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

reassessment proceedings culminated into passing of\nAssessment Order, dated 29/12/2017, under Section 143(3)\nread with Section 147 of the Act.\n5. Being

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

reassessment proceedings culminated into passing of\nAssessment Order, dated 29/12/2017, under Section 143(3)\nread with Section 147 of the Act.\n\n5. Being

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

reassessment proceedings culminated into passing of\nAssessment Order, dated 29/12/2017, under Section 143(3)\nread with Section 147 of the Act.\n\n5. Being

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

reassessment proceedings culminated into passing of \nAssessment Order, dated 29/12/2017, under Section 143(3) \nread with Section 147 of the Act. \n5. Being

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)

143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act whereby income of the Assessee was determined at INR.3,44,52,52,130/- under normal provisions of the Act and Book Profit under Section 115JB of the Act were determined at INR.1,70,14,98,778/-. Thereafter, reassessment

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)

143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act whereby income of the Assessee was determined at INR.3,44,52,52,130/- under normal provisions of the Act and Book Profit under Section 115JB of the Act were determined at INR.1,70,14,98,778/-. Thereafter, 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)

143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act whereby income of the Assessee was determined at INR.3,44,52,52,130/- under normal provisions of the Act and Book Profit under Section 115JB of the Act were determined at INR.1,70,14,98,778/-. Thereafter, 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)

143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act whereby income of the Assessee was determined at INR.3,44,52,52,130/- under normal provisions of the Act and Book Profit under Section 115JB of the Act were determined at INR.1,70,14,98,778/-. Thereafter, reassessment

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

reassessment proceedings culminated into passing of \nAssessment Order, dated 29/12/2017, under Section 143(3) \nread with Section 147 of the Act. \n5. Being

DHAVAL EXIM PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, 5(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dhaval Exim Pvt. Ltd., Acit, 5(1)(2), 117-A, 117-A, Panchratna Bldg., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mama Parmanand Marg, Opera Maharishi Karve Road, House, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400 004. Pan No. Aadcd 0472 B Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. Dr : 04/04/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 25/04/2024

reassessment orders without notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act was justified. Section 143 (2) of the Act was justified

KUDOS FINANCE AND INVESTMENT PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

143(1) of the Act as originally available to the Assessing Officer. In the present case, the Learned PCIT has directed the Assessing Officer to carry out inquiry in the matter of claim of deduction of INR.1,07,35,497/- under Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act and to reassess

DR BATRAS POSITIVE HEALTH CLINIC PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Ita Nos. 2748, 2747 & 2761/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dr Batras Positive Health Clinic Cit(A), National Faceless Pvt. Ltd., Appeal Centre, Delhi. 2Nd Floor, H Kantilal Compound, Vs. Andheri Kurla Road, Sakinaka Andheri East-400072 Pan No. Aabcd 3857 G Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings. proceedings. proceedings. (x) (x) (x) Thereafter, the AO is obliged under the law to issue and serve Thereafter, the AO is obliged under the law to issue and serve Thereafter, the AO is obliged under the law to issue and serve notice u/s 143(2) to enable him to make http://www.itatonline.org notice u/s 143(2) to enable

DR BATRAS POSITIVE HEALTH CLINIC PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), NFAC, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Ita Nos. 2748, 2747 & 2761/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dr Batras Positive Health Clinic Cit(A), National Faceless Pvt. Ltd., Appeal Centre, Delhi. 2Nd Floor, H Kantilal Compound, Vs. Andheri Kurla Road, Sakinaka Andheri East-400072 Pan No. Aabcd 3857 G Appellant Respondent

reassessment proceedings. proceedings. proceedings. (x) (x) (x) Thereafter, the AO is obliged under the law to issue and serve Thereafter, the AO is obliged under the law to issue and serve Thereafter, the AO is obliged under the law to issue and serve notice u/s 143(2) to enable him to make http://www.itatonline.org notice u/s 143(2) to enable

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 under section 143(3) read with section 147 completed reassessment under section 143(3) read with section 147 completed

URMISH M. UDANI,MUMBAI vs. ACI 10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\n&\nSHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER\nI.T.A. No. 6144/Mum/2017\nAssessment Year: 2009-10\nShri Urmish M. Udani\nRH-12, J-12, Prabhukrupa\nSector-6, Vashi\nNavi Mumbai - 400705\n[PAN: AAGPU5477P]\nअपीलार्थी/ (Appellant)\nAsst. Commissioner of Income\nVs\nTax – 10(3), Mumbai\nप्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent)\nAssessee by : Shri Madhur Agrawal/Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/Rs\nRevenue by: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R\nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date

section 143(3) will not\nrender the Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings even when\nintimation under section 143

M/S.U.S.ROOFS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-10(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

143(3) read with section 147 of the Act is bad in law. The learned AR by referring to the assessment order submitted that, during the reassessment

JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 15(3)2, (OSD), MUMBAI vs. M/S.U.S.ROOFS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

143(3) read with section 147 of the Act is bad in law. The learned AR by referring to the assessment order submitted that, during the reassessment

SHREE SAI BABA SANTHAN TRUST MUMBAI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the\nappeal of the Revenue is dismissed

reassess a return where only 143(1)(a) order of processing was\nearlier passed and have summarised the legal requirement as follows-\n\"Summary of the legal position\n35.1 The upshot of the above discussion is that where the return\ninitially filed is processed under Section