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

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by\ntreating the reassessment order passed under section\n143(3) read with section 147

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

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by\ntreating the reassessment order passed under section\n143(3) read with section 147

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

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by\ntreating the reassessment order passed under section\n143(3) read with section 147

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.\nThe CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by\ntreating the reassessment order passed under section\n143(3) read with section 147

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

147", "Section 10(38)", "Section 68", "Section 153A", "Section 153C", "Section 148", "Section 132", "Section 132A", "Section 131" ], "issues": "1. Whether the 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. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by\ntreating the reassessment order passed under section\n143(3) read with section 147

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)

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by treating the reassessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147

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)

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by treating the reassessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147

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)

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by treating the reassessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147

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)

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by treating the reassessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147

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

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by \ntreating the reassessment order passed under section \n143(3) read with section 147

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

reassessment proceedings under Section 147 were initiated.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the additional ground raised by the assessee regarding the applicability of Section 153C instead of Section 147 was a mixed question of fact and law and could not be admitted as it required fresh material. Regarding Ground No. 1

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

1, 1989,\nas also sections 148 to 152 are substantially different from the provisions as they\nstood prior to such substitution. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate\nclauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping\nassessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI), MUMBAI

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

1, 1989,\nas also sections 148 to 152 are substantially different from the provisions as they\nstood prior to such substitution. Under the old provisions of section 147, separate\nclauses (a) and (b) laid down the circumstances under which income escaping\nassessment for the past assessment years could be assessed or reassessed

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

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by \ntreating the reassessment order passed under section \n143(3) read with section 147

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

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

reassess under unamended section 147, (b) issuance of notice under unamended section 148, (c) in accordance with time limit in terms of unamended section 149 and (d) sanction under unamended section 151 of the Act. 3 ITA Nos. 3674/Mum/2025 and ors. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 5. Whether section 3(1

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

1. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO by\ntreating the reassessment order passed under section\n143(3) read with section 147

JAMNADAS VIRJI SHARES AND STOCK BROKERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4(3)(1), MUMBAI

1), wherein the claim of exemption in respect of dividend\nincome was accepted and the business loss returned by the\nassessee was also accepted. Even in the reassessment\nproceedings, the Assessing Officer, in the body of the\nreassessment order passed under section 143(3) read with\nsection 147