222 Taxman 15 (Gujarat)(MAG.), Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-4 v. G & G Pharma India Ltd.

384 ITR 147High Court2016#289 most cited

What is 222 Taxman 15 (Gujarat)(MAG.), Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-4 v. G & G Pharma India Ltd. authority for?

An assessment can be reopened if there is tangible material indicating escapement of income, demonstrating a live link between the material and the reasons recorded for reopening. The Assessing Officer must apply their mind to the material facts, and the sanction under section 151 should not be based on borrowed satisfaction.

274

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-4 v. G & G Pharma India Ltd. · section 147 · section 148 · section 151 · section 143(3) · reason to believe · tangible material · live link · borrowed satisfaction · non-application of mind · escapement of income

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing 222 Taxman 15 (Gujarat)(MAG.), Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-4 v. G & G Pharma India Ltd.

M/S Holy Faith International Pvt. Ltd, Jalandhar vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 181/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Soodita No.181/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 M/S Holy Faith International Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Mbd House, Central Circle-Ii, Railway Road, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach6111J Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Bhawani Shankar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2019 Order Per N. K. Saini: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.03.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-I, Jalandhar. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. That The Worthy Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-1, Jalandhar Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Assessee. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Contention Of The Assessing Officer In Reopening The Case U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act And, Thus, Framing Of Assessment U/S 147 R.W.S.143(3)/153C At An Income Of Rs. 4,95,13,441/- Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 4,63,33,441/-. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Considering That There Was No Reason To Believe That The Income Of The

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar, DR
Section 131Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…rectorate of Income Tax without making an inquiry was not justified. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Sheo Nath Singh Vs ACIT 82 ITR 0147 (SC) " CIT Vs SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 285 (Del.) " Pr. CIT Vs G. G. Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.) " Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO 338 ITR 51 (Del.) " ITO Vs Narnaudia Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 4094/Del/2009 " Sh. Chunnilal Prajapati Vs ITO-II in ITA Nos.290 to 295/Luc/2010 " G. N. Shaw (Wine) (P) Ltd. Vs ITO 260 ITR 513 (Cal.) " Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs DCIT 381 ITR 387 (Del.) " Shaf Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. V…

Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-61(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2159/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2009-10 Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, Vs. Ito, B-174, Ground Floor, Ward-61(5), Nirman Vihar, Vikas Marg, New Delhi. Delhi – 110092. Pan: Aagpa1651B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.P. Ganguli, Advocate Revenue By : Shri P.S. Thuingaleng, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.12.2018 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31St January, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-20, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Doctor & Filed His Return Of Income On 30Th March, 2010 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,77,510/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 On The Ground That The Assessee Has Received Cash Payment Of Rs.2 Lakh During F.Y. 2008-09 Which Was Largely Unaccounted For As Per The Information Received From The Dcit, Circle 1, New Delhi. The Assessee, In Response To The Same, Submitted That The Original Return Filed On 20Th March, 2010 May Be Treated As Return Filed In Response To Notice U/S 148. On Being Asked By The Assessee To Issue The Reasons Recorded, The Assessing Officer

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Ganguli, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Thuingaleng, Sr.DR
Section 131(1)Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…icer has merely relied on the information received from the ACIT Circle 1(1), New Delhi and has not applied his independent mind. Relying on various decisions including the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. G & G Pharma (2015) 384 ITR 147 (Del) and various other decisions, he submitted that where the Assessing Officer had not made any effort to discuss the material on the basis of which he formed the prima facie view that the income had escaped assessment, the basic requirement of section 147 that the 4 Assessing Officer has to apply his mind in order to form reasons to believe t…