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.

448 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 234B(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai448Delhi437Bangalore223Ahmedabad101Chennai59Hyderabad55Jaipur51Kolkata42Pune26Rajkot20Lucknow19Nagpur15Amritsar12Surat12Chandigarh12Indore11Patna11Agra9Visakhapatnam8Cochin6Karnataka4Dehradun4Allahabad4Jodhpur3Cuttack3Ranchi3Telangana2Guwahati1Raipur1Panaji1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 148128Section 147117Section 143(3)103Addition to Income81Reassessment57Section 6853Reopening of Assessment43Section 25035Section 234B

AMBUJA CEMENT INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2600/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2600/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri. Soumen Adak &For Respondent: Shri Satish Chandra Rajore
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 234B

234B of Rs.35,77,341/- The Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee is challenging legality and validity of reopening of the concluded assessment u/s. 147 and grounds of appeal no. 1(a) and 1(b) filed with memo of appeal with tribunal are directed towards challenging legality and validity of reopening of concluded assessment u/s. 147

Showing 1–20 of 448 · Page 1 of 23

...
33
Penalty25
Section 69C24
Section 69A22

BENCO FINANCE & INVESTMENT P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2092/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh () & Shri Ravish Sood () Benco Finance & Investment Dy. Cit, Central Circle-40 Private Limited; 205, Sujata Vs. (Now Dcit, Central Circle -7(2), Mumbai) Room No. 656, 6Th Floor, Chambers, 2Nd Floor, 1/3 Aaykar Bhawan, M.K Road, Abhichan Gandhi Marg, Off. Mumbai – 400 020. Katha Bazar, Masjid Bunder (W), Mumbai – 400 009 (Assessee) (Revenue) Pan No. Aabcb9349R Assessee By : S/Shri Vijay Mehta & Purushottam, A.Rs Revenue By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R Date Of Hearing : 18/06/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/08/2021

For Appellant: S/shri Vijay Mehta & Purushottam, A.RsFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153Section 234BSection 68

147 of the Act is void ab-initio and/or otherwise bad-in-law. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3: D. ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT: 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in adding the premium

SAMBHAVANATH INFRABUILD FARMS (SUCCESSOR TO LODHA CONSTRUCTION P. LTD P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ASSTT. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7(3), MUMBAI

ITA 1897/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blesambhavnath Infrabuild & Farms Pvt. Ltd., V. Asst. Cit– Central Circle – 7(3) {Successor To Lodha Construction Pvt. Ltd.,} Room No. 655, 6Th Floor 412, 4Th Floor, 17G Vardhaman Chamber Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Mumbai - 400020 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aalcs1394M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Department By Shri B.K. Bagchi

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153ASection 69D

234B, 246A and 276CC to give reference to section 153A in these sections. 65.12 These amendments will take effect from 1st June, 2003.” 2.3.4 A careful study of section 153A to 153C and also the circular issued by the CBDT explaining the procedure of assessment in search cases, it shows that these are separate provisions independent of other provisions relating

BALAJI BUILLION & COMMODITIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - CC- 7(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3599/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2009-10 M/S Balaji Bullion & Dcit Central Circle-7(1), Commodities (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Vs. House Zaveri Baazar, Mumbai-400 002. Pan No. Aadcb 0236 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. N.M. Porwal Assessee By Revenue By : Mr. S. Srinivasu, Cit-Dr : 27/03/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 03/04/2024

For Respondent: Mr. N.M. Porwal
Section 234BSection 68

section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. The Ld. A.O. erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of 7. The Ld. A.O. erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of 7. The Ld. A.O. erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income

M/S GUJARAT REALTORES ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, , THANE

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2009

ITA 3525/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3523 To 3525/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2012-13, 2013-14 M/S Gujarat Realtors, Dy. Cit Central Circle-1, Ground Floor, Samriddhi, Room No. 10, 6Th Floor, Ashar Annapurna Estate, Indralok, Vs. It Park, Wagle Industrial Godhbunder Link Road, Thane, Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Bhayander, 401105. Pan No. Aahfg 0051 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2024 : Date Of Pronouncement 30/05/2024

For Appellant: Mr. Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 234BSection 36Section 68

234B of the Act. 8. In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised the ground No. 2 challenging the reassessment proceedings on the the ground No. 2 challenging the reassessment proceedings on the the ground No. 2 challenging

M/S GUJARAT REALTORES,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, THANE, THANE

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2009

ITA 3524/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3523 To 3525/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2012-13, 2013-14 M/S Gujarat Realtors, Dy. Cit Central Circle-1, Ground Floor, Samriddhi, Room No. 10, 6Th Floor, Ashar Annapurna Estate, Indralok, Vs. It Park, Wagle Industrial Godhbunder Link Road, Thane, Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Bhayander, 401105. Pan No. Aahfg 0051 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2024 : Date Of Pronouncement 30/05/2024

For Appellant: Mr. Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 234BSection 36Section 68

234B of the Act. 8. In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised the ground No. 2 challenging the reassessment proceedings on the the ground No. 2 challenging the reassessment proceedings on the the ground No. 2 challenging

M/S. GUJARAT REALTORS (FIRM),BHAYANDER vs. DCIT, CC-1, THANE

In the result, the appeal for assessment year 2009

ITA 3523/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita Nos. 3523 To 3525/Mum/2023 Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2012-13, 2013-14 M/S Gujarat Realtors, Dy. Cit Central Circle-1, Ground Floor, Samriddhi, Room No. 10, 6Th Floor, Ashar Annapurna Estate, Indralok, Vs. It Park, Wagle Industrial Godhbunder Link Road, Thane, Estate, Thane (W)-400604. Bhayander, 401105. Pan No. Aahfg 0051 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2024 : Date Of Pronouncement 30/05/2024

For Appellant: Mr. Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 234BSection 36Section 68

234B of the Act. 8. In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised In the instant assessment year also the assessee has raised the ground No. 2 challenging the reassessment proceedings on the the ground No. 2 challenging the reassessment proceedings on the the ground No. 2 challenging

SHRI MOHAN THAKUR,MUMBAI vs. A.C.I.T. CENT. CIR. 8(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

ITA 7413/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7413 /Mum/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09) बनधम/ Shri Mohan Thakur Acit, Central Circle-8(4) 6Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, 4, Flora Vila, 35, St. Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai- Andrews Road, Bandra 400020. (W), Mumbai-400050. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaapt2966N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Durga Dutt/ Akhtar H. Ansari (Dr) Assessee By: Dr. K. Shivaram सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 30.10.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-50, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2008- 09. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Validity Of Notice U/S 148 Where The Proceedings U/S 153C Had Already Been Initiated Which Were Dropped & Immediately The Reassessment Proceedings Had Been Initiated Without Any Fresh Material On Record & Hence Reopening Is Void- Ab - Initio Merit : Addition Of Rs.237.00.000/- Based On Entries In Diary Of Third Person: 2. No Addition Can Be Made Based On Entries Found In The Books In Third Party'S Premises Since No Search U/S 132 Had Taken Place On The Assessee & Hence S.132(4A) Would Not Be Applicable To The Present Facts Of The Case. In View Of The Same The Entire Addition May Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Dr. K. ShivaramFor Respondent: Shri Durga Dutt/ Akhtar H
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153C

3), r.w.s. 147. The assessee contention is that the assessment cannot be reopened u/s 147 but, the Assessing Officer can issue notice u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A and proceed to assess or reassess the total income of each of assessment year falling within six assessment years as referred to in section 153A. 8. Now, the question before us is (i) whether

DCIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. TATA MOTORS LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed except the issue relating to reopening, which is treated as academic

ITA 1977/MUM/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Am

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan Vora, Nikhil Tiwari & Mihir ChitaliaFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

reassessment order under section 143(3) read with section 147 dated 31 December 2007. Tribunal further observed that there was no scope left with the CIT(A) to enhance the very same items in the appellate proceedings pending before him against the order passed under section 143(3) of the Act. Thus, the premise was that the interest

ANUMITA INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-4, MUMBAI

ITA 2555/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 263

u/s 263 it has been alleged that source of purchase and sale of transactions remained to be verified.\n9. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify, or delete any grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings.”\n11. During the course of hearing before us the learned Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the reassessment proceedings

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

ITA 8363/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17
Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

u/s 10(34) of the Act.\n15.\nThe AO erred in levying interest under section 234A of Rs.\n63,283/- and CIT(A) erred in confirming the same.\n16.\nThe AO erred in levying interest under section 234B of Rs.\n4,14,216/- and under section 234D of Rs. 1,17,087/- and CIT(A)\nerred in confirming the same

RATNAGIRI STAINLESS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4463/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4463/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Ratnagiri Stainless Pvt. Income Tax Officer 5(3)(1), बनाम/ Ltd., Mumbai. V. 21/23, Laxmi Niwas, 2 Nd Parsiwada Lane, Opp V.P. Road Police Station, Mumbai – 400 004. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aadcr2993P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.M. PorwalFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop,DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. ITA 4463/Mum/2016 3 7. The appellant crave leave to add, amend , alter and/or vary any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 3. At the outset learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not wish to press ground no. 1,2,5 and 6 raised

JOHNSON & JOHNSON LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 4912/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआअसं. 4912/मुं/2013 ("न.व.2004-05) Johnson & Johnson Private Limited (Earlier Known As Johnson & Johnson Limited) 501, Arena Space, Off Jvlr, Behind Majas Bus Depot, Jogeshwari (East) Mumbai 400 060 Pan: Aaacj0866E ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Large Taxpayer Unit, 29Th Floor, Centre No.1, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

234B of the Act. 3. Shri Rajan Vora, appearing on behalf of the assessee made three fold submissions assailing reopening under section 147 of the Act. The first plank of his argument is against initiation of 2nd reopening proceedings during the subsistence of first reassessment proceedings. The ld. AR contended that the assessee filed its return of income on 01/11/2004

ACIT (OSD-II) CENT. RG. - 7, MUMBAI vs. M/S. CIFCO FINANCE LTD., MUMBAI

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 2323/MUM/2006[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

Section 147 of the act. The assessee objected before the learned assessing officer the validity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings stating that it is a change of opinion. The AO rejected such objection in the assessment order itself and proceeded to make the addition of accrued interest. AO found that as per schedule 7 of the balance sheet assessee

CIFCO FINANCE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (OSD II) CIR.7, MUMBAI

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 6146/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

Section 147 of the act. The assessee objected before the learned assessing officer the validity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings stating that it is a change of opinion. The AO rejected such objection in the assessment order itself and proceeded to make the addition of accrued interest. AO found that as per schedule 7 of the balance sheet assessee

THE ACIT (OSD-II) CEN RG-7, MUMBAI vs. M/S. CIFCO FINANCE LTD, MUMBAI

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 2341/MUM/2006[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2000-2001

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

Section 147 of the act. The assessee objected before the learned assessing officer the validity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings stating that it is a change of opinion. The AO rejected such objection in the assessment order itself and proceeded to make the addition of accrued interest. AO found that as per schedule 7 of the balance sheet assessee

CIFCO FINANCE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (OSD-II) CR 7, MUMBAI

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 6075/MUM/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

Section 147 of the act. The assessee objected before the learned assessing officer the validity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings stating that it is a change of opinion. The AO rejected such objection in the assessment order itself and proceeded to make the addition of accrued interest. AO found that as per schedule 7 of the balance sheet assessee

CIFCO FINANCE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (OSD II) CIR.7, MUMBAI

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 6147/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

Section 147 of the act. The assessee objected before the learned assessing officer the validity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings stating that it is a change of opinion. The AO rejected such objection in the assessment order itself and proceeded to make the addition of accrued interest. AO found that as per schedule 7 of the balance sheet assessee

M/S. CIFCO FINANCE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (OSD-II) CR-7, MUMBAI

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 2496/MUM/2006[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

Section 147 of the act. The assessee objected before the learned assessing officer the validity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings stating that it is a change of opinion. The AO rejected such objection in the assessment order itself and proceeded to make the addition of accrued interest. AO found that as per schedule 7 of the balance sheet assessee

M/S. CIFCO FINANCE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (OSD-II) CR-7, MUMBAI

In the result all 16 appeals related to the assessee are disposed off

ITA 2499/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2002-2003

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal C Bench Mumbai Before Sri Amit Shukla J M & Prashant Maharishi Am In The Matter Of Cifco Finance Limited, [ Aaacc1765F] Bhupen Chambers, Dalal Street, Mumbai V The Asst Commissioner Of Income Tax Aykar Bhavan 4Th Floor , M K Road Mumbai 20

Section 143Section 147Section 271

Section 147 of the act. The assessee objected before the learned assessing officer the validity of the initiation of reassessment proceedings stating that it is a change of opinion. The AO rejected such objection in the assessment order itself and proceeded to make the addition of accrued interest. AO found that as per schedule 7 of the balance sheet assessee