DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

reassessment for examining another aspect/facet of same issue/claim already examined during original assessment is not permissible. The headnote of said decision is reproduced herein below: 18 ITA NO.3137 & 3138/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2010-11) ITA.No. 3177/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) M/s. ACC Limited “Section 10B

AAACORP EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. D.C.I.T.-CIRCLE-14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal & Aaa Corp Exim India Pvt. Ltd. C-206, Ghatkopar Industrial Estate, Off Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai-400 086 Pan: Aacca8815C ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit-14(1)(1) Income Tax Offices, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 ..... Respondent

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154 for any assessment year the proceedings of which have been completed before the 1st day of October, 2009.] (3) Where during the course of any proceeding for the assessment of income

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

reassessments finalized for finalized for the the the assessment years covered under Section 153A of the assessment years covered under Section 153A of the assessment years covered under Section 153A of the Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 1020, 1019, 1550 & 1548/M/2018 & 1970/M/2022 Income Income-tax Act stand abated cannot be accepted. tax Act stand abated cannot be accepted. Similarly

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year the result, the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Camac Street, Vs. Mk Road, Kolkata-700017. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jcit, Central Circle-1(4), M/S Essel Mining & Industries Room No. 902, Pratishtha Ltd., Bhavan, 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Building Annexe, Camac Street, Mumbai-400020. Kolkata-700017. Pan No. Aaace 6607 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Essel Mining & Industries Dy. Cit, Central Circle-1(4), Ltd., 9Th Floor, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Industry House, 18Th Floor, 10, Mk Road

reassessments finalized for finalized for the the the assessment years covered under Section 153A of the assessment years covered under Section 153A of the assessment years covered under Section 153A of the Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. ITA Nos. 1020, 1019, 1550 & 1548/M/2018 & 1970/M/2022 Income Income-tax Act stand abated cannot be accepted. tax Act stand abated cannot be accepted. Similarly

SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

reassessment proceedings on the ground of invalid invalid sanction M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. ITA Nos. 3491, 3474, 3473, 3472 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3601/MUM/2023 obtained u/s 151 of the Act tained u/s 151 of the Act , which is issued

SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

reassessment proceedings on the ground of invalid invalid sanction M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. ITA Nos. 3491, 3474, 3473, 3472 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3601/MUM/2023 obtained u/s 151 of the Act tained u/s 151 of the Act , which is issued

DCIT CC 4 (4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

reassessment proceedings on the ground of invalid invalid sanction M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. ITA Nos. 3491, 3474, 3473, 3472 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3601/MUM/2023 obtained u/s 151 of the Act tained u/s 151 of the Act , which is issued

DCIT CC 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

reassessment proceedings on the ground of invalid invalid sanction M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. ITA Nos. 3491, 3474, 3473, 3472 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3601/MUM/2023 obtained u/s 151 of the Act tained u/s 151 of the Act , which is issued

DCIT CC 4 (4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

reassessment proceedings on the ground of invalid invalid sanction M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. M/s Sanman Trade Impex Ltd. ITA Nos. 3491, 3474, 3473, 3472 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3471, 3470/MUM/2023 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3606, 3605, 3603, 3602, 3614 & 3610, 3601/MUM/2023 obtained u/s 151 of the Act tained u/s 151 of the Act , which is issued

ACIT, (LTU)-2, MUMBAI vs. SHELL INDIA MARKETS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

10B of the Act. 12. In so far as the issue raised by the additional ground No.48 & 49, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order of TPO is time barred in terms of section 92CA(3) of the Act read with Section 153) and consequently, the passing of draft assessment order and the entire proceedings initiated

SHELL INDIA MARKETS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (LTU) - 2, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

10B of the Act. 12. In so far as the issue raised by the additional ground No.48 & 49, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order of TPO is time barred in terms of section 92CA(3) of the Act read with Section 153) and consequently, the passing of draft assessment order and the entire proceedings initiated

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SIR DORABJI TATA TRUST , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

10B submitted during the course of assessment proceedings for AY 13-14, the assessee has claimed that there are no investments held at any time during the previous year in concerns in which persons referred to in section 13(3) have a substantial interest.\nHowever, on perusal of records of A.Y.2014-15, it is also noticed that the assessee holds investment

DIAGOLD DESIGNS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-12(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal & Diagold Designs Limited, Cc2070, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 051 ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit-12(2) (1) Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Pan – Aabcd3716 ..... Respondent

10B (4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Gr.V The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, withdraw or substitute the above grounds of appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee company filed its return of income on 19.09.2010 declaring loss of Rs. 31,26,475/-. Case of the assessee was assessed

SIR DORABJI TATA TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (APPEALS) NFAC, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross\nappeal filed by the assessee is allowed

10B submitted during the course of assessment\nproceedings for AY 13-14, the assessee has claimed that there\nare no investments held at any time during the previous year in\nconcerns in which persons referred to in section 13(3) have a\nsubstantial interest.\nHowever, on perusal of records of A.Y.2014-15, it is also noticed\nthat the assessee holds investment

MEHLI MEHTA MUSIC FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD-2(4), MUMBAI

reassessment order be modified by holding that your appellant\nis entitled to the benefit of exemption under sections 11 and 12:\n3. The addition of corpus donations of Rs 3,64,60,524 be deleted.\nThe above grounds are independent of and without prejudice to one\nanother.\nYour appellant craves leave to add to, modify or delete

MEHLI MEHTA MUSIC FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD-2(4), MUMBAI

reassessment order be modified by holding that your appellant\nis entitled to the benefit of exemption under sections 11 and 12:\n3. The addition of corpus donations of Rs 3,64,60,524 be deleted.\nThe above grounds are independent of and without prejudice to one\nanother.\nYour appellant craves leave to add to, modify or delete

MEHLI MEHTA MUSIC FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2(4), MUMBAI

reassessment order be modified by holding that your appellant\nis entitled to the benefit of exemption under sections 11 and 12:\n3. The addition of corpus donations of Rs 3,64,60,524 be deleted.\nThe above grounds are independent of and without prejudice to one\nanother.\nYour appellant craves leave to add to, modify or delete

MEHLI MEHTA MUSIC FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2(4), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment\nyear 2009-10 stands partly allowed and appeals for assessment\nyears 2014-15, 2016-17 and 2017-18 stands allowed

reassessment order be modified by holding that your appellant\nis entitled to the benefit of exemption under sections 11 and 12:\n3. The addition of corpus donations of Rs 3,64,60,524 be deleted.\nThe above grounds are independent of and without prejudice to one\nanother.\nYour appellant craves leave to add to, modify or delete