Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 92 (1.17 seconds)
Documents citing B.R. Bamasi vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... on 16 February, 1970

Multiplex Capital Ltd., New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax on 2 March, 2016

13. On the basis of threadbare analysi s of Rule 27 in the light of propositions/dicta laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in various decision including the order in the case of B.L. Bamasi [supra] and order of the co-ordinate Bench of ht Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Smt. Gurinder Kaur [supra] we reach to a fo rtified conclusion that in the present case the assessee-respondent can very w ell challenge the impugned penalty order without filing any cross appeal or cross objection by invoking legally available right as mandated by Rule 27 of the Rules.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vilsons Particle Board Industries ... vs Ito (Central), Kolhapur on 21 December, 2016

44. In assessment year 2004-05, the Revenue is in appeal before us, but the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee referred to Rule 27 of ITAT Rules and pointed out that though the assessee is not in appeal, but it could support the order of CIT(A) on different points. In this regard, he stressed that the assessment order passed is time barred because of no show cause notice being given by the Assessing Officer at the pre-decisional stage on proposing special audit under section 142(2A) of the Act. The plea of learned Authorized Representative for the assessee is admitted and the assessee in view of Rule 27 of ITAT Rules, can support the order of CIT(A) on a point other than the point on which relief has been given by the CIT(A) as held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in B.R. Bamasi Vs. CIT (supra). The issue on merits is otherwise covered by our decision in the paras hereinabove relating to assessment year 2005-06 and applying the same, we hold that the assessment framed in the case is time barred and hence, invalid. The appeal of Revenue on merits is thus, dismissed being infructuous.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 37 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Edward Keventer (Successors) P. Ltd. on 13 November, 1979

25. Of course, as pointed out by the Bombay High Court in Bamasi v. CIT [1972] 83 ITR 223, earlier referred to, the assessed could use this argument only to sustain the order of the AAC but not to get further relief and have the reassessment itself annulled and thus adversely affect the appellant and place it in a worse position than if it had not appealed at all. This decision illustrates the principle that the subject-matter of the appeal should be understood not in a narrow and unrealistic manner but should be so comprehended as to encompass the entire controversy between the parties which is sought td, be got adjudicated upon by the Tribunal.
Delhi High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 68 - S Ranganathan - Full Document

Acit, New Delhi vs M/S. Tirupati Buildings & Officers Pvt. ... on 9 February, 2023

23. Of course, as pointed out by the Bombay High Court in Bamasi v. CIT, [1972] 83 ITR 223, earlier referred to, the assessee could use this argument only to sustain the order of the AAC but not to get further relief and have the reassessment itself annulled and thus adversely affect the appellant and place it in a worse position than if it had not appealed at all. This decision illustrates the principle that the subject-matter of the appeal should be Understood not in a narrow and unrealistic manner but should be so comprehended as to encompass the entire controversy between the parties which is sought to be got adjudicated upon by the Tribunal.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 45 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Karia Builders ,Pune vs Ito Ward 14(3), Pune on 23 July, 2025

29. Since the assessee can always challenge the validity of assessment proceedings during the penalty proceedings as per the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of B.R. Bamasi vs. CIT (supra) and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of P.V. Doshi vs. CIT (supra) and the various other decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee in the paper book and since we have already held that the re-assessment proceedings are not in accordance with law on account of not obtaining the approval from the competent authority as per the provisions of section 151 of the Act, therefore, the penalty proceedings initiated u/s 271D of the Act do not survive. In view of the above discussion, the penalty proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC are not in accordance with law and are liable to be quashed. We, therefore, hold that the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC being not in accordance with law is liable to be deleted. We accordingly direct the Assessing Officer to cancel the penalty 17 ITA No.2401/PUN/2024 levied u/s 271D of the Act. The original grounds and the additional grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shri Ashish Prafulbhai ... vs The Acit. Central Circle-1(3),, ... on 1 August, 2025

Later, in the case of B.R. Bamasi V. CIT, the Bombay High Court which was dealing with the case of right of the respondent to defend the order appealed against held that the respondent would be entitled to raise a new ground in defence of the order appealed against, provided it is a ground of law and does not necessitate any other evidence to be recorded, the nature of which would not only be a defence to the appeal itself but may also affect the validity of the entire assessment proceedings. It was further held that the ground served as a weapon of defence against the appeal and, if accepted should not place the appellant in a worse than he would have been, had he not appealed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 57 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ashish P Patel,Ahmedabad vs The Acit, Central Circle-1(3), ... on 1 August, 2025

Later, in the case of B.R. Bamasi V. CIT, the Bombay High Court which was dealing with the case of right of the respondent to defend the order appealed against held that the respondent would be entitled to raise a new ground in defence of the order appealed against, provided it is a ground of law and does not necessitate any other evidence to be recorded, the nature of which would not only be a defence to the appeal itself but may also affect the validity of the entire assessment proceedings. It was further held that the ground served as a weapon of defence against the appeal and, if accepted should not place the appellant in a worse than he would have been, had he not appealed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 57 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next