254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

75 ITR 373Supreme Court of India1970#559 most cited

What is 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure is capital or revenue in nature based on its aim, object, and resultant advantage to the business.

172

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT · 254 ITR 657 (Del) · capital vs revenue expenditure · expenditure for business · aim and object of expenditure · resultant advantage · Sitalpur Sugar Works Vs. CIT · International Airport Authority of India Vs. CIT · Jagmohan Rao Vs. CIT

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153CSection 148Section 153ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

recognised provident fundsection 43b(f)section 274(1)section 211section 50bapproved gratuity fundsection 40a(9)section 2(45)section 36(l)(iii)wholly and exclusively for businesssection 271(l)section 32(1)(iia)

Judgments citing 254 ITR 657 (Del); Hardillia Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT

M/S. Karnataka Power Corporation Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 11(5) Presently Circle 4(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 282/BANG/2017[2002 - 2003]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jan 2021

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Kannan Narayanan, JCIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

…der of assessment and to substitute in its place the order made on reassessment. With this proposition there cannot be any quarrel and this aspect is already covered in Deputy CCT v. H. R. Sri Ramulu [1977] 39 STC 177 (SC), V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT/EPT [1970] 75 ITR 373 (SC) and CST v. H. M. Esufali H. M. Abdulali [1973] 90 ITR 271 (SC). 27. In Hind Wire Industries Ltd. (supra) the Supreme Court has used word "including" in the amended or rectified order would mean that word "order" as the case may be can be either "original order" or "amended order" or "rectified order" depending upon the fact as to in which ord…

Designarch Infrastructure P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8199/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 8199/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Designarch Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer, L-7A(Lgf), South Extension, Part-Ii, Ward-7(1), New Delhi-110049 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacfi4218C Assessee By : Sh. Raj Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.10.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 127(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…on the entire income which has escaped assessment. The learned counsel relied upon the cases of Supreme Court in CIT v. Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297/64 10 Designarch Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Taxman 442 and V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT/CEPT [1970] 75 ITR 373. On the other hand learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the words, 'and also' in section 147 signify that unless the Assessing Officer assesses the income with respect to which he has formed reason to believe within the meaning of section 147, it would not be open for him to assess or reassess any other income chargeable to tax which ha…

G Vijay Padma, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is dismissed

ITA 3295/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaismt. G Vijay Padma, No.206, 1St Floor, 10Th D Main, 5Th Cross, 1St Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru-560 011 Pan Abcpv 8123E ….Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), Bengaluru. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri P. R. Mathad, C.A. Revenue By: Smt. R. Premi, Jcit (D.R)

For Appellant: Shri P. R. Mathad, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54F

…ts for the proposition that the expenditure incurred for the purpose of eviction and compensation paid to take the complete possession of the property are all admissible expenditure: Mrs. June Perett Vs. ITO 298 ITR 268 (Kar) V. Jagamohan Rao & Others Vs CIT 75 ITR 373(SC) Sitalpur Sugar Works Ltd Vs CIT 49 ITR 160(SC) 9 5.10 The learned Departmental Representative relied on the order of the lower authorities. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and also considered various orders cited by the parties. The first contention of the AR is that the impugned land is an agricultural land and it is not a capital ass…

Sheela Foam Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4096/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4096/Del/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2005-06 Sheela Foam Ltd., C-55, Preet Vihar, Vikas Marg, New Delhi-110092. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaacs0189B Vs The Dcit, Central Circle-6, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent New Delhi-110016

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ssessment has already been made but the AO has reason to believe that there is underassessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Expln. 1 to s. 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. CIT (1970) 75 ITR 373 (SC), which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous underassessment is set aside and the ITO has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of s. 147 enures to the benefit of the Revenue and it is not open to the assessee to…

Prakash Ramji Gavali, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(2), Thane

In the result, the appeal is allowed, in the terms indicated above

ITA 1087/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2019AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…n made but the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that there is under assessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Explanation 1 to section 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the Judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT [1970] 75 ITR 373 , which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous under assessment is set aside and the Income-tax Officer has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of section 147 enures to the benefit of the revenue and it is not open to…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2283/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…t in the case of Jet Airways (I) Ltd (supra) after referring to the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd (1992) 198 ITR 297 and V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. Commission of Income Tax and Excess Profits Tax, (1970) 75 ITR 373 had examined the effect of Explanation 3 to Section 147 and held as follows: "The effect of the amended provisions came to be considered, in two distinct lines of precedent on the subject. The first line of authority, to which a reference has already been made earlier, adopted the principle that where the Assessing Officer has formed a reason to…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2282/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…t in the case of Jet Airways (I) Ltd (supra) after referring to the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd (1992) 198 ITR 297 and V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. Commission of Income Tax and Excess Profits Tax, (1970) 75 ITR 373 had examined the effect of Explanation 3 to Section 147 and held as follows: "The effect of the amended provisions came to be considered, in two distinct lines of precedent on the subject. The first line of authority, to which a reference has already been made earlier, adopted the principle that where the Assessing Officer has formed a reason to…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2281/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…t in the case of Jet Airways (I) Ltd (supra) after referring to the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd (1992) 198 ITR 297 and V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. Commission of Income Tax and Excess Profits Tax, (1970) 75 ITR 373 had examined the effect of Explanation 3 to Section 147 and held as follows: "The effect of the amended provisions came to be considered, in two distinct lines of precedent on the subject. The first line of authority, to which a reference has already been made earlier, adopted the principle that where the Assessing Officer has formed a reason to…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2280/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…t in the case of Jet Airways (I) Ltd (supra) after referring to the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd (1992) 198 ITR 297 and V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. Commission of Income Tax and Excess Profits Tax, (1970) 75 ITR 373 had examined the effect of Explanation 3 to Section 147 and held as follows: "The effect of the amended provisions came to be considered, in two distinct lines of precedent on the subject. The first line of authority, to which a reference has already been made earlier, adopted the principle that where the Assessing Officer has formed a reason to…

DCIT, Circle-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Dotex Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objections are also dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1602/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…essment, and which may come to his notice subsequently, in the course of proceedings under section 147." 12. The Division Bench in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. (supra) considered the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of V. JagamohanRaov. CIT EPT, [1970] 75 ITR 373 and CIT v. Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297 / 64 Taxman 442 and has then elucidated: "18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Limited [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom). We may also note that the heading of section 147 is "income escaping assessment…

Dipti Mehta, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 43(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2032/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…n made but the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that there is under assessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Explanation 1 to section 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the Judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT [1970] 75 ITR 373 , which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous under assessment is set aside and the Income-tax Officer has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of section 147 enures to the benefit of the revenue and it is not open to…

Ppn Properties Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 19(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3060/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S. Sainiassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…e entire income during the reassessment proceedings was left open, that question did not come up for consideration in the case of H. R. Sri Ramulu [1977] 39 STC 177 (SC) or H. M. Esufali's case [1973] 90 ITR 271 (SC) or even in V. Jaganmohan Rao's case [1970] 75 ITR 373 (SC). Some of the High Courts, therefore, fell in error in reading those judgments, divorced from the context in which the precise questions came up for consideration in those cases, and to hold that the assessee could " reagitate " the concluded issues and claim relief in respect of items finally concluded in the original assessment proceedings,…

Prashant Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 19(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3059/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S. Sainiassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…e entire income during the reassessment proceedings was left open, that question did not come up for consideration in the case of H. R. Sri Ramulu [1977] 39 STC 177 (SC) or H. M. Esufali's case [1973] 90 ITR 271 (SC) or even in V. Jaganmohan Rao's case [1970] 75 ITR 373 (SC). Some of the High Courts, therefore, fell in error in reading those judgments, divorced from the context in which the precise questions came up for consideration in those cases, and to hold that the assessee could " reagitate " the concluded issues and claim relief in respect of items finally concluded in the original assessment proceedings,…

Madhuri Dhananjauy Marathe, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(4), Nashik

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1640/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1639 & 1640/Pun/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Smt. Madhuri Dhananjay Marathe, 3, Yashodhara Apartment, Chinchkhed Road, At Post Pimpalgaon (B), Taluka- Niphad, Nashik Pan : Amjpm4024B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…A.Ys. 2009-10 & 2010-11 Officer has reason to believe that there is under assessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Explanation 1 to section 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the Judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CfT [19701 75 ITR 373, which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous under assessment is set aside and the Income-tax Officer has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of section 147 ensures to the benefit of the revenue and it is not open to…

Madhuri Dhananjauy Marathe, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(4), Nashik

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1639/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1639 & 1640/Pun/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Smt. Madhuri Dhananjay Marathe, 3, Yashodhara Apartment, Chinchkhed Road, At Post Pimpalgaon (B), Taluka- Niphad, Nashik Pan : Amjpm4024B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…A.Ys. 2009-10 & 2010-11 Officer has reason to believe that there is under assessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Explanation 1 to section 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the Judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CfT [19701 75 ITR 373, which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous under assessment is set aside and the Income-tax Officer has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of section 147 ensures to the benefit of the revenue and it is not open to…

ITO 19(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Meenakshi N Shah, Mumbai

ITA 7082/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit 5(2)(2) Meridian Chem Bond Mumbai Purchase Ltd., बनाम/ 903 Raheja Centre, Free Vs. Press Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. Aaacr1789G

Section 68

…43 (Raj) and also considered following decisions: • CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries [1989] 180 ITR 319 (P&H) • CIT v. Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343 (Raj) • CIT v. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 297 • (SC) Jaganmohan Rao (V.) v. CIT/EPT [1970] 75 ITR 373 • (SC) Travancore Cements Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2008] 305 ITR 170 (Ker) • Vipan Khanna v. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 220 (P&H) 69 Meridian Chem Bond P Ltd. & Meenakshi N Shah ITA No.7385 & 7082/Mum/2016 & C.O. No.86 & 85/Mum/2018 7.31 Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT vs. RAJESH JHAVERI STOCK BROKERS P. LTD. 291 ITR 500 (Supreme Court) held as under:…

Konark Structural Engg Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-12, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5488/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Revenue by B Sriniwas, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…supplementary assessment with the original assessment remaining intact came to be incidentally considered as a matter relevant for resolving the issue. Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered the decisions in the case of V jaganmohan Rao vs. CIT and CEPT (1970) 75 ITR 373 (SC) and also the decision in CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd (1992) 198 ITR 297 (SC), wherein it was decided that the AO’s jurisdiction was confined to income that has escaped assessment and that cannot justify revision, reopening or reconsideration of the entire assessment. 13. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered the decision…

ITO 6(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Juliet Industries Ltd. (Formerly Known As Juliet Products Ltd.), Mumbai

ITA 5975/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5452/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Juliet Industries Limited Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Lower Parel M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5975/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Juliet Industries Limited Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Vs. M.K.Road Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Vijay Mehta, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Vidhyadhar, Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ssessment has already been made but the AO has reason to believe that there is underassessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Expln. 1 to s. 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. CIT (1970) 75 ITR 373 (SC), which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous underassessment is set aside and the ITO has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of s. 147 enures to the benefit of the Revenue and it is not open to the assessee to…

Juliet Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 5452/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5452/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Juliet Industries Limited Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Lower Parel M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5975/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Juliet Industries Limited Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Vs. M.K.Road Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Vijay Mehta, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Vidhyadhar, Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ssessment has already been made but the AO has reason to believe that there is underassessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Expln. 1 to s. 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao vs. CIT (1970) 75 ITR 373 (SC), which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous underassessment is set aside and the ITO has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The Court held that the object of s. 147 enures to the benefit of the Revenue and it is not open to the assessee to…

N.Baladandayudam, Rep by Power Holder R.Ravichandran, Erode vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(2), Coimbatore

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the assessment year 2010-2011 is allowed whereas as those for assessment years

ITA 1678/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Respondent: Shri. B.Sagadevan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ade but the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that there is underassessment on account of the existence of any of the grounds contemplated by Explanation 1 to section 147. The Supreme Court adverted to the judgment in V. Jaganmohan Rao v. CIT/EPT [1970] 75 ITR 373, which held that once an assessment is validly reopened, the previous underassessment is set aside and the Income-tax Officer has the jurisdiction and duty to levy tax on the entire income that had escaped assessment during the previous year. The court held that the object of section 147 enures to the benefit of the Revenue and it is not open to t…