383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT v. Insecticides (India) Ltd.

413 ITR 400High Court2019#10608 most cited

What is 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT v. Insecticides (India) Ltd. authority for?

Reasons for reassessment must reflect independent application of mind to material, not mere reliance on information received. The material relied upon must be examined to form an independent belief that income has escaped assessment.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO · section 147 · section 148 · reassessment reasons · tangible material · independent application of mind · escaped income · belief of escapement · audit material

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 80ICSection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

amp expendituresection 92batrue and full disclosuresanction under section 151transfer pricing orderfresh tangible materialsection 148(2)sanctioning authorityfirst proviso to section 147section 151(1)material facts necessary for assessmentspecified domestic transaction

Judgments citing 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT v. Insecticides (India) Ltd.

Lasco Chemie Private Limited, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), New Delhi, Delhi

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…initio, as has been held in the following legal decisions: - ACIT vs. Dhariya Construction Company 328 ITR 515 (SC) - ITO vs Lakhmani Mewal Das: 103 ITR 437 (SC) - Jaimam Investments vs. ACIT: 439 ITR 154 (Bom.) - Revolation Forver Marketing (P) Ltd. v. ITO: 413 ITR 400 (Del) - Pr. CIT vs RMG Polyvinyl (1) Ltd. 396 1TR 5 (Del) - PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P.) Ltd. 395 ITR 677 (Del) - PCIT vs G & G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.) - CIT v SFIL Stock Broking Ltd: 325 ITR 285 (Del) - CIT vs. Vinceta Jain and Atul Jain: 299 ITR 383 (Del) 19. In the facts of the present case, the reasons recorded stated that t…

DCIT, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2445/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

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

…CIT vs. United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd 258 ITR 317 (Del), CIT 1. Vineeta Jain and Atul Jain: 299 ITR 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. 357 ITR 330 (Del), Revolution Forver Marketing (P) Lad. v. ITO 413 ITR 400 (Del) and CIT vs. And Jain 299 ITR 383 (Del) In the reasons recorded, no tangible information/ material has been highlighted that may even throw any doubt on the genuineness of the transactions undertaken by the assessee. DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. Further, the reasons recorded do not reflect any independent application of mind to the inf…

DCIT, CC-20, Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2444/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

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

…CIT vs. United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd 258 ITR 317 (Del), CIT 1. Vineeta Jain and Atul Jain: 299 ITR 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. 357 ITR 330 (Del), Revolution Forver Marketing (P) Lad. v. ITO 413 ITR 400 (Del) and CIT vs. And Jain 299 ITR 383 (Del) In the reasons recorded, no tangible information/ material has been highlighted that may even throw any doubt on the genuineness of the transactions undertaken by the assessee. DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. Further, the reasons recorded do not reflect any independent application of mind to the inf…

DCIT, CC-20, Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2443/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

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

…CIT vs. United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd 258 ITR 317 (Del), CIT 1. Vineeta Jain and Atul Jain: 299 ITR 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. 357 ITR 330 (Del), Revolution Forver Marketing (P) Lad. v. ITO 413 ITR 400 (Del) and CIT vs. And Jain 299 ITR 383 (Del) In the reasons recorded, no tangible information/ material has been highlighted that may even throw any doubt on the genuineness of the transactions undertaken by the assessee. DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. Further, the reasons recorded do not reflect any independent application of mind to the inf…

DCIT, CC-20, Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2442/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

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

…CIT vs. United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd 258 ITR 317 (Del), CIT 1. Vineeta Jain and Atul Jain: 299 ITR 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. 357 ITR 330 (Del), Revolution Forver Marketing (P) Lad. v. ITO 413 ITR 400 (Del) and CIT vs. And Jain 299 ITR 383 (Del) In the reasons recorded, no tangible information/ material has been highlighted that may even throw any doubt on the genuineness of the transactions undertaken by the assessee. DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. Further, the reasons recorded do not reflect any independent application of mind to the inf…

DCIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals P.Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 200/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

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

…CIT vs. United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd 258 ITR 317 (Del), CIT 1. Vineeta Jain and Atul Jain: 299 ITR 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. 357 ITR 330 (Del), Revolution Forver Marketing (P) Lad. v. ITO 413 ITR 400 (Del) and CIT vs. And Jain 299 ITR 383 (Del) In the reasons recorded, no tangible information/ material has been highlighted that may even throw any doubt on the genuineness of the transactions undertaken by the assessee. DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. Further, the reasons recorded do not reflect any independent application of mind to the inf…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2444/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

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

…CIT vs. United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd 258 ITR 317 (Del), CIT 1. Vineeta Jain and Atul Jain: 299 ITR 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. 357 ITR 330 (Del), Revolution Forver Marketing (P) Lad. v. ITO 413 ITR 400 (Del) and CIT vs. And Jain 299 ITR 383 (Del) In the reasons recorded, no tangible information/ material has been highlighted that may even throw any doubt on the genuineness of the transactions undertaken by the assessee. DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. Further, the reasons recorded do not reflect any independent application of mind to the inf…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2443/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

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

…CIT vs. United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd 258 ITR 317 (Del), CIT 1. Vineeta Jain and Atul Jain: 299 ITR 383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. 357 ITR 330 (Del), Revolution Forver Marketing (P) Lad. v. ITO 413 ITR 400 (Del) and CIT vs. And Jain 299 ITR 383 (Del) In the reasons recorded, no tangible information/ material has been highlighted that may even throw any doubt on the genuineness of the transactions undertaken by the assessee. DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. Further, the reasons recorded do not reflect any independent application of mind to the inf…

M/S.Kerala State Civil Supplies Corpn Ltd, Cochin vs. The ACIT, Cochin

ITA 95/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhalong With Stay Application No.19/Coch./2017 Assessment Year – 2010-2011 M/S.Kerala State Civil The Assistant Supplies Corpn. Ltd., Vs., Commissioner Of Income Kochi. Pan Aaack6767F Tax, Circle-1(2) C/O.Varma & Varma, C.As Kochi, Kerala. Cochin – 19. Kerala (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Satyanarayanan, C.A For Revenue: Dr.S.Pandian, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.11.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : This Assessee'S Appeal Ita.No.95/Coch/2017 Along With Stay Application Sa.No.19/Coch./2017, Arise Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A)-1, Cochin, Cochin'S Order In Appeal No.Ita.292/R-4/E/Cit(A)-1/2016-17, Dated 31St January, 2017, For The Assessment Year 2010-11, In 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayanan, C.A For Revenue: Dr.S.Pandian, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Dr.S.Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…manner the assessee's taxable income liable to be assessed had escaped assessment. There is also no whisper about quantification of such an escaped income as well in the above extracted reasons. Case law [2024] 464 ITR 305 (Bom.) Ramna Pinto vs. DCIT; [2019] 413 ITR 400 (Del.) Revolution Forver Marketing (P.) Ltd.,vs., ITO; [2010] 310 ITR 561 (SC) CIT vs. Kelvinator India Ltd., have settled the issue that a reopening based on such vague reasons, without even indicating the corresponding quantification of the income sought to be re-assessed, is invalid in law. We accordingly, quash the impugned reopening itself i…

M/S J P Distilleries Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 51/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 28

…s FIS Global Business Solutions India (P) Ltd. (2019) 262 Taxmann 369 (SC) CIT vs Kelvinator India Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) ITO vs TechSpan India Pvt.Ltd., (2018) 92 taxmann.com 361 (SC) Revolution Forever Marketing Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO reported in (2019) 413 ITR 400 (Del) Champ Energy Ventures Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO (2019) 102 taxmann.com 374 (Bom) Asian Paints Ltd. vs DCIT & Anr. reported in (2009) 223 CTR 141(Bom) Rallies India Ltd. vs ACIT & Anr. reported in (2010) 323 ITR 54 (Bom) Page 8 of 11 ICICI Home Finance Company Ltd. vs ACIT reported in (2012) 25 Taxmann.com 241 (BOM) Asiatic Oxygen Ltd. vs DCIT report…

383 (Del), Signature Hotels P. Ltd vs. ITO. 338 ITR 51 (Del), CIT v. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (413 ITR 400) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax