319 ITR 221 (Del) Shipra Srivastava v. ACIT

289 ITR 37High Court2007#5499 most cited

What is 319 ITR 221 (Del) Shipra Srivastava v. ACIT authority for?

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 cannot be initiated based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer. The AO must have tangible or fresh material to believe that income has escaped assessment.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Shipra Srivastava v. ACIT · 319 ITR 221 · reassessment · section 147 · section 148 · change of opinion · fresh material · escaped income · assessment order · AO powers

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing 319 ITR 221 (Del) Shipra Srivastava v. ACIT

DCIT, CC - 6 (1), , CHENNAI vs. SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 1783/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1783/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & C.O. No. 84/Chny/2019 [In I.T.A. No. 1783/Chny/2019] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Spi Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Ward 6(1), R.S. No. 4/5 & 4/6, Gothi Industrial Chennai. Estate, Kurumbapet, Puducherry 605 009. [Pan:Aaacs6707R] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 05.04.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross Objections Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai, Dated 28.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Cross Objections By Stating That The Reopening Of Assessment Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…sment order and therefore, issuing a notice under section 148 of the Act again on the same issue is amounting to change of opinion, which is not valid. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has relied on the decisions in the case of Bapalal & Co. & Exports v. JCIT 289 ITR 37 (Madras HC), CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC), CIT v. Lucas T.V.S. Ltd. 234 ITR 296 (Madras HC) and Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. v. ACIT 370 ITR 107 (Gujarat HC). 7. On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that so far as MTM gain is concerned, the assessing Officer has not applied his mind and therefore, the change of opin…

HSBC ASSET MANAGEMENT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, ground no.1 raised by assessee is allowed and assessment order framed found to be without jurisdiction

ITA 7292/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalhsbc Asset Management (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Mercantile Bank Chamber, 16 Veer Nariman, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aabch0007N ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-1(1)(2) Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Niraj Sheth, Ar Respondent By : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit (A)’] Vide Order Dated 13.10.2017 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Distinct & Separate & Without Prejudice To Each Other. 1. On The Facts & In Law, The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - 6, Mumbai [‘Cit(A)’] Erred In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Initiated After Four Years From The End Of Relevant Assessment Year, Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Made & The Appellant Had Disclosed Fully & Truly All Material Facts Necessary

For Appellant: Sh. Niraj Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 37(1)Section 40A(9)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HSBC Asset Management (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3rd Floor, Mercantile Bank Chamber, 16 Veer Nariman, Mumbai-400001 PAN: AABCH0007N ...... Appellant Vs. ITO-1(1)(2) Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Niraj Sheth, AR Respondent by : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 28/02/2022 Date of pronouncement : 29/04/2022 ORDER PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [h…

BRICS GILT FINANCE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5320/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5320/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Brics Gilt Finance Ltd. Dcit Cir 1(1)(1), Now Known As M/S Brics Aayakar Bhavan, बिधम/ Gilt Finance Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai, 1St Floor, Sadhna House, 570, Pin- Vs. P.H. Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018. & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5685/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit Cir 1(1)(1), Brics Gilt Finance Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Now Known As M/S Mumbai, Brics Gilt Finance Pvt. बिधम/ Pin- Ltd. Vs. 1St Floor, Sadhna House, 570, P.H. Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj8885B अपीऱाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Vijay Mehta, Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. T. Kepgen, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01/03/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 02/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Sandeep Gosain:

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Sh. T. Kepgen, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…ng decision which are mentioned below:- 1) CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd. [354 ITR 536, 548 (Del)] 2) CIT v. Atul Kumar Swami [362 ITR 693, 695-696 (Del)] 3) Inductotherm (India) (P) Ltd. v. M. Gopalan, DCIT - 258 CTR 61 (Guj) 4) Bapalal and Co. Exports v. it. CIT [289 ITR 37, 45 (Mad)] 5) Telco Dadajee Dhackjee Ltd. v. DCIT for A.Y 1998- 99 in ITA No. 4613/Mum/2005 dated 1205.2010 (TM) 6) Delta Air Lines Inc. v. ITO [153 Ui 506 (Mum)] 7) S. Ranjith Reddy v. DCIT [161 TTJ 316, 345 (Hyd)] 8) Amit Engineers v. ACIT [156 lTD 556 (Chd)] 9) Aipita Marketing (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [21 SOT 302 (Mum)] 7. On the other hand, Ld. DR a…

GAS & POWER INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 1(1)(4), MUMBAI

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

ITA 1118/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.1118/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Gas & Power The Ito, Ward 1(1)(4), बनाम/ Investment Co. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Asian Building, Mumbai-40 020 Ground Floor, 17, R. Kamani Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai -400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccg 3843J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Ishwer Rathi Shri Mahendra Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Miss Bharti Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ishwer RathiFor Respondent: Miss Bharti Singh
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40ASection 43BSection 619B

…the notice of the AO to enable him to form the requisite belief that any income liable to be assessed had escaped assessment, therefore, the initiation of reassessment proceedings was not valid. Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Bapalal & Co. Exports 289 ITR 37, held that in the absence of any new material, the AO is not empowered to reopen an assessment irrespective of the fact whether it was made under s. 143(1) or s. 143(3). Recently, Mumbai Bench of ITAT in the case HV Transmissions Ltd. in I.T.A No. 2230/Mum/2010 held that even though original assessment was made under s. 143(1) and not under s. 1…

Showing 120 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

319 ITR 221 (Del) Shipra Srivastava v. ACIT (289 ITR 37) — Cited in 21 Judgments | BharatTax