394 ITR 146 (Guj.) 2. Varshaben S. Patel v. ITO

338 ITR 51High Court2011#263 most cited

What is 394 ITR 146 (Guj.) 2. Varshaben S. Patel v. ITO authority for?

Reasons for reopening an assessment must be specific and not vague, scanty, or based on borrowed satisfaction. The Assessing Officer must quantify the escaped income.

295

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Varshaben S. Patel v. ITO · section 147 · section 148 · reassessment notice · vague reasons · borrowed satisfaction · escaped income

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 68Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 151

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 158basection 150unexplained jewellerysection 70beyond four yearssection 18section 149(1)(b)statement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing 394 ITR 146 (Guj.) 2. Varshaben S. Patel v. ITO

Ajay Sharma, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 35(3), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2722/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblejyoti Engineering Works Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sector-7, Rohini New Delhi Delhi Aadfj9259M (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sectdor-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Aawps0941G (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sectdor-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Aawps0941G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ajay Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sector-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Abbps7289K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 148

…f proceedings. It is 21 ITA No. 2719/Del/2018 & Ors. totally unwarranted. Resultantly, the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act are hereby quashed.” 12 In the case of Signature Hotels P Ltd Vs. ITO 338 ITR 51, it has been held as under: The first sentence of the reasons states that information had been received from Director of Income-Tax (Investigation) that the petitioner had introduced money amounting to Rs.5 lacs during financial year 2002-03 as per the details given in W.P. (C) NO. 8067/2010 Page 12 Annexure. The said Annexure, reproduced above,…

Sadhna Sharma, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-35(3), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2721/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblejyoti Engineering Works Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sector-7, Rohini New Delhi Delhi Aadfj9259M (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sectdor-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Aawps0941G (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sectdor-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Aawps0941G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ajay Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sector-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Abbps7289K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 148

…f proceedings. It is 21 ITA No. 2719/Del/2018 & Ors. totally unwarranted. Resultantly, the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act are hereby quashed.” 12 In the case of Signature Hotels P Ltd Vs. ITO 338 ITR 51, it has been held as under: The first sentence of the reasons states that information had been received from Director of Income-Tax (Investigation) that the petitioner had introduced money amounting to Rs.5 lacs during financial year 2002-03 as per the details given in W.P. (C) NO. 8067/2010 Page 12 Annexure. The said Annexure, reproduced above,…

Sadhna Sharma, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-35(3), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2720/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblejyoti Engineering Works Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sector-7, Rohini New Delhi Delhi Aadfj9259M (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sectdor-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Aawps0941G (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sectdor-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Aawps0941G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ajay Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sector-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Abbps7289K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 148

…f proceedings. It is 21 ITA No. 2719/Del/2018 & Ors. totally unwarranted. Resultantly, the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act are hereby quashed.” 12 In the case of Signature Hotels P Ltd Vs. ITO 338 ITR 51, it has been held as under: The first sentence of the reasons states that information had been received from Director of Income-Tax (Investigation) that the petitioner had introduced money amounting to Rs.5 lacs during financial year 2002-03 as per the details given in W.P. (C) NO. 8067/2010 Page 12 Annexure. The said Annexure, reproduced above,…

Jyoti Engineering Works, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-35(3), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2719/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblejyoti Engineering Works Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sector-7, Rohini New Delhi Delhi Aadfj9259M (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sectdor-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Aawps0941G (Appellant) (Respondent) Sadhna Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sectdor-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Aawps0941G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ajay Sharma Vs Ito C/O. Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Ward-35(3) Sector-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Abbps7289K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 148

…f proceedings. It is 21 ITA No. 2719/Del/2018 & Ors. totally unwarranted. Resultantly, the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act are hereby quashed.” 12 In the case of Signature Hotels P Ltd Vs. ITO 338 ITR 51, it has been held as under: The first sentence of the reasons states that information had been received from Director of Income-Tax (Investigation) that the petitioner had introduced money amounting to Rs.5 lacs during financial year 2002-03 as per the details given in W.P. (C) NO. 8067/2010 Page 12 Annexure. The said Annexure, reproduced above,…

Anil Khubchandani, Ulhasnagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2, Kalyan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6300/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhanil Khubchandani Acit Circle- 2 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, (Ulhasnagar) 501, Dev Corpra, Cadbury Junction, Kopat, Vs. Wayle Nagar, Khadakpada, Thane-400601. Kalyan-421301. Pan: Abipk4770G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Makhija (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (DR)
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Anil Khubchandani ACIT Circle- 2 1st Floor, Mohan Plaza, (Ulhasnagar) 501, Dev Corpra, Cadbury Junction, Kopat, Vs. Wayle Nagar, Khadakpada, Thane-400601. Kalyan-421301. PAN: ABIPK4770G Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Sunil Makhija (AR) Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (DR) Date of Hearing : 21.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 20.09.2018 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee under section 2…

Indu Jain, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 43(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 682/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2007-08 Indu Jain, Ito, Ward- 43(4), B- 144, Phase- V, Sector- 54, New Delhi. Vs. Gurgaon, Haryana.

For Appellant: Shri M. R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 148

…ns without independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer and without tangible material is invalid :- 6 PCIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd., 396 ITR 5. (ii) PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P.) Ltd., 395 ITR 677. (iii) Signature Hotels (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO, 338 ITR 51. (iv) CIT vs. Sfil Stock Broking Ltd., 325 ITR 285. (v) India Terminal Connector Systems Ltd. vs. DCIT, 52 SOT 13. 9. The ld. counsel for the assessee further submitted that the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax in a mechanical manner has given approval for issue of notice u/s 151(2) and there is no independent application of mind. Therefore, suc…

Rajender Parsad, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 63(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7060/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2007-08] Rajender Parsad Vs. The I.T.O Prop. M/S. Priya Enterprises Ward 63(3) 5897/2, Basti Harphool Singh, New Delhi Sadar Bazar, Delhi -110006 Pan : Anlpp 8555 H [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri Naveen Kumar Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…ee to go through the entire gamut of proceedings. It is totally unwarranted. Resultantly, the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 and issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act are hereby quashed.” 12 In the case of Signature Hotels P Ltd Vs. ITO 338 ITR 51, it has been held as under: The first sentence of the reasons states that information had been received from Director of Income-Tax (Investigation) that the petitioner had introduced money amounting to Rs.5 lacs during financial year 2002-03 as per the details given in W.P. (C) NO. 8067/2010 Page 12 Annexure. The said Annexure, reproduced above,…

Achla Dhawan vs. Income Tax Officer

The appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2165/DEL/2008[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2018AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri S. K. Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, Sr. D. R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…tex Ld. (2009) 313 ITR 231 (Raj) may be adverted to. Somebody else’s opinion cannot become the incumbent Assessing Officers opinion for initiating a reassessment. The Delhi High Court is violation this issue. Please see Signature Hotels P. Ltd. vs. ITO (2011) 338 ITR 51. 15. The relevant information as to the validity of the gift was already on record. The Assessing Officer changed his opinion as to the correctness of that information abruptly after receiving the communication from the AD (Inv) which admittedly was unverified, unsubstantiated and inadequate. That could not be considered as tangible material whose…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Shri Sajjan Kumar Goel, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 850/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT, D.R
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…from the material on record which was available with the assessing officer when he recorded the reasons. There should be a link between the reasons and evidence available with the assessing officer. (Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Others 338 ITR 51 (Del.). In the instant case, the belief formed by the assessing officer was not bonafide and it was based on vague, irrelevant and non-specific information. From the statements received from DRI, it was not discernible that appellant had admitted to have arranged Rs.l crore to Mr. Shree Bhagwan Tulsian in the F.Y. 2002-03. In the statement the ap…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Zeco Aircon Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and the

ITA 5231/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2005-06 Dcit, Circle- 18(1), Zeco Aircon Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Dda, New Delhi. Shopping Complex, Vs. Near Sindhi School, New Rajender Nagar, New Delhi.

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ased on the information received from the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd. (supra), following the decision in the case of Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 338 ITR 51 has held that in absence of independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer to the tangible material which forms the basis of the reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment, such reopening does not satisfy the requirement of law. It has been held in the said decision that the conclusion of the Assessing Officer is at best a rep…

Prabha Goyal, Chandigarh vs. ITO, W-5(1), Chandigarh

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1139/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2007-08 Smt. Prabha Goyal, Vs The Ito, Scf-71, Grain Market, Ward 5(1), Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan No. :Ajmpg2545B & Assessment Year: 2007-08 Poonam Goyal, Vs The Ito, Scf-44, Grain Market, Ward 5(1), Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan No. :Aaypg0402C

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Smt. Sukhwinder Sharma, Addl. CIT
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)

…f income Tax I 120 DTR" 241 DEL- High Court 3. Amrik Singh V/s Income Tax Officer i 181TTJ95ASR-Tribunal 4. Surinder Mohini Bawa V/s Income Tax Officer | ITA No. 649/ASR/2015, ITAT, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar 5. Signature Hotels (P) Ltd V/s Income Tax Officer | 338 ITR 51 DEL-HC 6. United Electrical Company (P) Ltd V/s Commissioner of Income Tax J 258 !TR 317 DEL- High Court 7. JCIT V/s George Williamson (Assam) Ltd \ 258 ITR 126 GAU-HC 8. Commissioner of income fax V/s Orient Craft Ltd I 354 iTR 536 DEL-HC 2.3 Referring to the facts in ITA 1140/CHD/2017, attention was invited to the copy of the reasons recorded av…

M/S. Intime Credit & Holding Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the

ITA 2944/DEL/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Shailesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2944/DEL/2015 A.Y. : 2001-02 M/S INTIME CREDIT & HOLDING INCOME TAX OFFICER, PVT. LTD., VS. WARD 11(4), 101, AMAN CHAMBER, NEW DELHI 47/21, OLD RAJINDER NAGAR, NEW DELHI – 110 060 (PAN: AAAC2890K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. Shailesh Gupta, CA Department by : Sh. Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM Assessee has filed the appeal against the Order dated 17.3.2015 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, New Delhi…

Gorika Investment and Exports Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 10(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3396/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 3396/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 M/S Gorika Investment & Vs Income Tax Officer, Exports (P) Ltd., 531Sg Ward-10(2), Complex, Dc Chowk Market, New Delhi Sector-9, Rohini, Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacg2462K Assessee By : Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv., Sh. Piyush Kumar Kamal, Adv. & Sh. Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Sh. B. R. Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.06.2018 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 15.02.2018 Of Ld. Cit(A)-35, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. B. R. Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234Section 68Section 69C

…sessee is placing reliance on the decisions reported in G&G Pharma India Ltd. (Del. High Court) (supra), N.C. Cables Ltd. (supra) and Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (supra). He also placed reliance on the decisions reported in Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 338 ITR 51 (Del), Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 195 Taxman 262 (Del), CIT vs. Kamdhenu Steels & Alloys Ltd. (2012) 119 Taxmann.com 26 (Del.). As could be seen from these decisions, it is consistently held that the reopening based on the information furnished by the Directorate of Investigation and the AO without making any further Investiga…

Shiv Charan Goel, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 56(4), New Delhi

In the result, ground Nos

ITA 4035/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishishri Shiv Charan Goel, Income Tax Officer, 1/7032, Shivaji Park, Vs. Shahdara, Ward : 56(4), D E L H I – 110 032. N E W D E L H I. Pan : Aaepg 9561 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153C

…learly shows, according to him, that there is no enquiry made by the Assessing Officer. He, therefore, submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO 338 ITR 51 (Del.); (ii) He further stated that satisfaction recorded by the approving authority has merely mentioned “Yes”. He submitted that such satisfaction without any reasoning is incorrect. He referred to the decision of the Hon’ble M.P. High Court in CIT Vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. 56 taxman.com 390 (MP). He further stated that Hon’ble Supr…

M/S Deepraj Hospital P Ltd, Hathras vs. ITO 3(5), Hathras

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 41/AGR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra01 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 147Section 148Section 68

…, 15. shows that the ld. CIT(A) has gone by the mere factum of receipt of material by the AO from the Investigation Wing of the Department. In ‘Meenakshi Overseas’ (supra), under similar facts and circumstances, relying on ‘Signature Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO’, 338 ITR 51 (Del), it has been held that the reasons must be self- I.T.A Nos. 41 & 40/Agra/2017 33 evident and they must speak for themselves; that the tangible material which forms the basis for the belief that income has escaped assessment must be evident from a reading of the reasons; and that where the link between the information made available to the…

M/S Charan Singh Ice & Storage P Ltd, Hathras vs. ITO 3(5), Hathras

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 40/AGR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra01 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 147Section 148Section 68

…, 15. shows that the ld. CIT(A) has gone by the mere factum of receipt of material by the AO from the Investigation Wing of the Department. In ‘Meenakshi Overseas’ (supra), under similar facts and circumstances, relying on ‘Signature Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO’, 338 ITR 51 (Del), it has been held that the reasons must be self- I.T.A Nos. 41 & 40/Agra/2017 33 evident and they must speak for themselves; that the tangible material which forms the basis for the belief that income has escaped assessment must be evident from a reading of the reasons; and that where the link between the information made available to the…

Sunil Agarwal, Haridwar vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3)(3), Haridwar

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 988/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year : 2008-09 Sunil Agarwal, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(3)(3), Haridwar Laxmi Niwas, Near Post Office, Kankhal, Haridwar Uttarakhand (Pan: Aanpa0687L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. & Sh. Piyush KrFor Respondent: Sh. K. Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 292CSection 69B

…nufacturing Co. vs. CIT and others reported in 308 ITR 38 (Del). 10. Copy of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay Tribunal in the reported in 57 DTR 0179. 11. Copy of judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Signatures Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 338 ITR 51; 12. Copy of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 343 ITR 183. 13. Copy of judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the Ltd. reported in 357 ITR 646 (Del.) 14. Copy of judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Living Media India Ltd. reported in 359 ITR 106. 15. Copy…

Gagandeep Maan, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 656/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)Section 148

…llowing decisions : i. Krown Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 375 ITR 460 (Delhi); ii. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd., 384 ITR 147 (Delhi); iii. Signature Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer & Anr., 338 ITR 51 (Delhi). A.Y. 2009-10 5.2 The ld. AR submitted that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in impugned order has made certain observations which are contrary to the facts. The ld. AR pointed that in para 8.3 of the impugned order, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has mentioned that the assessee has admitted that no real business was con…

Income-Tax Officer, Pune vs. Shri Gagandeep Amarpal Maan, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1078/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)Section 148

…llowing decisions : i. Krown Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 375 ITR 460 (Delhi); ii. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd., 384 ITR 147 (Delhi); iii. Signature Hotels (P) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer & Anr., 338 ITR 51 (Delhi). A.Y. 2009-10 5.2 The ld. AR submitted that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in impugned order has made certain observations which are contrary to the facts. The ld. AR pointed that in para 8.3 of the impugned order, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has mentioned that the assessee has admitted that no real business was con…

M/S. Cygnus Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 117/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250

…applying the proposition laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court in G&G Pharma India (supra) we hold that the reopening of assessment is bad in law” 7.3. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Signature Hotels (P) Ltd. vs ITO and another, reported in 338 ITR 51 (Delhi) has under similar circumstances held as follows: “For the A.Y. 2003-04, the return of income of the assessee company was accepted u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and was not selected for scrutiny. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 148 which was objected by the assessee. The Assessing Officer rejected the objecti…