18. Govinda Choudhury & Sons. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward A, Berhampur & Ors.

109 ITR 370High Court1977#1956 most cited

What is 18. Govinda Choudhury & Sons. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward A, Berhampur & Ors. authority for?

The approving authority must apply its mind to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer before granting sanction under section 151, and a mechanical rubber-stamping or mere affixation of a stamp without due consideration constitutes an invalid approval.

58

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Govinda Choudhury & Sons · 109 ITR 370 · section 148 · section 151 · approval · sanctioning authority · mechanical approval · application of mind · reasons recorded · reassessment · rubber stamping

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 151Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153DSection 132Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

section 271aab(1a)section 151(2)section 144basection 158bgsection 142(2a)approval under section 151section 271aabsection 148(2)section 151(1)section 271aac(1)section 153bsanctioning authority

Judgments citing 18. Govinda Choudhury & Sons. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward A, Berhampur & Ors.

Sankar Paikaray, Balugaon vs. I.T.O. Khurda Ward, Khurda

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 369/CTK/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack14 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA &For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.365 365/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011 ITA No.36 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2011-2012 ITA No.36 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2012-2013 ITA No.36 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2013-2014 ITA No.372 72/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2015-2016 Sankar Sankar Paikaray, Paikaray, Prop: Prop: Vs. Income Ta…

Sankar Paikaray, Balugaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Khurda Ward, Khurda

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 367/CTK/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack14 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA &For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.365 365/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011 ITA No.36 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2011-2012 ITA No.36 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2012-2013 ITA No.36 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2013-2014 ITA No.372 72/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2015-2016 Sankar Sankar Paikaray, Paikaray, Prop: Prop: Vs. Income Ta…

Sankar Paikaray, Balugaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Khurda Ward, Khurda

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 366/CTK/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack14 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA &For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.365 365/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011 ITA No.36 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2011-2012 ITA No.36 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2012-2013 ITA No.36 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2013-2014 ITA No.372 72/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2015-2016 Sankar Sankar Paikaray, Paikaray, Prop: Prop: Vs. Income Ta…

Sankar Paikaray, Balugaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Khurda Ward, Khurda

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 365/CTK/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack14 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA &For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.365 365/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011 ITA No.36 ITA No.369/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2011-2012 ITA No.36 ITA No.366/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2012-2013 ITA No.36 ITA No.367/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2013-2014 ITA No.372 72/CTK/2023: Assessment Year-201 2015-2016 Sankar Sankar Paikaray, Paikaray, Prop: Prop: Vs. Income Ta…

Biswajit Behera vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2), Bbsr

ITA/17/2024HC Orissa08 Oct 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central 2 vs. Ms Bhudeva Estates Pvt Ltd

ITA/577/2023HC Delhi06 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

Section 153ASection 153DSection 264Section 68

…Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case whe…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central 2 vs. Gopal Kumar Goyal

ITA/653/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case whe…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central II vs. M/S Witness Builders Pvt Ltd

ITA/641/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

…Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case whe…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central- II, New Delhi vs. M/S Witness Constructions (P) Ltd

ITA/638/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case whe…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central- II, New Delhi vs. M/S Kartikeya Buildcon (P) Ltd

ITA/639/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case whe…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central II vs. M/S Gee Gee Buildtech Pvt. Ltd

ITA/2/2024HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

…Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case whe…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-02 vs. M/S Mdlr Hotels Pvt Ltd

ITA/593/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case whe…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ms Believe Developers and Promoters P Ltd

ITA/21/2024HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by the Board leaves much to be desired. It is a case whe…

Golden Century Food Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-10(2), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6137/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 147Section 148

…ving upon the reasons recorded 2 ITA No.6137/Del./2019 u/s 148 of the Act. It is pertinent to note that where the reasons are factually incorrect, the notice and the assessment thereon need to be vitiated. [Sugar Chand v/s ITO 105 ITR 743 and Govinda V/s ITO 109 ITR 370]. In fact, that the figure of Rs.15,00,000/- as alleged to be main transaction in the report of Investigation wing has been found to be incorrect and no addition made on this ground, the order itself get vitiated. 5) That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. A.O. has erred under the law while making addition amounting to Rs.26,9…

Sh. Vikas Kapoor, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5936/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: SH. V.K.SABHARWAL, ADV. &For Respondent: MS. BEDOBINA CHAUDHURI, SR. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Mewal Das, (1972) 103 ITR 437 (SC) 50. Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee v. Income Tax Officer, "B" Ward, Central Salaries Circle, Calcutta & Ors., (1972) 93 ITR 130 (CAL). 51. Govinda Choudhury & Sons v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-A" 52. Berhampur & Ors., (1975) 109 ITR 370 (ORI) Details of judgments relied upon on Mechanical Approval uls 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: Pro CIT-6 Vs. M/s NC Cables Ltd. in ITA No. 3351Del12015 Hon'ble Delhi High Court, New Delhi vide order dated 11.01.2017 held as under Section 151 of the Act clearly stipulates that the CIT (A), who is the competent authority to authorize the r…

M/S. Mehta Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1633/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. V.P. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 3Section 68Section 69C

…, ITA No.4908/Del/2012 decided on 31.03.2015 – ITAT. (vi). Chanderiya Real Estate (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, ITA No. 657/Del/2015- ITAT. (vii). The Central India Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. ITO, (2011) 333 ITR 237 (Delhi) (viii). Govinda Choudhury & Sons v. ITO (1977) 109 ITR 370 (Ori.) (ix). S.P. Agarwalla alias Sukhdeo Prasad Agarwalla v. ITO (1983) 140 ITR 1010 (Cal.). (x). CIT v. Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.778/2015 (Del.) dated 13.10.2015. (xi). CIT v. Expo Globe India Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 147 (Del (xii). ITO v. Moksha Securities P. Ltd. in ITA No.6251/Dei/2015 dated 2.09.2016 of ITAT, Delhi. (xiii). ITO v…

ADIT (It)-3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. the Hong Kong & Shahghai Banking Corporation Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 3688/MUM/2009[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2016AY 2000-01
For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 5

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, ‘एल’ खंडपीठ अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “L” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, , , , "याियक सद"य राम लाल नेगी "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.3688/Mum/09 ,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2000-01 वष" आयकर आयकर…

M/S Central India Electric Supply Co.Ltd vs. ITO-Company Circle X & Ors

The appeal is allowed leaving the parties to bear their own

ITA - 17 / 1999HC Delhi28 Jan 2011

Bench: Us In The Present Appeal, Are: “(1) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Tribunal Was Justified In Holding That Re-Assessment Proceedings Under Section 147(A) Read With Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Had Been Rightly Initiated Against The Assessee?

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 54

…e of the Commissioner and no other relevant material was produced before the Court even when asked for. This was held to be a case of non-application of mind. The judgment in Govinda Choudhury & Sons v. Income Tax Officer Ward „A‟ Berhampur & Ors (1975) 109 ITR 370 2011:DHC:510-DB (ORI) was once again relied upon the judgment in Chuggamal Rajpal‟s case (supra). 18. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the rival pleas of learned counsel for the parties. FIRST PLEA: 19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chuggamal Rajpal‟s case (supra); Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee‟s case (…