SHELL INDIA MARKETS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (A.M.) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Shell India Markets Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax- Trent House, First Floor, Large Tax Units (Ltu) G-Block, Plot No.C-60, Mumbai Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400 051 Pan : Aaics1404P Appellant Respondednt

reassessment proceedings, on the issues taken up by the Learned Commissioner in section 263 proceedings. We have seen the reply furnished by the assessee filed in response to the questions raised by the assessing officer during the re-assessment copy of which is available at page No. 264 to 283 of PB. In our view the AO must have gone

NILESH S. BARDE & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ITO-24(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri D.K. Rao, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2840/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08,) Nilesh S. Barde & Co. Ito 24(3)(2) बनाम/ C-11, 7Th Floor, Pratyakshakar 320, Corporate Avenue, Wing-A, Sonawala Road, Goregaon-E Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra-E, Vs. Mumbai – 400 063. Mumbai – 400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aagpb9571K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

147 of the I.T. Act and accordingly, the case of the assessee is required to be reopened by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act so as to reassess the assessee’s correct income for the A.Y. 2007-08.” 4. The assessee in compliance to Notice u/s 148 of the ‘Act’ filed a letter with

NILESH S. BARDE & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 24(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri D.K. Rao, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2840/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08,) Nilesh S. Barde & Co. Ito 24(3)(2) बनाम/ C-11, 7Th Floor, Pratyakshakar 320, Corporate Avenue, Wing-A, Sonawala Road, Goregaon-E Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra-E, Vs. Mumbai – 400 063. Mumbai – 400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aagpb9571K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

147 of the I.T. Act and accordingly, the case of the assessee is required to be reopened by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act so as to reassess the assessee’s correct income for the A.Y. 2007-08.” 4. The assessee in compliance to Notice u/s 148 of the ‘Act’ filed a letter with

NILESH S. BARDE & CO.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,WD-24(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri D.K. Rao, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2840/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08,) Nilesh S. Barde & Co. Ito 24(3)(2) बनाम/ C-11, 7Th Floor, Pratyakshakar 320, Corporate Avenue, Wing-A, Sonawala Road, Goregaon-E Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra-E, Vs. Mumbai – 400 063. Mumbai – 400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aagpb9571K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

147 of the I.T. Act and accordingly, the case of the assessee is required to be reopened by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act so as to reassess the assessee’s correct income for the A.Y. 2007-08.” 4. The assessee in compliance to Notice u/s 148 of the ‘Act’ filed a letter with

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, , KALYAN vs. M/S ASB INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandip Singh Karhaildcit, C-1,Kalyan Vs. M/S. Asb International 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Pvt. Ltd. Mayale Naar, E9, E44, Addl. Kalyan(W)- 421301 Ambernath, Industrial Area, Anand Nagar, Ambernath Thane-421506 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaaca8424F Appellant .. Respondent C.O. No. 65/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2009-10)

u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act. 4. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the AO stated that from A.Y. 2001-02 onward the provisions of section10A of and 10B of the Act have been brought at per with the other section

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT(LTU) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

u/s. 143(3) for earlier years. Since, there is no change in the facts of the case, following the reasoning given in the assessment order for earlier years, CENVAT element of Rs.5,10,51,276/- referable to closing stock of raw materials etc. is being added back in computing total income of the assessee. However, deduction is granted for unutilized

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

u/s. 143(3) for earlier years. Since, there is no change in the facts of the case, following the reasoning given in the assessment order for earlier years, CENVAT element of Rs.5,10,51,276/- referable to closing stock of raw materials etc. is being added back in computing total income of the assessee. However, deduction is granted for unutilized

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI vs. ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA No

Bench: Us:-

147 of the Act and these procedures of assessment operate in different fields and have different purposes to be fulfilled altogether. 6.4.3. The expression 'assess or reassess' stated in section 153A(1)(b) has to be understood as below:- 'assess' means assessments to be framed in respect of abated assessment years irrespective of the fact whether there are any incriminating

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA No

Bench: Us:-

147 of the Act and these procedures of assessment operate in different fields and have different purposes to be fulfilled altogether. 6.4.3. The expression 'assess or reassess' stated in section 153A(1)(b) has to be understood as below:- 'assess' means assessments to be framed in respect of abated assessment years irrespective of the fact whether there are any incriminating

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI vs. ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA No

Bench: Us:-

147 of the Act and these procedures of assessment operate in different fields and have different purposes to be fulfilled altogether. 6.4.3. The expression 'assess or reassess' stated in section 153A(1)(b) has to be understood as below:- 'assess' means assessments to be framed in respect of abated assessment years irrespective of the fact whether there are any incriminating

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA No

Bench: Us:-

147 of the Act and these procedures of assessment operate in different fields and have different purposes to be fulfilled altogether. 6.4.3. The expression 'assess or reassess' stated in section 153A(1)(b) has to be understood as below:- 'assess' means assessments to be framed in respect of abated assessment years irrespective of the fact whether there are any incriminating

DCIT CC 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

147, as long as the conditions mentioned therein are fulfilled.” 9.1 Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Book Pages 275 to 278 and submitted 275 to 278 and submitted that in the course

DCIT CC 4 (4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

147, as long as the conditions mentioned therein are fulfilled.” 9.1 Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Book Pages 275 to 278 and submitted 275 to 278 and submitted that in the course

DCIT CC 4 (4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

147, as long as the conditions mentioned therein are fulfilled.” 9.1 Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Book Pages 275 to 278 and submitted 275 to 278 and submitted that in the course

SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

147, as long as the conditions mentioned therein are fulfilled.” 9.1 Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Book Pages 275 to 278 and submitted 275 to 278 and submitted that in the course

SANMAN TRADE IMPEX LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

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

147, as long as the conditions mentioned therein are fulfilled.” 9.1 Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Book Pages 275 to 278 and submitted 275 to 278 and submitted that in the course

INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL TECHNOLOGY ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (E)- I(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s. 11 of the Act and filed its return of income for the A.Y.2008-09 on 25/03/2009 declaring total income of Rs. Nil. The assessee has filed the income and expenditure account, balance sheet and audit report in Form 10B along with the return of income. The scrutiny assessment was completed in the hands of the assessee trust u/s.143

SUVARNA NAGAR CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

147, which subsequently became subject matter of revisions in the impugned revisions order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s 263, the assessee had filed an appeal against the 21 Co.Op. Housing Societies aforesaid assessment order before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) wherein following grounds were taken: “(1) The Learned Assessing officer erred in taking the cost of acquisition

THE NAVYUG CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 21, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2004-05 Vithal Nagar Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd., Pratyakshkar बनाम/ 51 N.S.S. Rd No.11, Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Jia Hind Club, Jvpd Scheme, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400056 Mumbai- 400050 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat3055F Assessment Year: 2004-05 The Navyug Co. Operative Cit-21 Housing Society Ltd. Pratyakshkar बनाम/ Plot No. 51 Jain Hind Club Bhavan, Bkc Vs. Gldg. N.S. Rd No.11, Jai Hind Bandra (E) Society Jvpd Scheme Vile Mumbai- 400050 Parle (W) Mumbai-400049 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaaat0325L Assessment Year: 2004-05

147, which subsequently became subject matter of revisions in the impugned revisions order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s 263, the assessee had filed an appeal against the 21 Co.Op. Housing Societies aforesaid assessment order before the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) wherein following grounds were taken: “(1) The Learned Assessing officer erred in taking the cost of acquisition