1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. v. CIT

247 ITR 818Supreme Court of India2001#908 most cited

What is 1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. v. CIT authority for?

Reassessment proceedings are not a change of opinion if the original assessment did not arrive at a positive or negative finding on the issue.

116

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kalyanji Mavji · Esskat Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · ITO v. Purushottam Das Bangur · change of opinion · reassessment · original assessment · Section 147 · failure to fully and truly disclose

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

fresh tangible materialfirst proviso to section 147material facts necessary for assessmentbeyond four yearsmere change of opinionkelvinatorfull and true disclosurelive linkshort term capital gainssection 11(5)within four yearschange of opinion

Judgments citing 1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. v. CIT

K. Baskar, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2691/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

K. Sadasivam, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2690/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

P. Nallusamy, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2687/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

K. Kathirvel, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2686/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

P. Karunanithi, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2685/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

Ramasamy Palanisamy, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2591/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

Ramasamy Palanisamy, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2590/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

Palanisamy Gounder Loganathan, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

ITA 2589/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…rther relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the ::9 :: ITA No.2587/CHNY/2024 & 22 others (AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14) Shri M. Velusamy & others cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 ITR 818) to support the AO's action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since the assessment was not completed u/s 143(3), the AO never had the occasion to form any opinion on the seized material for the relevant AY 2012-13 and hence she contended that the impugned reopening was justifie…

M. Velusamy, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2587/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

M. Velusamy, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2586/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

S. Aravind, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2584/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…: cases of ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR ACIT v Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (291 ITR 500) & EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT EssEss Kay Engg. Co. (P) Ltd. v CIT (247 (247 ITR 818) to support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012 support the AO’s action of reopening the assessment for AY 2012-13 which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. According to her, since t which was…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3 4 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Limited, Mumbai

ITA 1374/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Choughule
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)Section 80G

…an be said to have been arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings. 17. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion as held in the judgments (i) Kalyanji Mavji and Co Vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC); (ii) Esskat Engineering Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 and (iii) ITO Vs. Purushottom Das Bangur and Anr. 224 ITR 362 (SC). The details of such case laws are submitted herewith for your kind perusal and your favourable consideration.” (Emphasis Supplied) 11. We have given thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions. On perusal of reasons recorded for reopening assessment, we find that the sole b…

M/S Man Diesel & Turbo India Ltd., Maharashtra vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is hereby dismissed

ITA 4295/DEL/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singha.Y. 2003-04

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…he assessee on the issue, no finding either positive or negative was arrived at during the course of the original assessment proceedings, therefore, there is no question of change of opinion. Relaince is placed on Ess Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (SC) 247 ITR 818, Revathy C.P. Equipments Ltd. vs. DCIT & Ors. (Mad) 241 ITR 856 and EMA India Ltd. vs. ACIT (All) 30 DTR 82 5.1.6 In the case of M/s Consolidated Photo & Finvest Ltd. vs. ACIT 2006 (151 Taxman 41 Del). Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that even if the assessing officer gathered a reason to believe from the very same records as had been subject…

Airads Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-2(1), New Delhi

ITA 6652/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaairads Limited Vs. Dcit, 4624/ 18, Ansari Road, Circle-2(1), Darya Ganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 Pan : Aaaca5793R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…Delhi, (119 ITR 996) (Hon’ble Supreme Court) Airads Ltd. 5 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that there is no error in the findings of Ld. Tax Authorities below. He relied Hon’ble Supreme Court judgement in Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. P Ltd Vs CIT 2001 247 ITR 818 SC to contend that it is not case of mere change of opinion and there was fresh material available to reopen the assessment. 7. Now, appreciating the matter on record it can be observed that Ld. DR was not able to controvert all the factual aspects argued by Ld. AR. There is no dispute to the fact that while calling for information u/s 142(1) of…

Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is al

ITA 990/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Maharashtra State Electricity Income-Tax Officer, Ward Transmission Company Ltd., 14(2)(3), Plot No. C-19 E Block, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Prakashganga, Bandra-Kurla Karve Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaecm 2936 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ketan Ved, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Harishankar Lal, Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/12/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Harishankar Lal, DR
Section 148

…Firm Vs The Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of A.L.A. Firm Vs CIT(Mad) 102 IT 622. CIT(Mad) 102 IT 622. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ess Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ess Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd. Vs CIT(SC) Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd. Vs CIT(SC) 247 ITR 818. Hon'ble 247 ITR 818. Hon'ble Madras High C Madras High Court in case ofRevathy C.P. Equipments Ltd. ourt in case ofRevathy C.P. Equipments Ltd. Vs DCIT&Ors. (Mad) 241 IT 856and Hon'ble Allahabad High Vs DCIT&Ors. (Mad) 241 IT 856and Hon'ble Allahabad High Vs DCIT&Ors. (Mad) 241 IT 856and Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in case of EMA Court in case…

M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DDIT It-3(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 1510/MUM/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2003-2004
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…ormed belief that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2003-04 has escaped assessment. 10.10. In view of the above, we hold that re-assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2003-04 were initiated 13 ESS KAY Engineering Company Ltd. Vs CIT: 247 ITR 818 (SC) 90 ITA. No. 3135 & 3130/Mum/2006 & CO No. 324/Mum/2006 ITA No. 1510 & 1444/Mum/2009 & CO No. 160/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04 in compliance with the provisions of Section 147/148 of the Act and the same cannot be regarded as bad in law. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 raised by GCC in Appeal is dismissed. We proceed to examine…

M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (Int. Taxation) - 3(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 3135/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2002-2003
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…ormed belief that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2003-04 has escaped assessment. 10.10. In view of the above, we hold that re-assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2003-04 were initiated 13 ESS KAY Engineering Company Ltd. Vs CIT: 247 ITR 818 (SC) 90 ITA. No. 3135 & 3130/Mum/2006 & CO No. 324/Mum/2006 ITA No. 1510 & 1444/Mum/2009 & CO No. 160/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04 in compliance with the provisions of Section 147/148 of the Act and the same cannot be regarded as bad in law. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 raised by GCC in Appeal is dismissed. We proceed to examine…

ADIT (It)-3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 3130/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2002-2003
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…ormed belief that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2003-04 has escaped assessment. 10.10. In view of the above, we hold that re-assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2003-04 were initiated 13 ESS KAY Engineering Company Ltd. Vs CIT: 247 ITR 818 (SC) 90 ITA. No. 3135 & 3130/Mum/2006 & CO No. 324/Mum/2006 ITA No. 1510 & 1444/Mum/2009 & CO No. 160/Mum/2009 Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04 in compliance with the provisions of Section 147/148 of the Act and the same cannot be regarded as bad in law. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 raised by GCC in Appeal is dismissed. We proceed to examine…

DCIT 13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Pebble Bay Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the application of the assessee under rule 27 is ...

ITA 5744/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- M/S Pebble Bay Developers Tax-13(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Room No. 218, Vs. Raheja Chambers, Linking Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Road, Main Avenue Santacruz Mumbai-400020. (West), Mumbai-400054. Pan No. Aaccg 1645 E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Vranda Matkari, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Nishit Gandhi, Ar Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda Matkari, DR
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 69C

…re is no question of change of opinion - refer refer- A.L.A. Firm vs. CIT 102 ITR 622 (Madras), Ess Kay Firm vs. CIT 102 ITR 622 (Madras), Ess Kay M/s Pebble Bay Developers Pvt. Ltd. M/s Pebble Bay Developers Pvt. Ltd. 33 Engineering Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 (SC) and EMA India Engineering Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 (SC) and EMA India Engineering Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 (SC) and EMA India Ltd. vs. ACIT (30 DTR 82) (Allahabad). Ltd. vs. ACIT (30 DTR 82) (Allahabad). 4.8. When an income liable to tax has escaped assessment in the original 4.8. When an income liable to tax has esc…

ACIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Cavinkare Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

Appeal stand allowed

ITA 1076/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (C.A) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreeenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 36(1)(iii)

…sary to reopen the case, in our opinion, were duly fulfilled by Ld. AO and the reassessment proceedings were perfectly valid. 10. Our view is duly supported by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. V/s CIT (247 ITR 818; 23.07.1997) wherein Hon’ble Court held that there was no bar for Ld. AO to reopen the assessment of an earlier year on the basis of his findings of fact made on the basis of fresh materials in the course of assessment of the next assessment year. 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO (236 ITR 34; 17.12.1…