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 ()

1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that, Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable

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 ()

1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that, Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable

M/S THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO. OP BANK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO-1(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment and recomputation. and recomputation. 153. (1) No order of assessment12 shall be made under 153. (1) No order of assessment12 shall be made under 153. (1) No order of assessment12 shall be made under section

DY CIT-1(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

reassessment and recomputation. and recomputation. 153. (1) No order of assessment12 shall be made under 153. (1) No order of assessment12 shall be made under 153. (1) No order of assessment12 shall be made under section

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

153 and 149/MUM/2025 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 3674, 3523 and 3440/Mum/2025) Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2016-17 Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry Income Tax officer Sterlin Bay, (International taxation) 103, Walkeshwar Road, Mumbai - 3(2)(1) 400006 Mumbai (PAN: AAEPM2061M) Appellant Respondent Present for: Assessee : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate and Shri Divesh Chawla, Advocate Revenue : Shri Satya

TUBACEX PRAKASH INDIA P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL/JT/CY/ASSTT/CIT/ ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE,, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed on the additional grounds

Bench: Us, First We Would Like To Address Ground No.3 Wherein The Assessee Has Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Tpo U/S.92Ca(3) Of The Act Dated 01/11/2019 Is Barred By Limitation & Hence, Invalid In Law.

1) is made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, an order under sub-section (3) may be made at any time before sixty days prior to the date on which the period of limitation referred to in section 153, or as the case may be, in section 153B for making the order of assessment or reassessment

TELEPERFORMANCE GLOBAL SERVICES P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL/JT/DY/CIT/ASSTT/ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT DENTRE,, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed on the additional grounds

Bench: Us, First We Would Like To Address Ground No.2 Wherein The Assessee Has Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Tpo U/S.92Ca(3) Of The Act Dated 01/11/2019 Is Barred By Limitation & Hence, Invalid In Law.

1) is made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, an order under sub-section (3) may be made at any time before sixty days prior to the date on which the period of limitation referred to in section 153, or as the case may be, in section 153B for making the order of assessment or reassessment

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

153 and 149/MUM/2025\n(Arising out of ITA Nos.3674, 3523 and 3440/Mum/2025)\n Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2016-17\n\nShapoorji Pallonji Mistry\nSterlin Bay,\n103, Walkeshwar Road, Mumbai\n400006\n(PAN: AAEРМ2061M)\nAppellant\nIncome Tax officer\n(International taxation)\n3(2)(1)\nMumbai\nRespondent\n\nPresent for:\nAssessee : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate\nand Shri Divesh

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

153 and 149/MUM/2025\n(Arising out of ITA Nos.3674, 3523 and 3440/Mum/2025)\n Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2016-17\n\nShapoorji Pallonji Mistry\nSterlin Bay,\n103, Walkeshwar Road, Mumbai\n400006\n(PAN: AAEРМ2061M)\nAppellant\nIncome Tax officer\n(International taxation)\n3(2)(1)\nMumbai\nRespondent\n\nPresent for:\nAssessee : Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate\nand Shri Divesh

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

1) or section 153, the\nassessment or reassessment relating to any assessment year\nwhich has abated under the second proviso

GAMMON INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC- 7(2)., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Blem/S. Gammon India Ltd V. Dcit-Central Circle 7(2) 3Rd Floor, Plot No. 3/8 Room No. 655, 6Th Floor Hamilton House, J.N. Heredia Marg Aayakar Bhavan Ballard Estate, Mumbai- 400038 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacg3821A (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle 7(2) V. M/S. Gammon India Ltd Room No. 655, 6Th Floor 1, Gammon House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Veer Savarkar Marg Mumbai- 400020 Prabhadevi, Mumbai - 400025 Pan: Aaacg3821A (Appellant) (Respondent)

1) is made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, an order under sub-section (3) may be made at any time before sixty days prior to the date on which the period of limitation referred to in section 153, or as the case may be, in section 153B for making the order of assessment or reassessment

DCIT CC 7(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S GAMMON INDIA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Blem/S. Gammon India Ltd V. Dcit-Central Circle 7(2) 3Rd Floor, Plot No. 3/8 Room No. 655, 6Th Floor Hamilton House, J.N. Heredia Marg Aayakar Bhavan Ballard Estate, Mumbai- 400038 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacg3821A (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Central Circle 7(2) V. M/S. Gammon India Ltd Room No. 655, 6Th Floor 1, Gammon House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Veer Savarkar Marg Mumbai- 400020 Prabhadevi, Mumbai - 400025 Pan: Aaacg3821A (Appellant) (Respondent)

1) is made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, an order under sub-section (3) may be made at any time before sixty days prior to the date on which the period of limitation referred to in section 153, or as the case may be, in section 153B for making the order of assessment or reassessment

ACIT 32 1, MUMBAI vs. VIDHI ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () Before Shri Om Prakash Kant () Before Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

153, assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the deprecation reassess such income or recompute the loss or the deprecation reassess such income or recompute the loss or the deprecation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such wance or any other allowance or deduction for such wance or any other allowance or deduction for such

VIDHI ENTERPRISES,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () Before Shri Om Prakash Kant () Before Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

153, assess or reassess such income or recompute the loss or the deprecation reassess such income or recompute the loss or the deprecation reassess such income or recompute the loss or the deprecation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such wance or any other allowance or deduction for such wance or any other allowance or deduction for such

MR NILESH BHARANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 612/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

reassessment made under sub-section (1) has been annulled in appeal or any other legal proceeding, then, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or section 153

ATOS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed on the additional grounds

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1795/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-14(1)1), Atos India Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan Godrej & Boyce Complex, बनाम/ Mumbai Plant 5, Pirojshanagar, Vs. Lbs Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400079 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaaco2461J (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Dhanesh Bafna /Chandni Sha /Riddhi Maru /Kinjal Patel, Ld. Ars प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Yogesh Kamat, Ld. Dr सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ 01.06.2022 & : 25.01.2023 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 23.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: 1. The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) In 2

reassessment or recomputation or fresh assessment, as the case may be, expires:" 24. Ergo, the TPO can pass an order u/s 92CA of the Act at any time before 60 days prior to the date on which period of limitation referred to u/s 153 expires. Thus 60 days have to be counted prior to the date of last date

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. (a) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the reassessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act is invalid, bad-in-law and against the principles of natural justice. (b) The Ld.CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the validity of the reassessment order by referring to the proviso to Explanation (2) of section 153

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. (a) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the reassessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act is invalid, bad-in-law and against the principles of natural justice. (b) The Ld.CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the validity of the reassessment order by referring to the proviso to Explanation (2) of section 153

M/S. PATANJALI FOODS LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS RUCHI SOYA INDUSTRIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DY COMM OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal and cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1172/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1175/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 1176/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

153-A(1). For the sake of convenience, the second and third proviso to section 153A(1) of ITA. No.320/Mum/2023 & CO No. 51/Mum/2023 A.Y Nos. 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s. Patanjali Foods Ltd. the said Act which is relevant is reproduced below and reads thus : Provided further that assessment or reassessment