Agarwal Metals and Alloys v. ACIT

346 ITR 64High Court2012#3507 most cited

What is Agarwal Metals and Alloys v. ACIT authority for?

An assessment order is liable to be struck down if the Assessing Officer fails to communicate the 'reasons to believe' upon which the case was reopened. Such a failure constitutes a brazen violation of governing legal principles and the assumption of jurisdiction is unsustainable.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Agarwal Metals and Alloys v. ACIT · section 147 · section 148 · reasons to believe · notice u/s 148 · communication of reasons · reassessment · violation of principles of natural justice · Bombay HC

Also reported as

27 Taxmann.com 139

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 151section 148section 147section 14indiatotal incomedocumentsection 143(3)nfac

Judgments citing Agarwal Metals and Alloys v. ACIT

Rima Maheshwari, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 61(2), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 7211/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2015-16 Vinesh Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 61(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2940M) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ay: 2015-16 Rima Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 61(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm6735L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 139Section 143(2)Section 68

…to provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re- assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the…

Vinesh Maheshwari, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 61(3), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 7210/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2015-16 Vinesh Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 61(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2940M) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ay: 2015-16 Rima Maheswari, Vs. Ito, Ward 61(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm6735L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 139Section 143(2)Section 68

…to provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re- assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the…

Surender Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-39(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8219/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Surender Kumar, Vs. Ito, Ward 39(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Afxpm2941L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69A

…to provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re- assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the…

Amit Garg, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 10(2), New Delhi

In the result, the assessees’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2724/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2014-15 Amit Garg, Vs. Ito, Ward 10(2), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aahpg2528C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69CSection 69c

…to provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re- assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the…

Naseem Saad, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-46(5), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of all the above assessee are partly

ITA 208/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay : 2014-15 Nazia Zafar, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaipz25398) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Naseem Zafar Vs. Ito, Ward 46(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaapz2495G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Vs. Naseem Saad Ito, Ward 46(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aarps3364A (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY : 2014-15 NAZIA ZAFAR, vs. ITO, WARD 46(3), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAIPZ25398) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 NASEEM ZAFAR vs. ITO, WARD 46(3), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAAPZ2495G) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 vs. NASEEM SAAD ITO, WARD 46(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AARPS3364A (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 KAMRAN NASEEM,…

Naseem Zafar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-46(3), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of all the above assessee are partly

ITA 207/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay : 2014-15 Nazia Zafar, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaipz25398) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Naseem Zafar Vs. Ito, Ward 46(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaapz2495G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Vs. Naseem Saad Ito, Ward 46(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aarps3364A (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY : 2014-15 NAZIA ZAFAR, vs. ITO, WARD 46(3), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAIPZ25398) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 NASEEM ZAFAR vs. ITO, WARD 46(3), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAAPZ2495G) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 vs. NASEEM SAAD ITO, WARD 46(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AARPS3364A (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 KAMRAN NASEEM,…

Nazia Zafar, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(3), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of all the above assessee are partly

ITA 8093/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay : 2014-15 Nazia Zafar, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaipz25398) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Naseem Zafar Vs. Ito, Ward 46(3), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aaapz2495G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Vs. Naseem Saad Ito, Ward 46(5), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aarps3364A (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY : 2014-15 NAZIA ZAFAR, vs. ITO, WARD 46(3), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAIPZ25398) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 NASEEM ZAFAR vs. ITO, WARD 46(3), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AAAPZ2495G) (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 vs. NASEEM SAAD ITO, WARD 46(5), C/O KAPIL GOEL, ADVOCATE, NEW DELHI F-26/124, SECTOR-7, ROHINI, DELHI (PAN: AARPS3364A (Appellant) (Respondent) AY: 2015-16 KAMRAN NASEEM,…

Daya Bansal, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 48(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 7806/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2015-16 Amitabh Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(4), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Actpb6786D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Anjul Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(4), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Allpb6364J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Daya Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 48(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aalpb6363R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re- 39 assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the…

Amitabh Bansal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(4), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 7804/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2015-16 Amitabh Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(4), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Actpb6786D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Anjul Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(4), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Allpb6364J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Daya Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 48(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aalpb6363R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re- 39 assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the…

Anjul Bansal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(4), New Delhi

In the result, all the 03 appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 7802/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuay: 2015-16 Amitabh Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(4), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Actpb6786D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Anjul Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 46(4), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Allpb6364J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2015-16 Daya Bansal, Vs. Ito, Ward 48(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi (Pan: Aalpb6363R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re- 39 assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the…

Brijendra Nath Agarwal, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1666/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1666/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shri Brijendra Nath Agarwal, Mzsk & Associates, Chartered Accountants Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Near Rto, Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aawpa9005D Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Circle 2(1), Pune

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…to provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re-assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). 26. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of…

Agarwal Group Corporate Holding P. Ltd., Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1667/PUN/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1666/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shri Brijendra Nath Agarwal, Mzsk & Associates, Chartered Accountants Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Near Rto, Pune – 411001 …. Pan: Aawpa9005D Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Circle 2(1), Pune

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…to provide opportunity to file objections to the reopening of assessment violates the governing principle of law and hence, re-assessment order needs to be quashed and set aside. 25. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys Vs. ACIT (2012) 346 ITR 64 (Bom) has propounded such a view in turn relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra). 26. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has raised various issues of change of opinion in the case of Shri B.N. Agarwal, wherein original assessment was completed under section 143(3) of…

Revival Synthetics Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO., Ward-4(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.1 in the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1533/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri C.N. Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Satish A ModyFor Respondent: Shri Tufail Ahmad Khan
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ial Co. Ltd. (supra), Principal CIT Vs. Tupperware India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the Gujarat High Court in the case of General Motors India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra). 8. However, we also find that the Bombay High Court in the case of Aggarwal Metals Vs. DCIT [346 ITR 64] considered a situation where the Assessing Officer without disposing of the objections for reopening the assessment passed reassessment order and the Hon’ble High Court quashed the assessment, however, operation of notice u/s 148 stayed granting further time for completion of reassessment. 9. Taking the totality of facts and circumstances into a…

Ratandevi Kataria, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 449/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri N.M. PorwalFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…easons to the assessee to enable her to raise objections. In this context, the learned 6 Smt. Ratnadevi Kataria Departmental Representative relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Agarwal Metals and Alloys v/s ACIT & Anr., [2012] 346 ITR 64 (Bom.). 8. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record in the light of the decisions relied upon before us. At the outset, we need to observe, it appears from the grounds raised by the assessee before the first appellate authority as well as the impugned order of the first appellate authority, th…