Aditya and Co. v. CIT

279 ITR 47High Court2005#17494 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

escapement of incomereason to believenotice under section 148reassessment proceedingssection 148section 147personsection 14indiadocumentinterest

Judgments citing Aditya and Co. v. CIT

Shrimati Amarjit Kaur W/O Bugar Singh, Mansa vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4), Mansa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 251(2)Section 49

…ed, reassessment is permissible. Reasons can be even on the basis of 15 Amarjit Kaur v. ITO particulars of the return without any new material. Even if proceedings under s. 143(2) are not taken, reassessment proceedings can be taken. h) Aditya and Co. Vs CIT 279 ITR 47 P&H In the case of an intimation under section 143(l)(a) of the Act the question of examination of the material by the Assessing Officer did not arise at that stage. Therefore, in case of intimation u/s 143(1), re-opening cannot be challenged on the ground of change of opinion. i) Tilak Raj Bedi Vs. JCIT 319 ITR 385 P&H The power of reassessmen…

M/S Blue City Township & Colonizers, Amritsar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Amritsar

ITA 90/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 69

…R 500 SC, A.L.A. Firm v. CIT [1991] 189 ITR 285 (SC), Raymond Woollen Mills Limited. Vs ITO 236 ITR 34 SC, Gurera Gas Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 258 ITR 170 P&H, Jawand Sons Vs. CIT 326 ITR 39 P&H, Sewak Ram Vs ITO 236 CTR 462 (P&H), Aditya and Co. Vs CIT 279 ITR 47 P&H, Tilak Raj Bedi Vs. JCIT 319 ITR 385 P&H, Pb. State Cooperative Agriculture Dev Bank Vs. CIT 207 CTR 352 P&H, Grover Nursing Home 248 ITR 493 P&H, Consolidated Photo & Finvest Ltd. Vs. ACIT 281 ITR 394 Del the principle is laid down that the Assessing Officer is expected to possess information which should make a prima facie belief of inc…

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

…ld in the judgments relied upon on behalf of the assessee but if there are reasons to believe that tax has escaped, reassessment is permissible. Reasons can be even on the basis of particulars of the return without any new material. g) Aditya and Co. Vs CIT 279 ITR 47 P&H In the case of an intimation under section 143(l)(a) of the Act the question of examination of the material by the Assessing Officer did not arise at that stage. Therefore, in case of intimation u/s 143(1), re-opening cannot be challenged on the ground of change of opinion. h) Tilak Raj Bedi Vs. JCIT 319 ITR 385 P&H The power of reassessment…

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

…ld in the judgments relied upon on behalf of the assessee but if there are reasons to believe that tax has escaped, reassessment is permissible. Reasons can be even on the basis of particulars of the return without any new material. g) Aditya and Co. Vs CIT 279 ITR 47 P&H In the case of an intimation under section 143(l)(a) of the Act the question of examination of the material by the Assessing Officer did not arise at that stage. Therefore, in case of intimation u/s 143(1), re-opening cannot be challenged on the ground of change of opinion. h) Tilak Raj Bedi Vs. JCIT 319 ITR 385 P&H The power of reassessment…

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

…er section 148(1) can be issued by assuming jurisdiction under that section. Finally, the ld. DR relied on the decisions in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (supra), CIT v. Abad Fisheries [2002] 258 ITR 641 (Ker.), Aditya & Co. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 47 (Punj. & Har.), Elegant Chemicals Enterprises (P.) Ltd. (supra), Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (supra), Pradeep Kumar Har Saran Lal (supra), Vipan Khanna v. CIT [2002] 255 ITR 220 (Punj. & Har.), Deepak Kumar Poddar v. Union of India [1997] 224 ITR 95 (Pat.), A. Pusa Lal v. CIT [1988] 169 ITR 215 (AP) and Jorawar Singh Baid v. Asstt. CIT [1992] 1…

Aditya and Co. v. CIT (279 ITR 47) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax