INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 3(2)(1), KAUTILYA BHAWAN MUMBAI vs. SHAPOORJI PALLONJI MISTRY, MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the Revenue are dismissed and the\ntwo Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

1)(b) of the Act. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings and orders were quashed.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "147", "148", "148A", "149", "151", "143(3)", "68", "142

SHYAM KUMAR SADASHIVAN PILLAI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE 27(3)(1), NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

reassessment proceedings. Sec. 142(1) of the Act contemplates enquiry before assessment in order to determine the true and correct income of the assessee and it is the duty of every assessee to cooperate with and join the proceedings to ascertain the truth regarding cases. The purpose of the penal provision contained in Section

ITO(IT)-3(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SHAPOORJI PALLONJI MISTRY, MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the Revenue are dismissed and the\ntwo Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

142(1) issued wherein Approval of 156-157\nTax.\nPrincipal Chief Commissioner of Income\nInternational Taxation. New Delhi dated\n27th July 2022 for order u/s 148A(d) and issued\nof notice u/s 148 was provided\n18. 30th May 2023\nDraft assessment order u/s 144C(1) r.w.s 147 158-169\nwas passed proposing addition of\nRs.28,50,30,661/- while computing

SHAILESH ASALRAJ JAIN,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI 20, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2018-19

section 263 and set aside the reassessment proceedings for fresh consideration and set aside the reassessment proceedings for fresh consideration and set aside the reassessment proceedings for fresh consideration observing as under: “7. The above explanation at clause (c) clearly provides that the 7. The above explanation at clause (c) clearly provides that the 7. The above explanation at clause

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAUTILYA BHAWAN vs. JAJ INTERNATIONAL, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds relating to merit the file of the Ld

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

reassessment has abated. (2) Where books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned 2) Where books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned 2) Where books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned as referred to in sub as referred to in sub-section (1) has or have been received by the section (1

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE- 41(1)(1), MUMBAI, KAUTILYA BHAWAN, BKC vs. JAJ INTERNATIONAL, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds relating to merit the file of the Ld

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

reassessment has abated. (2) Where books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned 2) Where books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned 2) Where books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned as referred to in sub as referred to in sub-section (1) has or have been received by the section (1

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

1)\nof section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly\nall material facts necessary for his assessment, for that\n assessment year”\n12. As per First Proviso to Section 147 of the Act, no action under\nITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834,\n2827

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

1)\nof section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly\nall material facts necessary for his assessment, for that\n assessment year”\n12. As per First Proviso to Section 147 of the Act, no action under\nITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834,\n2827

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)

1)\nof section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly\nall material facts necessary for his assessment, for that\n assessment year”\n\n12.\nAs per First Proviso to Section 147 of the Act, no action under\n\nITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834,\n2827

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

1)\nof section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly\nall material facts necessary for his assessment, for that\n assessment year”\n\n12. As per First Proviso to Section 147 of the Act, no action under\n\nITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834,\n2827

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

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

1) of section 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

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

1) of section 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

NIYATI SUTARIA JEMES ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailniyati Sutaria James, 302 Parimal Premises, 17Th Road, Khar West, Mumbai – 400052 ............... Appellant Pan : Ahipj7649B V/S Ito, Ward – 23(2)(1), Piramal Chambers, Parel ……………… Respondent Mumbai - 400012

section 250 of the Income-tax Act. 1961 (the Act), on the following amongst other grounds each of which is in the alternative and without prejudice to any others. 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the communication were delivered to the assessee on her registered email id. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the registered mobile

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

1)\nof section 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

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

1)\nof section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly\nall material facts necessary for his assessment, for that\n assessment year”\n\n12. As per First Proviso to Section 147 of the Act, no action under\n\nITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834,\n2827

VIIKING MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (IT) CENTRAL CIR4(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blev. Acit – Central Circle-4(4) Viiking Media & Entertainment Pvt Ltd., 604-065, 6Th Floor, Gateway Plaza, Air India Building Hiranandani Garden Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Central Avenue, Powai, Mumbai - 400076 Pan: Aaacj9884E (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Neelkant Khandelwal Assessee Represented By : Ms. Richa Gulati Department Represented By :

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 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, if has been made, before the date of receiving

HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

142(1) was also issued by the DCIT Central Circle 4(1) Mumbai as is mentioned in para 2 of the relevant assessment order. The said notice was also responded by the assessee on 06/09/2018 to the DCIT Central Circle 4(1) Mumbai. 6. Mr Vinod Bindal, the ld. Counsel of the assessee, submitted that though these facts are very

HEMENDRA RAMJI VIRA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

142(1) was also issued by the DCIT Central Circle 4(1) Mumbai as is mentioned in para 2 of the relevant assessment order. The said notice was also responded by the assessee on 06/09/2018 to the DCIT Central Circle 4(1) Mumbai. 6. Mr Vinod Bindal, the ld. Counsel of the assessee, submitted that though these facts are very