R R PAINTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 15(3)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 1112/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 December 2024AY 2012-2013Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that reopening beyond four years requires failure to disclose material facts, which was not established. The additions were based on existing materials considered during the original assessment, making the reopening invalid.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment was reopened beyond four years. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions to Long Term Capital Gains and business income based on existing records. The assessee argued that the reopening was invalid as there was no failure to disclose material facts.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment beyond four years was valid when the AO relied on existing material and there was no failure to disclose material facts by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(6)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY&

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Hearing: 28.11.2024Pronounced: 05.12.2024

Per Padmavathy S, AM: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short 'the CIT(A)'] dated 17.01.2024 for AY 2012-13. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1) The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, has erred in confirming the increasing the Long Term Capital Gains by Rs 71,432/- by reworking the indexation which was correctly worked out by the appellant R R Paints Private Ltd. 2) The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi ha

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 →