DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PSB INDUSTRIES INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the Revenue did not challenge the quashing of the reopening of the assessment, it had no authority to decide the additions on merits. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessment was reopened to disallow expenses under Section 14A and determine the annual value of a property. The CIT(A) quashed the reopening, stating it was based on a change of opinion, and also deleted the disallowances on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment was valid when it was based on a change of opinion and whether the additions made on merits can be considered when the reopening itself is unchallenged.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI , A. M.
This appeal is filed by the ld DCIT, Circle-14(1), New Delhi for Assessment Year 2005-06 against the order of the ld CIT(A)-17, New Delhi dated 27.06.2014. The ld CIT(A) passed an order in appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed by the ld AO i.e. DCIT, Circle-14(1), New Delhi u/s 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act, 1961 dated 25.03.2013.
The brief facts of the case shows that the assessee is a company who originally filed return of income on 30.03.2006 declaring loss of Rs. 157050/-. The assessment u/s 147 read with section 143(3) was completed on 29.09.2009 at the total income of Rs. 60,53,100/-. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened for disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of the Act and determination of the annual value of the property. The ld AO subsequently determined the expenses disallowable u/s 14A of the Act of Rs. 575764/-. Further, the annual lettable value of a property was also determined at Rs. 5,76,63,600/-. Page | 1
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Sharma vs. Union Of INDIA Rep Thr The Intelligence Officer, Directorate General Of GST Intelligence (Dggi)Jharkhand · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Om.S.R. Construction, Through Its Proprietor Mr. Kuldeep Sharma vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through Its Commissioner, Commerical Tax DepartmentJharkhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026