DCIT 1(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA COMMUNICATION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 7514 /मुं/2011 ("न. व. 2007-08 ) आअसं. 6781/मुं/2012 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं. 572/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1106/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) Tata Communications Ltd. (Formerly Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd.) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Bhavan, M.G Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaccv-2808-C बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 1(3), Room No.540, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1657/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1561/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) The Dcit -1(3) Room No.564,Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai 400 020 बनाम Vs.

120(4)(b) of the Act. Neither the Board has empowered the PCIT nor the PCIT has passed any order authorizing Addl.CIT to be the Assessing Officer. Since, the draft assessment order and the final assessment order has been passed by an Addl.CIT having no authorization to discharge the duties of Assessing Officer, assessment order passed by Addl. CIT suffers

DCIT 1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. TATA COMMUNICATION LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 7514 /मुं/2011 ("न. व. 2007-08 ) आअसं. 6781/मुं/2012 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं. 572/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1106/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) Tata Communications Ltd. (Formerly Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd.) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Bhavan, M.G Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaccv-2808-C बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 1(3), Room No.540, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1657/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1561/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) The Dcit -1(3) Room No.564,Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai 400 020 बनाम Vs.

120(4)(b) of the Act. Neither the Board has empowered the PCIT nor the PCIT has passed any order authorizing Addl.CIT to be the Assessing Officer. Since, the draft assessment order and the final assessment order has been passed by an Addl.CIT having no authorization to discharge the duties of Assessing Officer, assessment order passed by Addl. CIT suffers

TATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 7514 /मुं/2011 ("न. व. 2007-08 ) आअसं. 6781/मुं/2012 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं. 572/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1106/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) Tata Communications Ltd. (Formerly Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd.) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Bhavan, M.G Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaccv-2808-C बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 1(3), Room No.540, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1657/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1561/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) The Dcit -1(3) Room No.564,Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai 400 020 बनाम Vs.

120(4)(b) of the Act. Neither the Board has empowered the PCIT nor the PCIT has passed any order authorizing Addl.CIT to be the Assessing Officer. Since, the draft assessment order and the final assessment order has been passed by an Addl.CIT having no authorization to discharge the duties of Assessing Officer, assessment order passed by Addl. CIT suffers

TATA COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED(FORMERLY VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ADDL. CIT RANGE - 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 7514 /मुं/2011 ("न. व. 2007-08 ) आअसं. 6781/मुं/2012 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं. 572/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1106/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) Tata Communications Ltd. (Formerly Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd.) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Bhavan, M.G Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaccv-2808-C बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 1(3), Room No.540, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1657/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1561/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) The Dcit -1(3) Room No.564,Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai 400 020 बनाम Vs.

120(4)(b) of the Act. Neither the Board has empowered the PCIT nor the PCIT has passed any order authorizing Addl.CIT to be the Assessing Officer. Since, the draft assessment order and the final assessment order has been passed by an Addl.CIT having no authorization to discharge the duties of Assessing Officer, assessment order passed by Addl. CIT suffers

TATA COMMUNICATION LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.),MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T.RG.1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 7514 /मुं/2011 ("न. व. 2007-08 ) आअसं. 6781/मुं/2012 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं. 572/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1106/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) Tata Communications Ltd. (Formerly Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd.) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Bhavan, M.G Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaccv-2808-C बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 1(3), Room No.540, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1657/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1561/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) The Dcit -1(3) Room No.564,Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai 400 020 बनाम Vs.

120(4)(b) of the Act. Neither the Board has empowered the PCIT nor the PCIT has passed any order authorizing Addl.CIT to be the Assessing Officer. Since, the draft assessment order and the final assessment order has been passed by an Addl.CIT having no authorization to discharge the duties of Assessing Officer, assessment order passed by Addl. CIT suffers

TATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD ( FORMERLY VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 7514 /मुं/2011 ("न. व. 2007-08 ) आअसं. 6781/मुं/2012 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं. 572/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1106/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) Tata Communications Ltd. (Formerly Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd.) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Bhavan, M.G Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaccv-2808-C बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 1(3), Room No.540, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1657/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं. 1561/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2010-11) The Dcit -1(3) Room No.564,Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai 400 020 बनाम Vs.

120(4)(b) of the Act. Neither the Board has empowered the PCIT nor the PCIT has passed any order authorizing Addl.CIT to be the Assessing Officer. Since, the draft assessment order and the final assessment order has been passed by an Addl.CIT having no authorization to discharge the duties of Assessing Officer, assessment order passed by Addl. CIT suffers

ADDL CIT 1(3), MUMBAI vs. TATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD ( FORMERLY VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Additional Commissioner Vs. M/S. Tata Communications Of Income Tax, Range – Limited (Formerly Known As 1(3) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited) Mumbai Videsh Sanchar Bhavan Room No.540/564, 5 Th M.G.Road, Fort Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 001 Maharshi Karve Road, New Marine Linmes Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacv2808C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & M/S. Tata Communications Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known As Income Tax, Range – 1(3) Videsh Sanchar Nigam Mumbai Limited) Room No.540, Aayakar Videsh Sanchar Bhavan Bhavan, Maharshi Karve M.G.Road, Fort Road Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaacv2808C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Tata Communications Ltd.

section 2(28C) to mean a person appointed to be a Joint Commissioner of Income Tax or an Additional Commissioner of Income-tax under section 117(1). Section 151(2) mandates that the satisfaction has to be of the Joint Commissioner. The expression has a distinct meaning by virtue of the definition in 'section 2(28C). The Commissioner of Income

DCIT 2(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. TATA SONS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2001-02 Tata Sons Ltd. Acit Cir. 2(3) Bombay House, 24, Homi Aayakar Bhavan, Roon बनाम/ Mody Street No.555 M.K. Rd. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aaact4060A Assessment Year: 2001-02

disallowed by the AO.” 2. During the course of hearing, arguments were made by Shri Dinesh Vyas, Authorised Representative (Sr. Counsel) on behalf of the Assessee and by Shri K. Srisha Murthy, Departmental Representative (CIT-DR) on behalf of the Revenue. 3. During the course of hearing, the assessee filed few more additional grounds on merits. The assessee vide

M/S. TATA SONS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2001-02 Tata Sons Ltd. Acit Cir. 2(3) Bombay House, 24, Homi Aayakar Bhavan, Roon बनाम/ Mody Street No.555 M.K. Rd. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Mumbai-400020 (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. No. Aaact4060A Assessment Year: 2001-02

disallowed by the AO.” 2. During the course of hearing, arguments were made by Shri Dinesh Vyas, Authorised Representative (Sr. Counsel) on behalf of the Assessee and by Shri K. Srisha Murthy, Departmental Representative (CIT-DR) on behalf of the Revenue. 3. During the course of hearing, the assessee filed few more additional grounds on merits. The assessee vide

ITO - 4(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. M.M. POONJIAJI SPICES LTD., MUMBAI

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

120,497/– which was disallowed by the learned assessing officer however allowed by the learned CIT – A following its decision for the earlier year. The identical issue arose in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2001 – 02 wherein dismissing the appeal of the learned AO we have directed the learned assessing officer to allow the claim under section

.DCIT., CIR.-4(2),MUMBAI vs. M.M. POONJIAJI SPICES LTD, MUMBAI

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

120,497/– which was disallowed by the learned assessing officer however allowed by the learned CIT – A following its decision for the earlier year. The identical issue arose in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2001 – 02 wherein dismissing the appeal of the learned AO we have directed the learned assessing officer to allow the claim under section

I.T.O-4(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S M.M.POONJIAJI SPICES LTD, MUMBAI

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

120,497/– which was disallowed by the learned assessing officer however allowed by the learned CIT – A following its decision for the earlier year. The identical issue arose in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2001 – 02 wherein dismissing the appeal of the learned AO we have directed the learned assessing officer to allow the claim under section

INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. M.M. POONJIAJI SPICES LTD., MUMBAI

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

120,497/– which was disallowed by the learned assessing officer however allowed by the learned CIT – A following its decision for the earlier year. The identical issue arose in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2001 – 02 wherein dismissing the appeal of the learned AO we have directed the learned assessing officer to allow the claim under section

ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI vs. M .M. POONJIAJI SPICES LTD, MUMBAI

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

120,497/– which was disallowed by the learned assessing officer however allowed by the learned CIT – A following its decision for the earlier year. The identical issue arose in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2001 – 02 wherein dismissing the appeal of the learned AO we have directed the learned assessing officer to allow the claim under section

ITO - 4(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. M.M. POONJIAJI SPICES LTD., MUMBAI

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

120,497/– which was disallowed by the learned assessing officer however allowed by the learned CIT – A following its decision for the earlier year. The identical issue arose in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2001 – 02 wherein dismissing the appeal of the learned AO we have directed the learned assessing officer to allow the claim under section

ITO - 4(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. M.M. POONJIAJI SPICES LTD., MUMBAI

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

120,497/– which was disallowed by the learned assessing officer however allowed by the learned CIT – A following its decision for the earlier year. The identical issue arose in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2001 – 02 wherein dismissing the appeal of the learned AO we have directed the learned assessing officer to allow the claim under section

D.C.I.T. CENT. CIR. - 7(2), MUMBAI vs. RAJAHMUNDHRY EXPRESSWAY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

120 of the paper book. He further submitted, NHAI had also put a condition that the SPV formed for the purpose of developing the project should not undertake any other business activity except the BOT project. He submitted, complying with the condition imposed by the NHAI in the letter of allotment the assessee company was incorporated to implement

THE DY CIT 3(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

120(1), 120(2) and 120(4)(b) legal requirements as envisaged u/s. 120(1), 120(2) and 120(4)(b) legal requirements as envisaged u/s. 120(1), 120(2) and 120(4)(b) of the I.T. Act. were satisfied of the I.T. Act. were satisfied and jurisdiction was conferred on and jurisdiction was conferred on the Addl./Jt

NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD,,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. C.I.T,RANGE 3(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 1998-99 & Assessment Year: 1999-2000 & Assessment Year: 2000-01 & Assessment Year: 2001-02 & Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 Nuclear Power Corporation Of Acit, Range-3(2), India Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. Central Avenue, Anushakti Nagar, Mumbai-400094. Pan No. Aaacn 3154 F Appellant Respondent

120(1), 120(2) and 120(4)(b) legal requirements as envisaged u/s. 120(1), 120(2) and 120(4)(b) legal requirements as envisaged u/s. 120(1), 120(2) and 120(4)(b) of the I.T. Act. were satisfied of the I.T. Act. were satisfied and jurisdiction was conferred on and jurisdiction was conferred on the Addl./Jt