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

142A and ending with the date on which the report of the Valuation Officer is received by the Assessing Officer; or (vi) the period (not exceeding sixty days) commencing from the date on which the Assessing Officer received the declaration under sub-section (1) of section 158A and ending with the date on which the order under sub-section

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

142A and ending with the date on which the report of the Valuation Officer is received by the Assessing Officer; or (vi) the period (not exceeding sixty days) commencing from the date on which the Assessing Officer received the declaration under sub-section (1) of section 158A and ending with the date on which the order under sub-section

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, 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 notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. 13. It is observed that in assessment order, Assessing Officer has referred to decision of Delhi High court in case of assessee for A.Y.2007-08 wherein assessee’s writ petition was dismissed and observed that receipt of DVO’s order after completion of assessment does not make reference invalid. It is relevant

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, 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 notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. 13. It is observed that in assessment order, Assessing Officer has referred to decision of Delhi High court in case of assessee for A.Y.2007-08 wherein assessee’s writ petition was dismissed and observed that receipt of DVO’s order after completion of assessment does not make reference invalid. It is relevant

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 notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. 13. It is observed that in assessment order, Assessing Officer has referred to decision of Delhi High court in case of assessee for A.Y.2007-08 wherein assessee’s writ petition was dismissed and observed that receipt of DVO’s order after completion of assessment does not make reference invalid. It is relevant

PANKAJ DHANDHARIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-22(1), MUMBAI

Appeal is dismissed

reassessment order passed under\nsection 147 read with section 144B of The Income Tax Act, 1961\n(The Act) on 6/11/2023 by the National Faceless Assessment\nCentre (the learned AO) dated 6/11/2023, was dismissed.\n2. The assessee is aggrieved with the same and is in appeal before\nus raising following grounds.\n1.\nOn the facts and circumstances of the case

ACADEMY FOR GLOBAL EDUCATION SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 142A of the Act as it stood for the year under consideration reads as under: "142. (1) For the purposes of making an assessment or reassessment

DCIT-CC-7(3), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. SHRI MAJNI KARAMSHI PATEL, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal, Accountat Member Dcit, Cc-7(3) Vs. Shri Manji Karamshi Room No. 655, Patel Aayakar Bhavan, Office No. 1, Patel M.K.Road, Bhavan-29, Vijaywadi, Mumbai.-400020. Dr. Nagindas N Shah Lane Chira Bazar, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpp0130D Appellant .. Respondent Co No. 45/Mum/2021 (A.Y: 2014-15) Shri Manji Karamshi Vs. Dcit, Cc-7(3) Patel Room No. 655, Aayakar Office No. 1, Patel Bhavan, Bhuvan-29, Vijaywadi, M.K .Road, Dr. Nagindas N Shah Mumbai-400002. Lane Chira Bazar, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpp0130D Appellant .. Respondent

Section 142A of the Act as it stood for the year under consideration reads as under: “142. (1) For the purposes of making an assessment or reassessment

D.C.I.T. - 15(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ACADEMY FOR GLOBAL EDUCATION SERVICES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1134/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) The Dy. Commissioner Of Academy For Global Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(1) Education Services Pvt. Ltd, Room No. 470, 4Th Floor, C-09, Konark Indraprastha, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Sarvoday Nagar, Naur Village, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aahca2596F अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri B. S. Bist, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Dinesh R. Shah, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09-05-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21-05-2019

Section 142A of the Act as it stood for the year under consideration reads as under: “142. (1) For the purposes of making an assessment or reassessment

ITO 2(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. SATURN ADVISORY SERVICES P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Years: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer-2(3)(2), M/S Saturn Advisory Room No. 518A, Services Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 44, Strategic House, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mint Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती/Assessee) Pan No.:-Aajcs2674N

142A. Estimate by Valuation Officer in certain cases.—(1) For the purposes of making an assessment or reassessment under this Act, where an estimate of the value of any investment referred to in s. 69 or s. 69B or the value of any bullion, jewellery or other valuable article referred to in s. 69A or s. 69B or fair market