DCIT, NUNGAMBAKKAM CHENNAI vs. M/S SWISS PARK VANIYA PVT. LTD., WORLI MUMBAI

ITA 413/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 September 2026AY 2011-1226 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act was valid. The reasons recorded were based on a statement under oath from Shri A.K. Khemka, which constituted specific and tangible material, not borrowed satisfaction. The Tribunal also found that while the disposal of objections might not have been a separate speaking order, the AO did address them in a subsequent notice, and this did not vitiate the reassessment as the reasons recorded independently justified the jurisdiction. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s decision upholding the reopening was affirmed. Regarding the addition under Section 68, the Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had accepted explanations for Rs.16 crores (via IDS, 2016) and Rs.1 crore (by Shri Arvind Gupta). However, the remaining Rs.7 crores were not fully addressed by the CIT(A) in relation to the AO's assessment order, which treated the entire Rs.24 crores as a single addition. The Tribunal restored the issue of addition amounting to Rs.4 crores (part of the Rs.7 crores) to the file of the AO for examination, considering Shri A.K. Khemka's admission regarding receipt of funds. The judgment does not specify the treatment of the remaining Rs.3 crores from the Rs.7 crores.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Swiss Park Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., filed its return for AY 2011-12 declaring Rs.1,08,584. A search on OPG Power Generation Pvt. Ltd. led to the Revenue believing the assessee routed unaccounted money of Shri Arvind Gupta. The assessee received Rs.24,00,00,000 in share capital and premium from various entities and Shri Arvind Gupta. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened assessment under Section 147, treating the Rs.24 crores as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 on a protective basis, as Rs.23 crores were already taxed in Shri Arvind Gupta's hands. The CIT(A) upheld the reopening but accepted explanations for Rs.16 crores (declared under IDS, 2016) and Rs.1 crore (invested by Shri Arvind Gupta). The remaining Rs.7 crores were still in dispute.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was valid, considering the assessee's contention of borrowed satisfaction and improper disposal of objections. - Assessee's argument: The AO lacked independent satisfaction, relying solely on Investigation Wing material. Objections to reopening were not disposed of by a separate speaking order as per GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO & Ors. - Revenue's argument: The AO had tangible material from search proceedings and statements, giving a bona fide reason to believe income had escaped assessment. The CIT(A) rightly upheld the reopening. 2. Whether the addition of Rs.24,00,00,000 under Section 68 of the Act was justified, considering the partial acceptance of explanations by the CIT(A). - Assessee's argument: (Implicitly, as the CIT(A) partially accepted) The source of funds for Rs.16 crores (via IDS, 2016) and Rs.1 crore (by Shri Arvind Gupta) was explained. - Revenue's argument: (Implicitly, as the CIT(A) partially rejected) The entire amount represented unexplained cash credit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 68,Section 142(1),Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & MS PADMAVATHY S

For Respondent: Ms. Nayani Swapna, CIT, Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCA
Hearing: 01.09.2026Pronounced: 23.09.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.413/CHNY/2026
ITA 4102/CHNY/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER BENCH:

These cross appeals are dir

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →