ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

159 (pre-death)\ncannot be assessed under Section 168 (post-death). There is no\noverlapping of jurisdiction.\n9.11 In the present case, the reassessment

ESTATE OF VANDRAVAN P SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

159 (pre-death)\ncannot be assessed under Section 168 (post-death). There is no\noverlapping of jurisdiction.\n9.11 In the present case, the 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)

reassessment proceedings. The relevant extract of the said judgment reads as under: “2. Here is a case where Petitioner had filed return of income ITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834, 2827, 2830 & 2823 / Mum / 2024 & C.O. No. 97 & 96 / Mum / 2024 Assessment Year 2010-2011, 2012-2013 to 2019-2020 showing a total income

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)

reassessment proceedings. The relevant extract of the said judgment reads as under: “2. Here is a case where Petitioner had filed return of income ITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834, 2827, 2830 & 2823 / Mum / 2024 & C.O. No. 97 & 96 / Mum / 2024 Assessment Year 2010-2011, 2012-2013 to 2019-2020 showing a total income

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)

reassessment proceedings. The relevant extract of the said judgment reads as under: “2. Here is a case where Petitioner had filed return of income ITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834, 2827, 2830 & 2823 / Mum / 2024 & C.O. No. 97 & 96 / Mum / 2024 Assessment Year 2010-2011, 2012-2013 to 2019-2020 showing a total income

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)

reassessment proceedings. The relevant extract of the said judgment reads as under: “2. Here is a case where Petitioner had filed return of income ITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834, 2827, 2830 & 2823 / Mum / 2024 & C.O. No. 97 & 96 / Mum / 2024 Assessment Year 2010-2011, 2012-2013 to 2019-2020 showing a total income

M/S. STEECON INFRASTRUCTURE ,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Steecon Infrastructure Income Tax Officer 1(4) 85, Subhash Nagar, Pal Road, Paota Jodhpur- 242008 Vs. Jodhpur- 342008 Pan No. Acdfs3423Q Appellant Respondent

reassessment notice issued under section 148 of the Act dated 8/9/2014 on the ground that same was issued on non- existent entity as the firm was dissolved on 1/1/2013. The learned counsel of the assessee has relied on decisions, which are listed above. In Bhupendra Bhikabhai Desai (supra), the case is of individual and notice under section 153C

ALBERT JOSEPH ROZARIO,MUMBAI vs. ITO, INT. TAX, CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Rahul Chaudharyassessment Year : 2018-19 Albert Joseph Rozario, Ito, (Int. Tax), Circle-4(1)(1), B-311, 5Th Wing, Room No. 629, 6Th Floor, Inlaks Park, Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Yari Road, Versova, C-41 To C-43, G Block, Andheri West, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400058 Bandra East, Pan : Afvpr6139P Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Dharan Gandhi For Revenue : Shri Sridhar G. Menon, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22-07-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 R/W 144C(13) Of The Act Dt. 30-12-2024, Consequent To The Directions Given By The Ld. Drp-1, Mumbai-3, U/S 144C(5) Of The Act, Dated 30-11-2024 Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay.) 2018-19. 2. Briefly The Facts Of The Case Are That Basis Information Available Through The Insight Portal That The Assessee Had Purchased Immoveable Properties Amounting To Rs. 8,31,45,549/- & Has Received Interest

reassessment proceedings to be completely without jurisdiction. It was submitted that grant of proper sanction is not just a procedural issue, but a jurisdictional issue as held by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court. 10. Further reference was drawn to the first proviso to section 148, as it then stood at the relevant time, which requires a notice

APCOTEX INDUSTRIES LIMITED,RAOGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - CIRCLE 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

reassessment proceedings, notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer held that depreciation under section 32 is allowable only where the asset is used for the purposes of business during the relevant previous year. According to him, the assessee failed to establish that the property was used for business purposes

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

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

section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016 and the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

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

section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016 and the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

LESHARK GLOBAL LLP ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals for A

section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. In respect of the FPS, the ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the ITAT Chennai Bench in the case of Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 47/MDS/2016(AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13) dated 17.05.2016 and the ITAT Delhi in the case of Bharat Rasayan

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

reassessment proceedings. The relevant extract \nof the said judgment reads as under:\n“2. Here is a case where Petitioner had filed return of income \nshowing a total income of Rs.1,93,550/- and return of income \nhas been processed under section 143(1). Therefore, even \nthough more than four years have expired from the end of the \nrelevant assessment

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

reassessment proceedings. The relevant extract\nof the said judgment reads as under:\n“2. Here is a case where Petitioner had filed return of income\nITA No. 2616-2623 /Mum /2024, ITA No. 2845, 2841, 2836, 2834,\n2827, 2830 & 2823 / Mum / 2024 & C.O. No. 97 & 96 / Mum / 2024\n Assessment Year 2010-2011, 2012-2013 to 2019-2020\n33\nshowing

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

reassessment proceedings. The relevant extract\nof the said judgment reads as under:\n\n“2. Here is a case where Petitioner had filed return of income\n\n==End of OCR for page 38==\n\nshowing a total income of Rs.1,93,550/- and return of income\nhas been processed under section 143(1). Therefore, even\nthough more than four

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR JAIN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

159 (Visakhapatnam Trib.). The extract of the decision is as under: "A careful study of sections 153A to 153C and also the circular issued by the CBDT explaining the procedure of assessment in search cases shows that these are separate provisions independent of other provisions relating to reassessment

SONAL SNEHAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(1), MUMBAI

section 148. This was requested for\nseveral occasions during the entire reassessment\nproceedings. No certified copies of the statement were\nfurnished in completion of the reassessment and no\nopportunity was afforded for cross\nexamination/verification of records and third parties.\n2.\nThe learned AO erred in making the impugned\naddition of Rs. 40,159

ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX MUMBAI vs. DEVANG AJIT JAVERI , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on aforesaid terms

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

159 taxmann.com 450 (Delhi) and also by earlier by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Narayani and Sons Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2016) 73 taxmann.com 21. Thus, we hold that the penalty order dated 11/03/2020 is barred by limitation and accordingly, the penalty levied by the ld. JCIT is hereby quashed