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

Hitesh Chhatwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC -5(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed while for the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6418/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: Vinay Sinha
Section 54F

…(SC). 4.9. When no finding either positive or negative is arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings, there is no question of change of opinionrefer ~ A.L.A. Firm vs. CIT 102 ITR 622 (Madras), Ess Kay Engineering Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 (SC) and EMA India Ltd. vs. ACIT (30 DTR 82) (Allahabad). Assessment u/s 143(3) vis-a-vis non consideration of an issue-reopening is valid as held in (2013) 89 DTR (Ker) 31 Innovative Foods Ltd. UOI. 4.10 Even when an income liable to tax has escaped assessment in the original assessment proceedings due to oversight and inadvertence or a mistake…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 1(2), Bangalore vs. Mr. M R Seetharam, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 256/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2007-08
For Respondent: Shri Naginchand Khincha
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153Section 153A

…he assessee and the third party who has admitted having paid unaccounted cash to a list of parties, the Ld.AO is empowered to make further enquiries with the assessee. 7. He relied on the following decisions  (1999) 236 ITR (SC.) Raymond Wollen Ltd.  (2020) 247 ITR 818 (SC.)Ess Ess Kay Engg.Co. P vs. CIT  159 ITR 956 (SC.) I.O.C. Vs. ITO  (1993) 203 ITR (SC) — Phool Chand Bajrang Lal. vs. ITO  324 ITR 54 (Bom.) Multiscreen Media Pvt. Ltd.  (2010) 329 ITR 28 (Del.) — Diwakar Engineers Ltd. vs. ITO  225 ITR 495 (Del.) — Rakesh Aggarwal 8. The Ld. Standing Counsel also placed heavy reliance on the decision of…

Lokesh Talanki, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 261/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Waghale CAFor Respondent: Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman Addln CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 54F

…asset in assessment 2012-13 would have surfaced whereby the assessee would not have got the exemption u/s.54F. The Learned DR in this regard placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. P. Ltd. vs CIT (2001) 247 ITR 818 SC. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials on record. We notice that the AO during the course of original assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act, had called for various details including the statement of income, Balance sheet and Profit & Loss account, property details, rental agreements etc. which the assessee has been shari…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Clarion Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 421/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri V.K. ShridharFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…en the proceeding u/s. 147 of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court also considered the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs. Saradbhai M. Lakhani reported in 243 ITR 1which held the 9 ITA Nos.331 & 421/PUN/2016, A.Y. 2009-10 Vs. CIT reported in 247 ITR 818 which held that the Income Tax Officer is not precluded from reopening of the assessment of an earlier year on the basis of his finding of fact made on the basis of the fresh material in the course of assessment of the next assessment year. Considering the above three decisions of Hon‟ble Supreme Court it was held by the Hon‟ble High Court of All…

Clarion Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 331/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri V.K. ShridharFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…en the proceeding u/s. 147 of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court also considered the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs. Saradbhai M. Lakhani reported in 243 ITR 1which held the 9 ITA Nos.331 & 421/PUN/2016, A.Y. 2009-10 Vs. CIT reported in 247 ITR 818 which held that the Income Tax Officer is not precluded from reopening of the assessment of an earlier year on the basis of his finding of fact made on the basis of the fresh material in the course of assessment of the next assessment year. Considering the above three decisions of Hon‟ble Supreme Court it was held by the Hon‟ble High Court of All…

Jsk Industries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-8(1), Mumbai

ITA 5891/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 147Section 68

…be said to have been arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion as held in the following judgements: 1. Kalyanji Mavji & Co. vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) 2. Esskay Engineering P. Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 3. ITO vs. Purushottam Das Bangur & Anr. 224 ITR 362 (SC) M/s. JSK Industries Pvt. Ltd. & ors 8.21 In Writ Petition. No.9036 of 2007, Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. Dy CIT &Anr. Decision dt. 14th Feb. 2011 (reported at (2011) 52 DTK (Del) 353 - Ed.) it was held: "10 The term 'failure' on the part of the assessee is not restricted only to the…

Nitan Chhatwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC -5(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 6422/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rahul RamanFor Respondent: Shri Mani Jain
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 14A

…C). 4.9. When no finding either positive or negative is arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings, there is no question of change of opinion- refer - A.L.A. Firm vs, CIT 102 ITR 622 (Madras), Ess Kay Engineering Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 (SC) and EMA India Ltd. vs. ACIT (30 DTR 82) (Allahabad). Assessment u/s 143(3) vis-a-vis non consideration of an issue-reopening is valid as held in (2013) 89 DTR (Ker) 31 Innovative Foods Ltd. vs UOI. 4.10. Even when an income liable to tax has escaped assessment in the original assessment proceedings due to oversight and inadvertence or a mis…

DCIT-CC-5(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Nitan Chhatwal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 6351/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rahul RamanFor Respondent: Shri Mani Jain
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 14A

…C). 4.9. When no finding either positive or negative is arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings, there is no question of change of opinion- refer - A.L.A. Firm vs, CIT 102 ITR 622 (Madras), Ess Kay Engineering Company (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 (SC) and EMA India Ltd. vs. ACIT (30 DTR 82) (Allahabad). Assessment u/s 143(3) vis-a-vis non consideration of an issue-reopening is valid as held in (2013) 89 DTR (Ker) 31 Innovative Foods Ltd. vs UOI. 4.10. Even when an income liable to tax has escaped assessment in the original assessment proceedings due to oversight and inadvertence or a mis…

Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 6, Mumbai

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2062/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri D.C.Bothra & Shri R. K. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet S Duggal
Section 132(1)

…n be said to have been arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion as held in the following judgements: 1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) 2. Esskay Engineering P. Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 3. ITO vs. Purushottam Das Bangur&Anr. 224 ITR 362 (SC) 8.14 In Writ Petition, No.903G of 2007, Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. CIT &Anr. Decision dt. 14th Feb. 2011 (reported at (2011) 52 DTR (Del) 353-Ed.) it was held: '10 The term 'failure1 on the pan of the assessee is not restricted only to the IT return and the columns of the IT return…

DCIT Cen Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3968/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri D.C.Bothra & Shri R. K. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet S Duggal
Section 132(1)

…n be said to have been arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion as held in the following judgements: 1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) 2. Esskay Engineering P. Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 3. ITO vs. Purushottam Das Bangur&Anr. 224 ITR 362 (SC) 8.14 In Writ Petition, No.903G of 2007, Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. CIT &Anr. Decision dt. 14th Feb. 2011 (reported at (2011) 52 DTR (Del) 353-Ed.) it was held: '10 The term 'failure1 on the pan of the assessee is not restricted only to the IT return and the columns of the IT return…

Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 6 (Old), Mumbai

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3245/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri D.C.Bothra & Shri R. K. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet S Duggal
Section 132(1)

…n be said to have been arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion as held in the following judgements: 1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) 2. Esskay Engineering P. Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 3. ITO vs. Purushottam Das Bangur&Anr. 224 ITR 362 (SC) 8.14 In Writ Petition, No.903G of 2007, Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. CIT &Anr. Decision dt. 14th Feb. 2011 (reported at (2011) 52 DTR (Del) 353-Ed.) it was held: '10 The term 'failure1 on the pan of the assessee is not restricted only to the IT return and the columns of the IT return…

The ACIT, Circle, Ratlam vs. M/S. Mahalaxmi Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd., Ratlam

ITA 956/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Miss Madhumita Roy

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…m u/s 80IB(5), was not allowable to the assessee. The location of unit is located in backward area or not is a material fact for allowing deduction, as such the ratio of decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. P. Ltd. vs. CIT-Tax 247 ITR 818 Hon'ble Supreme Court and Seimens Information System ltd. vs. ACIT [2012} 343 ITR 188 (BOM) is clearly applicable in this case. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in holding that reopening proceedings have not been validly initiated even when assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all ma…

The ACIT Circle, Ratlam vs. M/S. Mahalaxmi Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd., Ratlam

ITA 955/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Miss Madhumita Roy

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…m u/s 80IB(5), was not allowable to the assessee. The location of unit is located in backward area or not is a material fact for allowing deduction, as such the ratio of decisions of Supreme Court in the case of Ess Ess Kay Engineering Co. P. Ltd. vs. CIT-Tax 247 ITR 818 Hon'ble Supreme Court and Seimens Information System ltd. vs. ACIT [2012} 343 ITR 188 (BOM) is clearly applicable in this case. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in holding that reopening proceedings have not been validly initiated even when assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all ma…

The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Kotarki Constructions Pvt Ltd

WA/842/2018HC Karnataka30 Mar 2021

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,J.M.KHAZI

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 18ISection 4Section 80

…Judge in the case of Kelvinator of India Pvt. Ltd., and Sitara Diamond Pvt. Ltd., (supra) do not apply in the instant case. 11. Learned counsel for the appellants relied upon ESS Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 247 ITR 818 (SC) in support of his submissions, as well as Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another Vs. Income Tax Officer and Another reported in 203 ITR 456 and I.P. Patel and Co. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 346 ITR 206. 12. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the requisite conditions under Sections 147/148 have been…

Pr.Commissioner vs. M/S Esteem Classic

ITA/842/2018HC Karnataka22 Mar 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 18ISection 4Section 80

…Judge in the case of Kelvinator of India Pvt. Ltd., and Sitara Diamond Pvt. Ltd., (supra) do not apply in the instant case. 11. Learned counsel for the appellants relied upon ESS Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 247 ITR 818 (SC) in support of his submissions, as well as Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another Vs. Income Tax Officer and Another reported in 203 ITR 456 and I.P. Patel and Co. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 346 ITR 206. 12. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the requisite conditions under Sections 147/148 have been…

The Dy. CIT, Circle-1(2), Vadodara vs. M/S. Web Gazer Software Company, Vadodara

ITA 1559/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 10ASection 10BSection 14

…at it would be permissible. Similar was the view taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of New Light Trading Co. Vs CIT [2002] 256 ITR 391 (Del). It is necessary to refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ess Ess Kay Engg. Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT [2001] 247 ITR 818 (SC). In this case fresh material was obtained based on which the Supreme Court held that mere fact that the case of the assessee was accepted as correct in original assessment for the assessment year would not preclude the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment on the basis of fresh materials obtained in the course of assessment for the next…

Sterling Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 5(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2009-10 is dismissed

ITA 6154/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.6154, 6155, 6156, 6157 & 6158/Mum/2016 (Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) Sterling Jewels Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Acit-5(3)(2) 208, A-Z Industrial Estate 460, Aaykar Bhawan Ganpatrao Kadam Marg M.K.Road, Churchgate Lower Parel (W) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aajcs3316D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6154, 6155, 6156, 6157 & 6158/Mum/2016 (Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) Sterling Jewels Pvt.Ltd. Vs. ACIT-5(3)(2) 208, A-Z Industrial Estate 460, Aaykar Bhawan Ganpatrao Kadam Marg M.K.Road, Churchgate Lower Parel (W) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013 PAN/GIR No.AAJCS3316D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by K.A.Vaidyalingan Revenue by V.Vinod Kumar Date of Hearing 03/10/2019 Date of Pronouncement 03/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आ…

DCIT, Central Cir-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Amazon Metals Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 905/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Acro Exports Trade Room No. 658, 6Th Floor Pvt.Ltd. 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 37-40 Subash Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057

Section 131Section 147Section 148

…to have been arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion, as has been held in the following judgments: 1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) 2. Esskay Engineering P. Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 3. ITO v Purushottam Das Bangur & Anr. 224 ITR 362 (SC) 8.13 In Writ Petition. No. 9036 of 2007, Honda SielPower Products Ltd. vs DyClT&Anr. Decision dt. 14th Feb. 2011 reported in (2011) 52 DTR (Del) 353 - Ed.), it was held as under:- "10 The term 'failure' on the pan of the assessee is not restricted only to the IT return and the columns of t…

Dcie Central Circle-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Pali Fabrics Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 904/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 37-40 Subash Road Mumbai-400 020 Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp0089G (Appellant) .. Respondent) & C.O. No. 77/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.904/Mum/2018) (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Cc-8(4) 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 37-40 Subash Road Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp0089G (Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 131Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…to have been arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion, as has been held in the following judgments: 1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) 2. Esskay Engineering P. Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 3. ITO v Purushottam Das Bangur & Anr. 224 ITR 362 (SC) 8.13 In Writ Petition. No. 9036 of 2007, Honda SielPower Products Ltd. vs DyClT&Anr. Decision dt. 14th Feb. 2011 reported in (2011) 52 DTR (Del) 353 - Ed.), it was held as under:- "10 The term 'failure' on the pan of the assessee is not restricted only to the IT return and the columns of t…

DCIT Central Cir-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Acro Exports Trade Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 903/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Acro Exports Trade Room No. 658, 6Th Floor Pvt.Ltd. 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 37-40 Subash Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057

Section 131Section 147Section 148

…to have been arrived at during the course of original assessment proceedings. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion, as has been held in the following judgments: 1. Kalyanji Mavji& Co. vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) 2. Esskay Engineering P. Ltd. vs. CIT 247 ITR 818 3. ITO v Purushottam Das Bangur & Anr. 224 ITR 362 (SC) 8.13 In Writ Petition. No. 9036 of 2007, Honda SielPower Products Ltd. vs DyClT&Anr. Decision dt. 14th Feb. 2011 reported in (2011) 52 DTR (Del) 353 - Ed.), it was held as under:- "10 The term 'failure' on the pan of the assessee is not restricted only to the IT return and the columns of t…