ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.

291 ITR 500Supreme Court of India2007#41 most cited

What is ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

1,030

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. · Rajesh Jhaveri · 291 ITR 500 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reason to believe · income escaping assessment · prima facie material · tangible material · validity of reopening · initiation of reassessment · sufficiency of material

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 143(1)Section 142(1)Section 68Section 133ASection 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 147(a)fresh tangible materiallive linkmaterial facts necessary for assessmentmere change of opinionkelvinatortangible materialchange of opinionreason to believeescapement of incomeborrowed satisfactionincome escaping assessment

Judgments citing ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kolkata vs. Arshia Global Tradecom Private Limited

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

ITAT/175/2021HC Calcutta13 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 68

…sment. The expression cannot be read to mean that the assessing officer should finally ascertain the fact by legal evidence or conclusion. It was further pointed out that at that stage, 6 (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) ITAT 175 OF 2021 Page 9 of 16 the final outcome of the proceeding is not relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is the reason to believe, but not the established fact of a statement of income. At the stage of issue of notice, the only question is whether there was relevant material on which a reasonable…

M/S Srbh Ebguneering & Equipment Pvt Ltd Delha Mod, Sarla Nagar, Maihar Distt Satna(M.P), Satna vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, DCIT Cir Katni, Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 10/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur06 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Mehrotra, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…he facts stated therein. Why, the processing of a return of income u/s. 143(1)(a) is not an ‘assessment’ inasmuch as there is no provision for hearing the assessee, precluding debatable issues (see: CIT (Asst.) v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)). 5 | P a g e SRBH Engineering & Equipment P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT The only circumstance, therefore, justifying the impugned additions is a decision/s by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (also see para 4.2). No such decision, however, despite asking, stands brought to our notice by the parties, or otherwise found. As regards the aspect of t…

Varsha Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 510/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

…, deduction, allowance or relief in the return; 5.3. In the present facts of the case assessee falls under situation (b) above. We also place reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of ACTT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers reported in (2007) 291 ITR 500, wherein Hon'ble court held that Section 147 authorises and permits the Ld.AO to assessee or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for assessment year has escaped assessment. The word 'reason' in the phrase, 'reason to believe', would mean cause or justification. If the Ld.AO has cause or justification to know…

Varsha Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 509/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

…, deduction, allowance or relief in the return; 5.3. In the present facts of the case assessee falls under situation (b) above. We also place reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of ACTT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers reported in (2007) 291 ITR 500, wherein Hon'ble court held that Section 147 authorises and permits the Ld.AO to assessee or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for assessment year has escaped assessment. The word 'reason' in the phrase, 'reason to believe', would mean cause or justification. If the Ld.AO has cause or justification to know…

Varsha Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 508/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

…, deduction, allowance or relief in the return; 5.3. In the present facts of the case assessee falls under situation (b) above. We also place reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of ACTT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers reported in (2007) 291 ITR 500, wherein Hon'ble court held that Section 147 authorises and permits the Ld.AO to assessee or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for assessment year has escaped assessment. The word 'reason' in the phrase, 'reason to believe', would mean cause or justification. If the Ld.AO has cause or justification to know…

Varsha Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 507/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

…, deduction, allowance or relief in the return; 5.3. In the present facts of the case assessee falls under situation (b) above. We also place reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of ACTT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers reported in (2007) 291 ITR 500, wherein Hon'ble court held that Section 147 authorises and permits the Ld.AO to assessee or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for assessment year has escaped assessment. The word 'reason' in the phrase, 'reason to believe', would mean cause or justification. If the Ld.AO has cause or justification to know…

Yogesh Das, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 983/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Avdhesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…gated and decided by the assessing authority. The appellant will be entitled to take all the points before the assessing authority. The appeals are dismissed." (ix) It may be mentioned that in the case of ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC), it was held by the Apex Court that if the AO, for whatever reason, has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, it confers jurisdiction to re-open the assessment. It is a fact that no assessment was made earlier u/s 143(3)/144 of the Act in the case of the appellant, therefore, the ratio in the case of ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri S…

Green Valley Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT- Central-RG. 7 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 212/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Kavitha Rajagopal () Green Valley Developers Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax S-07, 2Nd Floor, Glomax Mall Central Range-7(3), Mumbai Room No.655, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Plot No.17, 18 & 19, Sector 2 Station Road, Kharghar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Navi Mumbai-410 210 Pan : Aagfg6558D Appellant Respondent

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…of the I.T. Act. Aggrieved by this, the assessee was in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who confirmed the action of the assessing officer by relying on various decisions, viz. the decision of Apex Court in the case of ACIT vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Broker Pvt Ltd 291 ITR 500 (SC). The assessee is in appeal before us as against the order of the Ld.CIT(A). 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee contended that the Assessing Officer has erroneously stated that the assessee did not file its return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 in his reasons for reopening the assessee’s case which was brought to our notice by the Ld.AR by referring…

Shri Baljinder Singh, Bathinda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Bathinda

In the result, both the appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

ITA 148/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. K. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69A

…not been subjected to tax, the onus would be up on such person to establish that the deposited cash is from explained sources. A prima facie assumption exist as has been laid down by Hon'ble court in the case of ACIT Vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Limited.291 ITR 500 SC which has been discussed here under. 5.1.3. In order to ascertain whether the decision of Hon’ble ITAT above and decisions in similar cases lays down on challenged and unfettered Legal postulate that cash deposit in bank accounts by itself is insufficient for mounting of reassessment, it would be useful to refer to a series of decided cases as…

Shrimati Manjit Kaur, Bathinda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (1), Bathinda

In the result, both the appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

ITA 147/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. K. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69A

…not been subjected to tax, the onus would be up on such person to establish that the deposited cash is from explained sources. A prima facie assumption exist as has been laid down by Hon'ble court in the case of ACIT Vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Limited.291 ITR 500 SC which has been discussed here under. 5.1.3. In order to ascertain whether the decision of Hon’ble ITAT above and decisions in similar cases lays down on challenged and unfettered Legal postulate that cash deposit in bank accounts by itself is insufficient for mounting of reassessment, it would be useful to refer to a series of decided cases as…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Sri C Gangadhara Murthy, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2400/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Shri C. Gangadhara Murthy Income-Tax, No. 322, 3Rd A Corss, 2Nd Block Circle - 6(2)(1) 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore . Bangalore 560079. Pan – Agipg 2668 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2

…nisterial staff of the Department. Once the AO has reason to believe for escapement of income he can issue notice under Section 148 of the Act as per the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Broker(P) Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) and he also strongly relied on para 18 of the said judgment which reads as under:- “18. So long as the ingredients of section 147 are fulfilled, the Assessing Officer is free to initiate proceedings under section 147 and failure to take steps under section 143(3) will not render the 8 Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proc…

Measage Bhai Industries Private Limited, Moga vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Moga

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 358/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…d. v. ITO the judgments which you mentioned in your letter and the same is different from your case. It is relevant to stated the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT V/s Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Limited [2007] reported in 291 ITR 500, at the stage of initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act, it is not required to be conclusively proven that income has actually escaped assessment. The only requirement is that whether there was any relevant material on which a reasonable person can form the requisite belief that taxable income has escaped assessment.…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Shri. Sumir J Hinduja, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1374/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aacph7291Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aaeph5197H Appellant Respondent C.O. No.48/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1373/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent C.O. No.49/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1374/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Susan Dolores George, D.R. Respondent By : Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri Susan Dolores George, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R
Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…sment proceedings. He relied on the following case laws: 8.1 (1) Raymond Woollen Mills vs ITO 236 ITR 34: Wherein held that whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which Depart could reopen is relevant. 8.2 (2) Rajesh Jhaveri Stockbrokers 291 ITR 500 (SC): Reason to believe cannot be read to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal evidence or conclusion. Relevant material on which a reasonable person could have formed a requisite belief. 8.3 (3) Phoolchund Bajranglalvs ITO 69 taxmann 627 (SC) . wherein held that the ITO may start reassessment proceedings either beca…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Shri. Jagadish N Hinduja, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1373/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aacph7291Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Deputy Commissioner Of Income- No.7 & 12, Industrial Suburb Tax Tumkur Road Vs. Circle 11(3) Yeshwanthpur Bangalore Bangalore 560 022 Pan No.Aaeph5197H Appellant Respondent C.O. No.48/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1373/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Jagadish N. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent C.O. No.49/Bang/2013 (Arising Out Of Ita No.1374/Bang/2012) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Sumir J. Hinduja Vs. Dcit, Circl-11(3),Bangalore Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Susan Dolores George, D.R. Respondent By : Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri Susan Dolores George, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok A Kulkarni, A.R
Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…sment proceedings. He relied on the following case laws: 8.1 (1) Raymond Woollen Mills vs ITO 236 ITR 34: Wherein held that whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which Depart could reopen is relevant. 8.2 (2) Rajesh Jhaveri Stockbrokers 291 ITR 500 (SC): Reason to believe cannot be read to mean that the AO should have finally ascertained the fact by legal evidence or conclusion. Relevant material on which a reasonable person could have formed a requisite belief. 8.3 (3) Phoolchund Bajranglalvs ITO 69 taxmann 627 (SC) . wherein held that the ITO may start reassessment proceedings either beca…

Shri.J M Vrushabendraiah, Hospet vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 299/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Narayana K.R., D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250

…t/reassessment proceedings under section 153C pursuant to the proviso clause to section 153C. Thus, the ground of legal malice is not established. [Para 128]” 10.4 Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. (291 ITR 500), wherein held as follows:- “16. Section 147 authorizes and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause…

Shri Kirodi Mal, Alwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Alwar

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 883/JPR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Jul 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. Javed Khan, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara (Addl. CIT)
Section 147Section 148Section 149

…t order as well as submissions made by the appellant. The function of the Assessing Officer is to administer the statute with solicitude for the public exchequer with an in-built idea of fairness to taxpayer (Asst. CIT Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd. 291 ITR 500 (SC) In determining whether commencement of reassessment proceedings is valid, the court has only to see whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond W…

Shiva Shakti Enclaves Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 49, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 17/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Shiva Shakti Enclaves Pvt. Ltd. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Raigad Darshan (Appeals)–49 Oppsite Indian Oil Company, 605, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Vs. J.P. Road, Andheri (W) Mumbai-400 050 Mumbai-400 053 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aagcs5014B Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ar Revenue By : Shri Himanshu Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2022

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma, DR
Section 131Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 271(1)(C)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Shiva Shakti Enclaves Pvt. Ltd. Commissioner of Income-tax Raigad Darshan (Appeals)–49 Oppsite Indian Oil Company, 605, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Vs. J.P. Road, Andheri (W) Mumbai-400 050 Mumbai-400 053 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AAGCS5014B Assessee by : Shri Vimal Punmiya, AR Revenue by : Shri Himanshu Sharma, DR Date of hearing: 25.05.2022 Date of pronouncement : .07.2022 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by the assessee namely Shiv Shakti Enclaves Pvt Ltd…

DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer vs. M/S Silvertoss Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 86/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 86/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13. cuke Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, M/s.Silvertoss Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Central Circle, 29 A, Weston Street, Ajmer. Kolkata. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. AALCS 2755 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent C.O. No. 5/JP/2022 (Arising in vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 86/J…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

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

ITA 1315/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2010-11
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 164(2)

…sment proceedings cannot be said to be based upon the change of opinion.  intimation under section 143 (1) cannot be treated to be an order of assessment as decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Private Limited (291 ITR 500) In the aforesaid order dated 02.12.2014, Assessing Officer agreed that the proceedings under section 147 have been initiated on perusal of the return. 6. Pursuant thereto the Assessing Officer completed the reassessment proceedings and passed the order dated 10.02.2015 under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. Aggrieved, inter ali…

Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Additional Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) Range-II(Now Assessed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai

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

ITA 1300/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2022AY 2010-11
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 164(2)

…sment proceedings cannot be said to be based upon the change of opinion.  intimation under section 143 (1) cannot be treated to be an order of assessment as decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Private Limited (291 ITR 500) In the aforesaid order dated 02.12.2014, Assessing Officer agreed that the proceedings under section 147 have been initiated on perusal of the return. 6. Pursuant thereto the Assessing Officer completed the reassessment proceedings and passed the order dated 10.02.2015 under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. Aggrieved, inter ali…