2011 (Delhi H C) (vii) Madhukar Khosla Vs. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (Del) (viii) CIT v. Foramer France

236 ITR 477Supreme Court of India1999#12458 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Judgments citing 2011 (Delhi H C) (vii) Madhukar Khosla Vs. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (Del) (viii) CIT v. Foramer France

S.P. Singla Construction Private Limited, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 514/CHANDI/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Jan 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153Section 153A

…posal of the case before the authority or court vide Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 12 CTR (SC) 201 : (1979) 120 ITR 14 (SC); Gupta Traders v. CIT [1982] 28 CTR (All) 270 : (1982) 135 ITR 504 (All); CIT v. Tarajan Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. [1999] 152 CTR (SC) 1 : (1999) 236 ITR 477 (SC) and CIT v. Goel Bros. [1982] 28 CTR (All) 274 : (1982) 135 ITR 511 (All), etc. The case of an expatriate employee was to be decided on the basis of the provisions of article XIV of the treaty, whereas corporate income was to be decided on the basis of either article III or article XVI of the treaty or Section 44BB of the Act. Hence, the obse…

M/S. Ue Development India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2381/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…) CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) (vi) CIT Vs. Modipon Ltd. in ITA No.533 of 2011 Dt.21.03.2011 (Delhi H C) (vii) Madhukar Khosla Vs. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (Del) (viii) CIT Vs. Foramer France 264 ITR 566 (SC) (ix) CIT Vs. Tarajan Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. 236 ITR 477 (SC) (x) Fibres & Fabrics International (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 48 ITR (T)46 (Bangalore – Trib.) 4. According to the ld.AR that as per the 1st proviso to Section 147 of the Act there is an assessment under Section 143(3) or 147 of the Act has already been completed for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under Section 147 of the Act…

Tata Advanced Materials Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(4), Bangalore

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2182/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…) CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) (vi) CIT Vs. Modipon Ltd. in ITA No.533 of 2011 Dt.21.03.2011 (Delhi H C) (vii) Madhukar Khosla Vs. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (Del) (viii) CIT Vs. Foramer France 264 ITR 566 (SC) (ix) CIT Vs. Tarajan Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. 236 ITR 477 (SC) (x) Fibres & Fabrics International (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 48 ITR (T)46 (Bangalore – Trib.) 4. According to the ld.AR that as per the 1st proviso to Section 147 of the Act there is an assessment under Section 143(3) or 147 of the Act has already been completed for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under Section 147 of the Act…

M/S Tata Advanced Materials Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(4), Bangalore

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2181/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…) CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) (vi) CIT Vs. Modipon Ltd. in ITA No.533 of 2011 Dt.21.03.2011 (Delhi H C) (vii) Madhukar Khosla Vs. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (Del) (viii) CIT Vs. Foramer France 264 ITR 566 (SC) (ix) CIT Vs. Tarajan Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. 236 ITR 477 (SC) (x) Fibres & Fabrics International (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 48 ITR (T)46 (Bangalore – Trib.) 4. According to the ld.AR that as per the 1st proviso to Section 147 of the Act there is an assessment under Section 143(3) or 147 of the Act has already been completed for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under Section 147 of the Act…

DCIT - 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. 3Dplm Solutions Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed and cross-objection filed by the assessee is also hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 2789/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2789/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Dcit-14(3)(1), Mumbai बिधम/ M/S. 3Dplm Solutions Limited, Unit No.703-B, 7Th 455, Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Vs. Floor, B-Wing, Reliable Floor, M.K. Marg, Mumbai- Tech Park, Airoli, Mumbai- 400020. 400708. Co. No.296/Mum/2017 (Ita. No. 2789/Mum/2016) (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) बिधम/ M/S. 3Dplm Solutions Dcit-14(3)(1)-Mumbai Limited, Unit No.703-B, 7Th Room No.455, Aayakar Vs. Floor, B-Wing, Reliable Bhavan Maharashi Karve Tech Park, Airoli, Mumbai- Marg, Mumbai-400020. 400708. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacz1421B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri K. Ved (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07.05.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue As Well As Assessee Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeal As Well As Cross Objection Against The Order Dated 25.01.2016 Passed

For Appellant: Shri K. Ved (AR)For Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari (Sr. AR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 148

…the Act. 5.7 Considering the appellant’s facts and circumstances as discussed above vis-à-vis the prvisions of proviso to section 147 of the Act and the legal position on the issue as held by the various courts in the case of CIT Vs. Tarajan Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. 236 ITR 477 (SC), CIT Vs. M/s. Kelvinator of India Ltd, 320 ITR 561 (SC), Fenner (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 241 ITR 672 (Mad), Bhavesh Developers Vs. AO, 329 ITR 249 (Bom), Asian Paints Ltd. Vs. DCIT 308 ITR 195, (Bom) and also various other judgements cited by the appellant, the AO was not justified in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Act and the same is…

Smt Santi Sarkar, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-37(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 797/KOL/2015[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri I. Banerjee, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…section 153(3)(ii) it must be an express direction necessary for the disposal of the case before the authority or court vide Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC) ; Gupta Traders v. CIT [1982] 135 ITR 504 (All) ; CIT v. Tarajan Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 477 (SC) and CIT v. Goel Bros. [1982] 135 ITR 511 (All), etc. The case of an expatriate employee was to be decided on the basis of the provisions of article XIV of the treaty, whereas corporate income was to be decided on the basis of either article III or article XVI of the treaty or section 44BB of the Act. Hence, the observations of the Tribu- nal…

JCIT(OSD), Circle - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the CO of assessee is allowed and appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 36/KOL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Mar 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak & Shri Harish Agarwal, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…section 153(3)(ii) it must be an express direction necessary for the disposal of the case before the authority or court vide Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC) ; Gupta Traders v. CIT [1982] 135 ITR 504 (All) ; CIT v. Tarajan Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 477 (SC) and CIT v. Goel Bros. [1982] 135 ITR 511 (All), etc. The case of an expatriate employee was to be decided on the basis of the provisions of article XIV of the treaty, whereas corporate income was to be decided on the basis of either article III or article XVI of the treaty or section 44BB of the Act. Hence, the observations of the Tribu- nal…

DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata vs. M/S Cheviot Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed and COs of assessee are allowed

ITA 530/KOL/2012[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kr. Pande, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…section 153(3)(ii) it must be an express direction necessary for the disposal of the case before the authority or court vide Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC) ; Gupta Traders v. CIT [1982] 135 ITR 504 (All) ; CIT v. Tarajan Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 477 (SC) and CIT v. Goel Bros. [1982] 135 ITR 511 (All), etc. The case of an expatriate employee was to be decided on the basis of the provisions of article XIV of the treaty, whereas corporate income was to be decided on the basis of either article III or article XVI of the treaty or section 44BB of the Act. Hence, the observations of the Tribu- nal…

2011 (Delhi H C) (vii) Madhukar Khosla Vs. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (Del) (viii) CIT v. Foramer France (236 ITR 477) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax