ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co.

328 ITR 515Supreme Court of India2010#916 most cited

What is ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. authority for?

Reassessment under Section 147 requires the Assessing Officer to apply an independent mind to the information; a vague report or a District Valuation Officer's opinion alone is not sufficient information to form the belief that income has escaped assessment.

116

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. · Dhariya Construction · Section 147 · Section 148 · reopening of assessment · independent application of mind · vague report · DVO opinion · information for reassessment · formation of belief · escaped income · sanction under section 151

Also reported as

197 Taxmann 202

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 151Section 142(1)Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

amp expendituretrue and full disclosuresection 92basanction under section 151fresh tangible materialmaterial facts necessary for assessmenttransfer pricing orderfirst proviso to section 147section 148(2)sanctioning authoritykelvinatorsection 151(1)

Judgments citing ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co.

Shri. Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 47/BANG/2021[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 147Section 234DSection 69

…f belief that income of assessee had escaped assessment had been recorded, notice issued under section 148 was to be quashed and assessment made in pursuance thereof was to be annulled. 41. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. [2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC) held that the opinion of the DVO per se is not an information for the purposes of reopening assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was held that the Assessing Officer has to apply his mind to the information, if any, collected and must form a belief thereon and without the same, the Department was not entitled to reopen…

Shri. Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 46/BANG/2021[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 147Section 234DSection 69

…f belief that income of assessee had escaped assessment had been recorded, notice issued under section 148 was to be quashed and assessment made in pursuance thereof was to be annulled. 41. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. [2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC) held that the opinion of the DVO per se is not an information for the purposes of reopening assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was held that the Assessing Officer has to apply his mind to the information, if any, collected and must form a belief thereon and without the same, the Department was not entitled to reopen…

The ITO, Ward-1, Anand vs. M/S. Devraj Developers, Anand

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1526/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr.DR
Section 142ASection 147

…ence: “3.6. The legal position on the issue of reopening of assessment on the basis of report of the DVO has been discussed by various judicial authorities and the catena of decisions are in favour of the appellant. In ACIT Vs Dhariya Construction Co. [2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC), the Supreme Court, in its short order dated 16.2.2010, held as follows:- "Having examined the record, we find that in this case, the Department sought reopening of the assessment based on the opinion given by the District Valuation Officer (DVO). The opinion of the DVO per se is not an information for the purposes of reopening assessment un…

The ITO, Ward-1, Anand vs. M/S. Devraj Developers, Anand

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1525/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr.DR
Section 142ASection 147

…ence: “3.6. The legal position on the issue of reopening of assessment on the basis of report of the DVO has been discussed by various judicial authorities and the catena of decisions are in favour of the appellant. In ACIT Vs Dhariya Construction Co. [2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC), the Supreme Court, in its short order dated 16.2.2010, held as follows:- "Having examined the record, we find that in this case, the Department sought reopening of the assessment based on the opinion given by the District Valuation Officer (DVO). The opinion of the DVO per se is not an information for the purposes of reopening assessment un…

The ITO, Ward-1, Anand vs. M/S. Devraj Developers, Anand

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1524/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1524 To 1526/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr.DR
Section 142ASection 147

…ence: “3.6. The legal position on the issue of reopening of assessment on the basis of report of the DVO has been discussed by various judicial authorities and the catena of decisions are in favour of the appellant. In ACIT Vs Dhariya Construction Co. [2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC), the Supreme Court, in its short order dated 16.2.2010, held as follows:- "Having examined the record, we find that in this case, the Department sought reopening of the assessment based on the opinion given by the District Valuation Officer (DVO). The opinion of the DVO per se is not an information for the purposes of reopening assessment un…

Ssg Mercantile Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-24(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1864/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Apoorva Bhardwaj, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…nformation wherein the AO has not investigated / enquired the matter independently, then the Department is not entitled to reopen the assessment. In support of his contention he relied upon the following cases laws:- - ACIT vs. Dhariya Construction Co. (2010) 328 ITR 515 (SC) - Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110. (Delhi) - Signature Hotels (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 338 ITR 51 (Delhi) - PCIT vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Delhi). - PCIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. (2017) 396 ITR 5 (Delhi). - PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 and; - Multiplex Trading and…

Jaee Vishwas Joshi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle-21(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1028/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodjaee Vishwas Joshi Vs. Acit,Circle-21(1) 8Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan 1002, Om Co-Op.Housing Society Limited Bkc M.B.Raut Road Mumbai-400 051 Shivaji Park, Dadar Mumbai-400 028 Pan/Gir No.Aelpa7074L (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 144ASection 147Section 148

…elhi) vs Kelvinator of India (SC) v) Akshar Builders vs ACIT,28(1), dated 17/01/2019 (Bom.) vi) Pr.CIT vs G &G Pharma Ltd., dated 08/10/2015 (Delhi High court) vii) Chhugamal Rajpal vs. SP Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 viii) ACITvs Dhariya Construction Co. (2010) 328 ITR 515 ix) German Remedies vs Dy.CIT, dated 10/10/2015 (Bombay High Court) 9. As regards, additions made towards disallowances of business counseling charges, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the 20 Jaee Vishwas Joshi assessee has filed complete details of expenditure, including proof of services rendered by the parties to prove that expendi…

Akg Securities & Consulting Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 1(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 4395/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Rohit Tiwari, Adv. & Sh. VinjayFor Respondent: Sh. S.N. Pandey, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-11 AKG SECURITIES & CONSULTING Vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), LTD., NEW DELHI 3776/309, NIRMAL MARKET, ROOM NO. 380-A, NETAJI SUBHASH MARG, C.R. BUILDING, IP ESTATE, DARYAGANJ, NEW DELHI – 110 001 NEW DELHI – 110 002 (PAN: AAACA7549K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Mr. Rohit Tiwari, Adv. & Sh. Vinjay Verma, Adv. Department by : Sh. S.N. Pandey, Sr. DR. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order pa…

Arina Grover, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-45(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 9316/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Arina Grover, Vs. Acit, Circle 45(1), D-25, 2Nd Floor, New Delhi Ajay Enclave, New Delhi – 110 027 (Pan: Akepg0821F) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Sh. VinayFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S ARINA GROVER, Vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 45(1), D-25, 2ND FLOOR, NEW DELHI AJAY ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI – 110 027 (PAN: AKEPG0821F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Sh. Vinay Verma, Advocate Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-15, New Delhi on 16.10.2019 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee f…

ITO, W-1(4), Chandigarh vs. Shri Rahul Mundrey, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 118/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 118/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 The Ito, Shri Rahul Mundrey, बनाम H.No. 3035, Sector 19-D, Ward-1(4), Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aavpm8649J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Shivam Bharadwaj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.S Phani Kishore, CIT DR
Section 147

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, “बी ” च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH "ी संजय गग", "या"यकसद"य एवं "ीमती अ"नपूणा" गु"ता, लेखा सद"य BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 118/CHD/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 The ITO, Shri Rahul Mundrey, बनाम H.No. 3035, Sector 19-D, Ward-1(4), Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAVPM8649J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee by : Shri Shivam Bharadwaj, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue by : Shri G.S Phani Kishore, CIT DR सुनवाईक…

M/S Hotel Ajuba Residency, Patiala vs. DCIT, Circle, Patiala

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 829/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jan 2020AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudershan, JCIT
Section 133ASection 142A(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…red in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer with regard to reopening of the case u/s 148. 2. That the confirmation of reopening of case by the CIT(A) is against the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dharia Construction Co. reported in 328 ITR 515 and others and the finding of the CIT(A) that it was a case of undisclosed investment and, therefore, the reopening is valid, is not a correct finding, since the reopening was only on account of valuation report of DVO and, as such, the reopening was bad in law in view of the binding Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court. 3. Notwithstanding the above…

Giggle Infotech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 10(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1284/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Ostwal, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S GIGGLE INFOTECH PVT. Vs. ITO, WARD 10(1), LTD., NEW DELHI C/O D. OSTWAL & ASSOCIATES, 310, COMPETENT HOUSE, F-14, MIDDLE CIRCLE, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI – 110 001 (PAN: AACCG6898F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Deepak Ostwal, FCA Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR.. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-35, New Delhi on 09.11.2017 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09 on the follo…

Printman Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 4029/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Chopra, CA & Sh. DineshFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2003-04 M/S PRINTMAN ASSOCIATES Vs. ITO, WARD 14(4), PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI PLOT NO. 8, PRINTING PRESS AREA, BEHIND PUNJAB KESARI, NEAR WAZIRPUR DEPOT, RING ROAD, NEW DELHI – 110 052 (PAN: AACCP6279M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Anil Chopra, CA & Sh. Dinesh Aggarwal, CA Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR.. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XVII, New Delhi on 17.04.2013 in relation to the ass…

Surinder Kumar & Sons HUF, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 890/DEL/2012[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2019AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 68Section 68oSection 69Section 69A

…009) 299 ITR 383 (Del.) iv) CIT vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta (2008) 303 ITR 95 (Del.) v) Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE (2015) 281 CTR 241 (SC) vi) CIT vs. Sunita Dhada in SLP(C) Diary No.9432/2018 dated 28.03.2018. vii) ACIT vs. Dhariya Construction Co., (2010) 328 ITR 515 (SC). viii) PCIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. (Del) (ix) CIT vs. Anupam Kapoor (2008) 299 ITR 179 (x) CIT vs. Paramjit Kaur (2009) 311 ITR 38 (P&H) (xi) CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd., (2010) 325 ITR 285 (Del.) 9 I.T.A. No.890/DEL/2012 10. He further submitted that the approval given u/s.151 by Addl. CIT is also mechanical and casual. On merits,…

Taruna Verma, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-35(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 2496/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 69A

…ng. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of principle Commissioner of income tax versus G & G Pharma Ltd 384 ITR 147 (Delhi) wherein it has been held that :- 10. In Asst. CIT v. Dhariya Construction Co. [2010] 328 ITR 515 (SC), the Supreme Court in a short order held as under : "Having examined the record, we find that in this case, the Department sought reopening of the assessment based on 17 ITA.No.2496/Del./2018 Smt. Taruna Verma, Delhi. the opinion given by the District Valuation Officer, the opinion of the District Valuation Officer per se is not an informat…

Brijbasi Education and Welfarew Society, Mathura vs. Addl.CIT, Range-1, Ghaziabad

In the result ITA number 4573/del/2017 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4573/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 12Section 143Section 148Section 161Section 68Section 80

…of donors, statement of entry operator etc. Therefore the facts of that particular case does not apply to the facts in the case before us. 14. The assessee also relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of ACIT vs Dharia construction Co 328 ITR 515 (SC). In that particular decision the reopening on the basis of the report of the district valuation officer was held to be not an information for the purpose of the reopening of the assessment. It was further held that the assessing officer has to apply mind to the information collected and must form a belief thereon. In the present case the ass…

Sushilkumar Kasturchand Bafna, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2303/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri N. Ashok Babu
Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 45(3)Section 50Section 50C

…e (a) per se information for the purposes of re-opening the assessment u/s.147 of the I T Act to arrive such belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, as held by the Hon Supreme Court in the decision of ACIT vs Dharia Construction Co (2010) 328 ITR 515, as relied by the appellant. (b) A.O failed to record the word as “Reasons to believe” in the reasons recorded which is mandatory, as contemplated in provision of section 147 of the I T Act. (c) The condition requires for initiation of proceedings u/s.147/148 are not fulfilled, as per ratio laid down in the decisions relied by the appellant as me…

Rajkumar Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2302/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri N. Ashok Babu
Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 45(3)Section 50Section 50C

…e (a) per se information for the purposes of re-opening the assessment u/s.147 of the I T Act to arrive such belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, as held by the Hon Supreme Court in the decision of ACIT vs Dharia Construction Co (2010) 328 ITR 515, as relied by the appellant. (b) A.O failed to record the word as “Reasons to believe” in the reasons recorded which is mandatory, as contemplated in provision of section 147 of the I T Act. (c) The condition requires for initiation of proceedings u/s.147/148 are not fulfilled, as per ratio laid down in the decisions relied by the appellant as me…

Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2301/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Sept 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri N. Ashok Babu
Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 45(3)Section 50Section 50C

…e (a) per se information for the purposes of re-opening the assessment u/s.147 of the I T Act to arrive such belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, as held by the Hon Supreme Court in the decision of ACIT vs Dharia Construction Co (2010) 328 ITR 515, as relied by the appellant. (b) A.O failed to record the word as “Reasons to believe” in the reasons recorded which is mandatory, as contemplated in provision of section 147 of the I T Act. (c) The condition requires for initiation of proceedings u/s.147/148 are not fulfilled, as per ratio laid down in the decisions relied by the appellant as me…

Brijbasi Education and Welfarew Society, Mathura vs. Addl.CIT, Range-1, Ghaziabad

In the result ITA number 4573/del/2017 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4572/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 12Section 143Section 148Section 161Section 68Section 80

…of donors, statement of entry operator etc. Therefore the facts of that particular case does not apply to the facts in the case before us. 14. The assessee also relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of ACIT vs Dharia construction Co 328 ITR 515 (SC). In that particular decision the reopening on the basis of the report of the district valuation officer was held to be not an information for the purpose of the reopening of the assessment. It was further held that the assessing officer has to apply mind to the information collected and must form a belief thereon. In the present case the ass…