THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, MUMBAI

Accordingly, in terms of the aforesaid, Ground No. 3 to\n7 raised by the Assessee pertaining to merits of such\nadditions/disallowances are dismissed as having been rendered\ninfructuous

Bench: "CLEAN_TEXT": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n\"I\" BENCH, MUMBAI\n\nSHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nSHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassess such income and\nalso any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped\nassessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in\nthe course of the proceedings under this section, or\nrecompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any\nother allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment\nyear concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3(2)(2), MUMBAI

reassess such income and\nalso any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped\nassessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in\nthe course of the proceedings under this section, or\nrecompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any\nother allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment\nyear concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, in terms of the aforesaid, Ground No. 3 to\n7 raised by the Assessee pertaining to merits of such\nadditions/disallowances are dismissed as having been rendered\ninfructuous

reassess such income and\nalso any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped\nassessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in\nthe course of the proceedings under this section, or\nrecompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any\nother allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment\nyear concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

SURENDRA GARG HUF ,MUMBAI vs. ITO- 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

142 has been issued to him, or\n\n(b)\na return of income has been furnished by such\nother person but no notice under sub-section (2)\nof section 143 has been served and limitation of\nserving the notice under sub-section (2) of section\n143 has expired, or\n\n(c)\nassessment or reassessment

SURENDRA GARG HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO - 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

142 has been issued to him, or\n(b) a return of income has been furnished by such\nother person but no notice under sub-section (2)\nof section 143 has been served and limitation of\nserving the notice under sub-section (2) of section\n143 has expired, or\n(c) assessment or reassessment

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

Bench: Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

reassessment proceedings had been initiated in the name of a deceas been initiated in the name of a deceased person. Estate of Vandravan P Shah Estate of Vandravan P Shah ITA No. 5401, 5402 & 5403/MUM/2024 5.1 It was submitted that the notices issued under sections 143(2) It was submitted that the notices issued under sections

ACIT-16(2), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN vs. FAKHRUDDIN TAIYEBALI PADARIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2017-18 Acit- 16(2), Mumbai Fakhruddin Taiyebali Padaria 5Th Floor, Shabbir Place, 80 Vs. Dr. A.L. Nair Road, Mumbai- 400008. Pan: Abdpp 7103 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Dinesh A Chourasia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.01.2025

reassessment of escaped income of the deceased, the Assessing Officer has to bring all the legal representatives on record. However, in the instant case no such exercise has been done by the AO. From the assessment order, it is not clear that the notice under section 142

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(2)(2), MUMBAI

reassess such income and \nalso any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped \nassessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in \nthe course of the proceedings under this section, or \nrecompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any \nother allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment \nyear concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

reassess such income and \nalso any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped \nassessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in \nthe course of the proceedings under this section, or \nrecompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any \nother allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment \nyear concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

JAYANTILAL RAJMAL SETH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jayantilal Rajmal Seth, Dcit-Cc-4(3), A-3, Saibaba Shopping Centre, Bkc, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai Central, Vs. Mumbai-400008. Pan No. Agepj 0499 E Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notices under section proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notices under section proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notices under section Jayantilal Rajmal Seth 16 142

SHRI AMIT MANGILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, - 33(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

142 has been issued to him, or (b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but no notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 has been served and limitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment

SHAKUNTALA KAMBLE (LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF PREMCHAND KAMBLE),THANE vs. DCIT -CENT. CIR `, THANE

142(2A) of the Act. Subsequently reassessment proceedings were initiated for the Assessment Year 2007-08 and 2008-09 and 2 separate reassessment order were passed on 20/03/2013 under Section

DCIT - CC- 6(4), MUMBAI vs. FORNAX REAL ESTATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, while the petition under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, 1963, as filed by the assessee, is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year:” Fornax Real Estate Ltd. ITA no.1427/Mum./2022 Thus, as per 1st proviso to section 147 of the Act, in a case where the 13. assessment was completed under section 143(3), reassessment

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

DCIT 3.2.1, MUMBAI vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

MR. SATYA PRAKASH SINGH,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-28(3)(1), VASHI

In the result, the ground so taken by the assessee so far as it relates to challenging the order of the AO as passed beyond the period of limitation is hereby allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

142 or sub-section (2) of section 143 or section 148 has been issued prior to the 1st day of June, 2016 and the assessment or reassessment