ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. RUNGTA IRRIGATION LTD, NEW DEHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the approval granted by the Principal Commissioner for reopening the assessment was invalid due to a lack of proper application of mind and adherence to the statutory requirements. Consequently, the reopening proceedings were quashed.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after a search and survey operation. The assessee challenged the reopening, arguing that the approval obtained from the Principal Commissioner under Section 151 was invalid.
What were the issues?
Whether the approval granted by the Principal Commissioner under Section 151 for reopening the assessment was valid and satisfied the requirements of law.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. SPL’s Siddhartha Ltd.164 citing167 Taxmann.com 113 · 2012 · HC · Read judgment
- Anirudhsinhji Karansinhji Jadeja v. State of Gujarat103 citing5 SCC 302 · 1995 · SC
- United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd. 258 ITR 317 (Del), DCIT v. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd.14 citing167 Taxmann.com 533 · 2024 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM]
Heard together (7 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Per Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM ITA Nos. 2399, 2400 & 2401/Kol/2024 Rungta Irrigation Ltd.
All these captioned four appeals filed by the assessee and the three appeals filed by the revenue are against the orders of Ld. CIT(A), Kolkat
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.
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
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026