M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

292B to sustain a notice from being declared invalid merely on the ground of mistake committed by the Assessing Officer in the notice, however, the issue here is not with regard to the mistake / error committed by the Assessing Officer while seeking an approval from the Addl.CIT, but, whether there was due application of mind by the Addl.CIT while giving

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

292B to sustain a notice from being declared invalid merely on the ground of mistake committed by the Assessing Officer in the notice, however, the issue here is not with regard to the mistake / error committed by the Assessing Officer while seeking an approval from the Addl.CIT, but, whether there was due application of mind by the Addl.CIT while giving

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

292B to sustain a notice from being declared invalid merely on the ground of mistake committed by the Assessing Officer in the notice, however, the issue here is not with regard to the mistake / error committed by the Assessing Officer while seeking an approval from the Addl.CIT, but, whether there was due application of mind by the Addl.CIT while giving

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

292B to sustain a notice from being declared invalid merely on the ground of mistake committed by the Assessing Officer in the notice, however, the issue here is not with regard to the mistake / error committed by the Assessing Officer while seeking an approval from the Addl.CIT, but, whether there was due application of mind by the Addl.CIT while giving

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

292B to sustain a notice from being declared invalid merely on the ground of mistake committed by the Assessing Officer in the notice, however, the issue here is not with regard to the mistake / error committed by the Assessing Officer while seeking an approval from the Addl.CIT, but, whether there was due application of mind by the Addl.CIT while giving

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

292B to sustain a notice from being declared invalid merely on the ground of mistake committed by the Assessing Officer in the notice, however, the issue here is not with regard to the mistake / error committed by the Assessing Officer while seeking an approval from the Addl.CIT, but, whether there was due application of mind by the Addl.CIT while giving

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

147 to 149, 151 and 153. By virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to 10 AYs consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant AY” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall beyond the 6 year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

147 to 149, 151 and 153. By virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to 10 AYs consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant AY” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall beyond the 6 year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

147 to 149, 151 and 153. By virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to 10 AYs consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant AY” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall beyond the 6 year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

147 to 149, 151 and 153. By virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to 10 AYs consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant AY” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall beyond the 6 year

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

147 to 149, 151 and 153. By virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to 10 AYs consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant AY” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall beyond the 6 year

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. ATUL YAMSANWAR , NAGPUR

U/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T. Act. 1961 2014-15 (MILIND V. PATIL) Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Central Range-2, Nagpur 19. We Further find that exactly similar approval under section 153D of the Act have been granted by the Department for all the remaining 20 cases which are under consideration before us, but the only changes