BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

20 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 145Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chandigarh25Mumbai20Ahmedabad16Agra8Kolkata8Delhi6Chennai5Pune3Indore2Hyderabad2Jaipur2Lucknow1Cochin1Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 14835Section 143(3)25Section 14721Section 148A14Addition to Income13Reassessment9Section 377Reopening of Assessment7Disallowance

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5.. In view of the same, notice u/s 148 is issued after approval of CIT-LTU, vide letter No. CIT/LTU/Reopening/2015-16 dated 29.02.2016’’ 10. On perusal of reasons recorded, it is apparent that reassessment notice has been issued by Assessing Officer mainly on two grounds i.e. one issue being alleged escapement on account

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

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

7
Survey u/s 133A6
Section 10A5
Section 133A5
ITA 3137/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5.. In view of the same, notice u/s 148 is issued after approval of CIT-LTU, vide letter No. CIT/LTU/Reopening/2015-16 dated 29.02.2016’’ 10. On perusal of reasons recorded, it is apparent that reassessment notice has been issued by Assessing Officer mainly on two grounds i.e. one issue being alleged escapement on account

ADDL CIT RG 7(1), MUMBAI vs. PROCTOR & GAMBLE HYGIENE & HEALTHCARE LTD, MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6549/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Batham
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

u/s. 143(3). 4. On appeal by the assessee the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. The assessee had also challenged the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act on the ground that the same was done purely on change of opinion. This was also rejected by the revenue authorities. Hence the above

PROCTER & GAMGLE HYGIENE& HEALTHCARE ,LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI

Appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6591/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Batham
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

u/s. 143(3). 4. On appeal by the assessee the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. The assessee had also challenged the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act on the ground that the same was done purely on change of opinion. This was also rejected by the revenue authorities. Hence the above

MS MILAN AGENCY,MUMBAI vs. ITO ASSESSEMENT UNIT, IT DEPT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5414/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Milan Agency Ito, Assessment Unit, It Deptt. Shop No. 6, Friends Shopping Vs. Centre, Azad Road, Andheri East, Mumbai-400069. Pan: Aaefm 8738 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal, Advocate & Om Kandalkar Revenue By : Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, Advocate & Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 145ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 274Section 44A

145A(ii) filed with the memo of appeal in Form 35 and also as an attachment with the executive summary filed [as desired by CIT(A)] after the Video conferencing. 6. Confirming penalty proceeding for notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271B / dismissing the ground no. 3, i.e. “issuing penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271B” when it is evident from

BLUE STAR INFOTECH LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 6(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7187/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Blue Star Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Circle-6(1), 4Th Floor, Band Box House, Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaacb6385J (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Circle-6(1), M/S Blue Star Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, 4Th Floor, Band Box House, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400018. Pan: Aaacb6385J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Sh. N.P. Singh (Sr.CIT-DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 145ASection 147Section 148Section 253Section 254(1)Section 46A

section 253 of Income Tax Act are directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-14, Mumbai dated 14.07.2011 for AY-2006-07. The assessee in ITA No.7187/M/2011 has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in directing the AO not exclude

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

ITA 6772/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

section 143(2) proceeding and was treated as such by the assessee preclude it from urging lack of jurisdiction." (emphasis supplied) (3) There is no interplay of section 127 as held in para 8, in the following words- "8. As far as the section 127 goes, we are of the opinion that having regard to the findings rendered, that question

M/S. BLUE SQUARE CORPORATE SERVICES PVT LTE,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-12(1)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2052/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2023AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Ms. Vinita ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 68

145A, 1st Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road, ……………. Mumbai - 400020 Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Ms. Vinita Shah For the Respondent/Department : Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha Date : 12.09.2023 Conclusion of hearing : 21.09.2023 Pronouncement of order O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: By way of the present appeal the Appellant has challenged the order, 1. dated 11/05/2023, passed

PFIZER LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 8739/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2007-08 & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Pfizer Limited, Acit Range 8(2), Patel Estate, Off S.V. Rd. Aayakar Bahwan, बनाम/ Jogeshwari (W), M.K. Marg, Vs. Mumba-400102 Mumbai- (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaacp3334M

147 of the Act for AY 2005-06, the AO rejected the submissions of the Appellant and included the entire interest amounting to Rs. 1,87,81,254 in the total income (refer compilation page nos. 133 to 140). 10. On appeal filed before CIT(A) against the aforesaid reassessment order

DCIT 10(3), MUMBAI vs. TOSCANO INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD, THANE

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6850/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6577 & 6578/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Toscano Infrastructure Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax 10(3) Ground Floor, Ashar I.T. Room No. 451 बनाम/ Park Road No. 16Z Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate M.K.Road Near Agricultural Bus Stop Mumbai -400 020 Thane(W) – 400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7263-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6849 & 6850/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Deputy Commissioner Of Toscano Infrastructure Income Tax 10(3) Private Limited Room No. 451 Ground Floor, Ashar I.T. बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Park Road No. 16Z Vs. M.K.Road Wagle Industrial Estate Mumbai -400 020 Near Agricultural Bus Stop Thane(W) – 400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7263-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram & Shri RahulFor Respondent: Dr. A.K.Nayak, Ld. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 143(3)(iii)Section 147

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide Assessing Officer [AO] order dated 18/11/2013 wherein the total income of the assessee was determined at Rs.10,09,83,380/- under normal provisions after addition of certain bogus purchases for Rs.6,72,98,528/- as against income of Rs.3,36,84,850/- determined in the original assessment u/s 143(3)(iii) dated

TOSCANO INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD,THANE vs. DCIT 10-(3), MUMBAI

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6578/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6577 & 6578/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Toscano Infrastructure Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax 10(3) Ground Floor, Ashar I.T. Room No. 451 बनाम/ Park Road No. 16Z Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate M.K.Road Near Agricultural Bus Stop Mumbai -400 020 Thane(W) – 400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7263-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6849 & 6850/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Deputy Commissioner Of Toscano Infrastructure Income Tax 10(3) Private Limited Room No. 451 Ground Floor, Ashar I.T. बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Park Road No. 16Z Vs. M.K.Road Wagle Industrial Estate Mumbai -400 020 Near Agricultural Bus Stop Thane(W) – 400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7263-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram & Shri RahulFor Respondent: Dr. A.K.Nayak, Ld. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 143(3)(iii)Section 147

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide Assessing Officer [AO] order dated 18/11/2013 wherein the total income of the assessee was determined at Rs.10,09,83,380/- under normal provisions after addition of certain bogus purchases for Rs.6,72,98,528/- as against income of Rs.3,36,84,850/- determined in the original assessment u/s 143(3)(iii) dated

DCIT 10(3), MUMBAI vs. TOSCANO INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD, THANE

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6849/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6577 & 6578/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Toscano Infrastructure Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax 10(3) Ground Floor, Ashar I.T. Room No. 451 बनाम/ Park Road No. 16Z Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate M.K.Road Near Agricultural Bus Stop Mumbai -400 020 Thane(W) – 400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7263-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6849 & 6850/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Deputy Commissioner Of Toscano Infrastructure Income Tax 10(3) Private Limited Room No. 451 Ground Floor, Ashar I.T. बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Park Road No. 16Z Vs. M.K.Road Wagle Industrial Estate Mumbai -400 020 Near Agricultural Bus Stop Thane(W) – 400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7263-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram & Shri RahulFor Respondent: Dr. A.K.Nayak, Ld. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 143(3)(iii)Section 147

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide Assessing Officer [AO] order dated 18/11/2013 wherein the total income of the assessee was determined at Rs.10,09,83,380/- under normal provisions after addition of certain bogus purchases for Rs.6,72,98,528/- as against income of Rs.3,36,84,850/- determined in the original assessment u/s 143(3)(iii) dated

TOSCANO INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD,THANE vs. DCIT 10-(3), MUMBAI

Appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6577/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6577 & 6578/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Toscano Infrastructure Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax 10(3) Ground Floor, Ashar I.T. Room No. 451 बनाम/ Park Road No. 16Z Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate M.K.Road Near Agricultural Bus Stop Mumbai -400 020 Thane(W) – 400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7263-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 6849 & 6850/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Deputy Commissioner Of Toscano Infrastructure Income Tax 10(3) Private Limited Room No. 451 Ground Floor, Ashar I.T. बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Park Road No. 16Z Vs. M.K.Road Wagle Industrial Estate Mumbai -400 020 Near Agricultural Bus Stop Thane(W) – 400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-7263-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram & Shri RahulFor Respondent: Dr. A.K.Nayak, Ld. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 143(3)(iii)Section 147

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide Assessing Officer [AO] order dated 18/11/2013 wherein the total income of the assessee was determined at Rs.10,09,83,380/- under normal provisions after addition of certain bogus purchases for Rs.6,72,98,528/- as against income of Rs.3,36,84,850/- determined in the original assessment u/s 143(3)(iii) dated

CHHEDA SPECIALITIES FOODS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-12(1)-4, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2305/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhchheda Specialities Vs. Ito-12(1)(4) Foods Pvt. Ltd. 145A, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. 7, Bmc Ind M. K. Road, Estate, Sai Nagar, Churchgate, Mg Road No. 1, Mumbai-400020 Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400067 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccc6221G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri. Ajay Singh
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 37

145A, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. 7, BMC Ind M. K. Road, Estate, Sai Nagar, Churchgate, MG Road No. 1, Mumbai-400020 Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400067 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AACCC6221G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri. Rahul Hakani Respondent by : Shri. Ajay Singh Date of Hearing 12.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2023 आदेश

CACHET ENGINEERING P.LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)-4, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1917/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1917/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Cachet Engineering Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Ito-12(1)-4 Ground Floor, Anandibai 145A, Aayakar Bhavan, M. Vs. Gosavi Chawl, Kurar K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Village, Malad (E)-400097. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccc9354L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri R.A. Dhyani (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 19.11.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. That The Learned Cit (A), Mumbai Has Grossly Erred Both In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Reassessment Proceedings & Also Framing The Assessment Under Section 143(3)/147 Of The Act Determining The Income Of The Appellant At An Income Of Rs.5,05,00,000/- As Against Returned Loss Of Rs. 30,080/-.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 40A(3)Section 68

145A, Aayakar Bhavan, M. Vs. Gosavi Chawl, Kurar K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Village, Malad (E)-400097. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCC9354L (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri R.A. Dhyani (Sr. AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 15/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 06/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMARJIT

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCLE 1(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SAUDELA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 5058/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta,, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 260A

147 TTJ 0513 (SB, : (2012) 74 DTR 0089 (SB) : (2012) 137 ITD 0287 (SB) : (2012) 18 ITR 0106 (SB) has observed as under: "5.2. The provision comes into operation if a search or requisition is initiated after 31.5.2003. On satisfaction of this condition, the AO is under obligation to issue notice to the person requiring him to furnish the return

ITD CEMENTATION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, assessee and revenue are decided as per the table below:

ITA 4532/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148A

147, one of the essential criteria to reopen any assessment proceedings beyond three years, as contemplated u/s. 149 is that escapement of income should be represented in the form of an asset. Explanation to the said section mentions that “asset” shall include immovable property, being land or building or both, shares and 8 ITA Nos. 4539/Mum/2024 and ors. ITD Cementa

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. ITD ITD CEM JOINT VENTURE, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, assessee and revenue are decided as per the table below:

ITA 5232/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148A

147, one of the essential criteria to reopen any assessment proceedings beyond three years, as contemplated u/s. 149 is that escapement of income should be represented in the form of an asset. Explanation to the said section mentions that “asset” shall include immovable property, being land or building or both, shares and 8 ITA Nos. 4539/Mum/2024 and ors. ITD Cementa

ITD CEMENTATION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, assessee and revenue are decided as per the table below:

ITA 4539/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148A

147, one of the essential criteria to reopen any assessment proceedings beyond three years, as contemplated u/s. 149 is that escapement of income should be represented in the form of an asset. Explanation to the said section mentions that “asset” shall include immovable property, being land or building or both, shares and 8 ITA Nos. 4539/Mum/2024 and ors. ITD Cementa

ACIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S. WYETH LEDERLE LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as CO of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4070/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4070/Mum/2005 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2000-01) Acit-7(3) बिधम/ M/S. Wyeth Ltd. Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Level 6 & 7, Plating Plot Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. No. C-59, G- Block Bkc, Road, Mumbai-400020. Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400098. Cross Objection No. 376/Mum/2005 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.4070/Mum/2005 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2000-01) M/S. Wyeth Ltd. बिधम/ Acit-7(3) Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Level 6 & 7, Plating Plot Vs. No. C-59, G- Block Bkc, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Bandra (E), Mumbai- Road, Mumbai-400020. 400098. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc1451A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Rajnandani Shukla Revenue By: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/02/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/02/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue & The Cross Objection (Co) Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Mumbai Dated 22.03.2005 For The Ay. 2000-01. 2. The Ground No. 1 Of The Revenue & Only Ground Raised By The Assessee In The Co Are Dealt Together. The Ground Is Against The Action Of Ld. Cit(A) Directing The Ao To Delete The Addition Of Rs.21,54,713/- (20% Of The Expenditure Of Rs.1,07,73,564/-).

For Appellant: Ms. Rajnandani ShuklaFor Respondent: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal (Sr. AR)

145A of the Act, sales have to include sales tax and excise duty and since these have not been specifically excluded in explanation (ba) to section 80HHC(4B) of the Act, the total turnover has to include sales tax and Excise duty. Aggrieved the assessee, preferred on appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who took note of decision