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

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

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)

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 by the assessee

WELSPUN CORP LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 22, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesses in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

234D and 220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arc consequential. The Appellant denies its liability for such interest. 5 . The Id. CIT(A) erred in,'holding that ground raised disputing initiation of the penalty proceedings1.'u/s.271(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is premature. The Appellant denies its liability for such penalty. The Appellant craves leave

AJAY MULTI PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, AAYKAR BHAWAN, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Ajay Multi Projects Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Circle-4(1)(1), 2Nd Floor, C.J. House, 285 Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Princess Street, Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400002. Pan No. Aadca 0338 H Appellant Respondent

section 148A have not been followed and as a result, the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. as a result, the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. as a result, the reassessment proceedings are bad in law. The sanction u/s 151 is bad in law and as a result, the The sanction u/s

VODAFONE INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 8(3)(2), MUMBAI

234D of the Act.We find that the AO had levied interest u/s. 234B from 1.4.2008 to 31.3.2014 i.e. period starting from first day of the relevant AY.to the end of the month in which reassessment order was passed. We find that levy of interest u/s.234B in case of reassessment or re-computation is governed by provisions of sub section

CROMPTON GREAVES LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT -6, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company in ITA no

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Ramit Kochar"ी शैल" कुमार यादव, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ी रिमत कोचर, लेखाकार सद"य के सम" । आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1994/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2836/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Crompton Greaves बनाम/ Cit – 6,Mumbai, Ltd.,6Th Floor, C.G. House, 5Th Floor, V. Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 030. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacc3840K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep N. Kapasi Revenue By : Shri C.W. Angolkar सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 29-10-2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-02-2016

234D of Rs. 37,93,211 without giving any opportunity of hearing and further erred in law in not passing any speaking order for the levy of interest. b. Your appellant denies any liability of payment of interest and further submits that the interest was charged in violation of the provision of Natural Justice in as much as no opportunity

THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T. LTU, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2551&2129/Mum/2012 नििाारण वर्ा/Asstt. Year:2006-07 The Shipping Corporation Of Additional Commissioner India Ltd. Vs. Of Income Tax Ltu Shipping House, 10Th Floor, 245, 29Th Floor, World Trade Madam Cama Road, Nariman Centre, Colaba, Mumbai- Point, Mumbai-400021 400006 Pan: Aaa Ct1 524 F Assistant Commissioner Of The Shipping Corporation Income Tax Ltu Of India Ltd. Centre-I, 28Th Floor, World Trade Shipping House, 10Th Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- Floor, 245, Madam Cama 400005 Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan: Aaa Ct1 524 F

234D. Your appellant crave leave to add, amend, alter, modify, cancel, withdraw any of the ground/s of appeal before final hearing of appeal.” 3. The assessee in the first ground of appeal has challenged the validity of the re-assessment framed under section 147 of the Act on the ground that it ITA nos.2551&2129/MUM/2012 Asstt. Years

ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2551&2129/Mum/2012 नििाारण वर्ा/Asstt. Year:2006-07 The Shipping Corporation Of Additional Commissioner India Ltd. Vs. Of Income Tax Ltu Shipping House, 10Th Floor, 245, 29Th Floor, World Trade Madam Cama Road, Nariman Centre, Colaba, Mumbai- Point, Mumbai-400021 400006 Pan: Aaa Ct1 524 F Assistant Commissioner Of The Shipping Corporation Income Tax Ltu Of India Ltd. Centre-I, 28Th Floor, World Trade Shipping House, 10Th Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- Floor, 245, Madam Cama 400005 Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan: Aaa Ct1 524 F

234D. Your appellant crave leave to add, amend, alter, modify, cancel, withdraw any of the ground/s of appeal before final hearing of appeal.” 3. The assessee in the first ground of appeal has challenged the validity of the re-assessment framed under section 147 of the Act on the ground that it ITA nos.2551&2129/MUM/2012 Asstt. Years

TCS-E-SERVE LTD ( EARLIER KNOWN AS E-SEREVE INTERNAIONTAL LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 9(1), MUMBAI

Appeal stand dismissed since the only issue in revenue’s appeal is deduction u/s 10A

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5089/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5090/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Tata Consultancy Services Limited Dcit- 9(1) / 9(3) (Upon Merger Of Tcs E-Serve Ltd Aaykar Bhawan बिाम With Tata Consultancy Services Ltd) M.K.Road / Vs. 9Th Floor, Nirmal Building Mumbai-400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-4480-F (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4928/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4929/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5478/Mum/2014 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7446/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7447/Mum/2010 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Acit, Range-9(3) / Circle-9(3) Tata Consultancy Services Limited Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road (Upon Merger Of Tcs E-Serve Ltd बिाम Mumbai-400 020 With Tata Consultancy Services Ltd) / Vs. 9Th Floor, Nirmal Building Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-4480-F (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

reassessment proceedings were quashed by Tribunal in ITA No.3725/Mum/2010 order dated 24/01/2018 (para 8 & 9). This issue again came up for challenge before Tribunal by the revenue for AY 2002-03, ITA No.3927/Mum/2010 order dated 24/01/2018 wherein deduction was denied to the assessee on identical facts. The learned first appellate authority reversed the action of Ld. AO by observing that

SHAH RUKH KHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalshah Rukh Khan, 44, Mannat, Bj Road, Bandstand, Bandra, Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Aahpk3293L ……………. Appellant V/S Dcit, Central Circle – 4(2) Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, ……………. Respondent Mumbai - 400050 Maharashtra

234D of the Income-tax Act, 1961.” 3. In this appeal, the assessee has challenged the validity of the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Act and has also raised the grounds on merits, challenging the additions made by the Assessing Officer (“AO”). Since the ground challenging the reopening of assessment under section 147

ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Shipping Corporation Of India The Additional Commissioner Limited, Of Income Tax (Ltu), Shipping House 10Th Floor, 29Th Floor, World Trade 245, Madam Cama Road, Vs. Centre, Colaba, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400006 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaact1524F (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Acit-Ltu, M/S The Shipping Corporation 28Th Floor, Centre-1, Of India Limited, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, 245, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai - 400005 Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaact1524F (Appellant) (Respondent)

234D.” 4. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the AO has reopened the assessment on the basis of change of opinion, which is not permissible under law. The Ld. counsel invited our attention to page 148 of the Assessment Years: 2005-06 paper book which is the copy of the reasons for reopening recorded

THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T. LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Shipping Corporation Of India The Additional Commissioner Limited, Of Income Tax (Ltu), Shipping House 10Th Floor, 29Th Floor, World Trade 245, Madam Cama Road, Vs. Centre, Colaba, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400006 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaact1524F (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Acit-Ltu, M/S The Shipping Corporation 28Th Floor, Centre-1, Of India Limited, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, 245, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai - 400005 Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaact1524F (Appellant) (Respondent)

234D.” 4. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the AO has reopened the assessment on the basis of change of opinion, which is not permissible under law. The Ld. counsel invited our attention to page 148 of the Assessment Years: 2005-06 paper book which is the copy of the reasons for reopening recorded

ASST CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. IDBI LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year: 2005-06 Acit Large Tax Payer Unit, M/S Idbi Ltd., 28Th Floor, World Trade Centre 1, Idbi Towers, 3Rd Floor, Cufee Parade, Cufee Parade, Vs. Mumbai-400005 Mumbai-400005. Pan: Aaaci1105R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Idbi Bank Ltd., Acit Large Tax Payer Unit, Idbi Towers, Wtc Complex, 7Th 28Th Floor, World Trade Centre 1, Floor, Taxation Cell, Cufee Parade, Cufee Parade, Vs. Mumbai-400005. Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaaci1105R (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 14A of the Income Tax Act 1961, for computing the book profit u/s 115JB. The manner and method of disallowance is also not in accordance with the law. 3.Interest levied u/s 234D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 The learned CIT(A), in law and on facts erred in confirming levy of interest u/s 234D. The CIT(A) ought

RALF JEMS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

234D of the Act.” 4. In Ground No.1 of grounds of appeal, assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment and order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 03.03.2016 as bad in law and void abinitio. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that this is a case where the original assessment was made

RALF JEMS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

234D of the Act.” 4. In Ground No.1 of grounds of appeal, assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment and order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 03.03.2016 as bad in law and void abinitio. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that this is a case where the original assessment was made

RALF JEMS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

234D of the Act.” 4. In Ground No.1 of grounds of appeal, assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment and order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 03.03.2016 as bad in law and void abinitio. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that this is a case where the original assessment was made

RALF JEMS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 5(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

234D of the Act.” 4. In Ground No.1 of grounds of appeal, assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment and order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 03.03.2016 as bad in law and void abinitio. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that this is a case where the original assessment was made

CHANDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Chandra Financial Services Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., Achal Building, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Income Tax-2(1)(1), 21, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001

sections 234A, 234B and 234D inasmuch as - (a) the Assessing Officer has not given an opportunity to the appellants before charging the said interest as required by the principles of nature justice, (b) the charging of interest is not in accordance with law. The appellants crave leave to add to, alter and/or amend the aforestated grounds of appeal.” 2. Briefly

AISHWARYA RAI BACHCHAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

reassessment under proviso to Section 147, therefore, ground taken by revenue is misconceived. CIT(A) on the basis of change of opinion recorded detailed finding and held that reopening was not valid in so far as issue was considered by AO in the original assessment proceedings after relying on the decision of Tribunal in assessee’s own case

DCIT CC 2, MUMBAI vs. AISHWARYA RAI BACHCHAN, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

reassessment under proviso to Section 147, therefore, ground taken by revenue is misconceived. CIT(A) on the basis of change of opinion recorded detailed finding and held that reopening was not valid in so far as issue was considered by AO in the original assessment proceedings after relying on the decision of Tribunal in assessee’s own case