/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.936 To 941/Chny/2018 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील & आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.1012/Chny/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years:2009-2010 To 2015-2016) वष" M/S Mahindra Holidays & Resorts Ltd Vs The Dcit (Ltu), Chennai-600001 Mahindra Towers, 2Nd Floor, 17/18, Pattulos Road, Chennai-600002 Pan No. :Aaacm 6469 L (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. & आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.942 To 944/Chny/2018 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील & आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.1089/Chny/2018 अपील (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years:2011-2012 To 2014-2015) वष" The Dcit (Ltu), Chennai-600001 Vs M/S Mahindra Holidays & Resorts Ltd Mahindra Towers, 2Nd Floor, 17/18, Pattulos Road, Chennai-600002 Pan No. :Aaacm 6469 L (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" ..

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

reassessment proceedings as contemplated under the provisions of the Act. 57. As elaborately discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs, disposal of objections submitted by the petitioner on the reasons furnished is to be done based on objective satisfaction and not on subjective satisfaction. An elaborate adjudication is required and such adjudications are to be done during the course of reopening proceedings

MAHINDRA HOLIDAYS & RESORTS INDIA LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (LTU) , CHENNAI

In the result the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 941/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.936 To 941/Chny/2018 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील & आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.1012/Chny/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years:2009-2010 To 2015-2016) वष" M/S Mahindra Holidays & Resorts Ltd Vs The Dcit (Ltu), Chennai-600001 Mahindra Towers, 2Nd Floor, 17/18, Pattulos Road, Chennai-600002 Pan No. :Aaacm 6469 L (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. & आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.942 To 944/Chny/2018 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील & आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita Nos.1089/Chny/2018 अपील (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years:2011-2012 To 2014-2015) वष" The Dcit (Ltu), Chennai-600001 Vs M/S Mahindra Holidays & Resorts Ltd Mahindra Towers, 2Nd Floor, 17/18, Pattulos Road, Chennai-600002 Pan No. :Aaacm 6469 L (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" ..

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32

reassessment proceedings as contemplated under the provisions of the Act. 57. As elaborately discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs, disposal of objections submitted by the petitioner on the reasons furnished is to be done based on objective satisfaction and not on subjective satisfaction. An elaborate adjudication is required and such adjudications are to be done during the course of reopening proceedings