Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

439 ITR 168High Court2021#4059 most cited

What is Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT authority for?

When reassessment proceedings are initiated more than four years after the relevant assessment year, the revenue must demonstrate a failure by the assessee to fully and truly disclose material facts.

29

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Ananta Landmark · section 147 · section 148 · failure to disclose material facts · true and full disclosure · jurisdictional requirement · reassessment after four years · AY

Also reported as

283 Taxmann 462

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 69CSection 68Section 10(38)Section 151

Issues it is cited on

section 132(5)section 100section 153(c)(1)section 94full and true disclosureabatement of assessmentmaterial facts necessary for assessmentanonymous donationfresh tangible materialkelvinatorsection 153(c)strategic investment

Judgments citing Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

KOMAL ENTERPRISES,DOMBIVALI vs. ITO, WARD 3(3), KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 4421/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarita No.4421/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (CIT DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…rial facts by the assessee during the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, reliance was placed on the judgments of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Anand Developers v. ACIT reported in 425 ITR 261 (Bom) and Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 439 ITR 168 (Bom). On perusal of the records, we find that the Ld. AO had conducted a detailed enquiry during the original assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act and passed the assessment order dated 05.02.2014 after examining the conditions prescribed for allowing deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act. The observations recorded in the…

KOMAL ENTERPRISES,DOMBIVALI vs. ITO, WARD 3(3), KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 4420/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarita No.4421/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (CIT DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…rial facts by the assessee during the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, reliance was placed on the judgments of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Anand Developers v. ACIT reported in 425 ITR 261 (Bom) and Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 439 ITR 168 (Bom). On perusal of the records, we find that the Ld. AO had conducted a detailed enquiry during the original assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act and passed the assessment order dated 05.02.2014 after examining the conditions prescribed for allowing deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Act. The observations recorded in the…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1565/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya andFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records'. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that t…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1555/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Respondent: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya and
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records'. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that t…

TATA MOTORS LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(4), MUMBAI

ITA 3511/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri Arun Khodpia, Hon'Ble

Section 115BSection 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250Section 32A

…bay HC) dated 03 February 2022] (enclosed at page nos.444 to 449 of the legal paperbook): • Tata Sons Ltd. [(2022) 286 Taxman 587 dated 3 February 2022 (Bombay HC)] (enclosed at page nos.450 to 453 of the legal paperbook) • Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. [(2021) 439 ITR 168 dated 14 September 2021 (Bombay HC)] (enclosed at page nos.454 to 466 of the legal paperbook) • Gujarat Natural Resources [(2023) 148 taxmann.com 476 (dated 11 November 2022 (Gujarat HC)] (enclosed at page nos.467 to 474 of the legal paperbook) • TMF Holdings Limited [ITA No. 2983/Mum./2025 dated 18 July 2025 (Mumbai ITAT)] (enclosed at page no…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ASHISH OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 148/PUN/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records’. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that th…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 146/PUN/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records’. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that th…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 145/PUN/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records’. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that th…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 143/PUN/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records’. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that th…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 142/PUN/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records’. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that th…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 141/PUN/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records’. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that th…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 140/PUN/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…relevant AY, Respondents have to show that the jurisdictional requirement is satisfied that there was failure to truly and fully disclose material facts as decided by this Court in Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2021) 131 taxmanın.com 52/283 Taxman 462/439 ITR 168. 6. We have examined the reasons recorded annexed to the Petition that are evidently premised on 'seen from the assessment records’. The Assessing Officer (AO) records that the assessee claimed to have purchased shares of the penny stock scrips for a total of Rs.33,09,976 and sold for a consideration of Rs.1,15.90,280/-. Therefore he held that th…

AMBAJI AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3922/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2012-13 Ambaji Avenues Private Limited Income Tax Officer- 9(1)(2), Mumbai A-109, Akshay Mittal Indl. Premises, M.V. Road, Sanjay Vs. Building No. 5, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400059. Pan: Aajca 8264 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Kumar Malpani Revenue By : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.06.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar MalpaniFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ambaji Avenues Private Limited Income Tax Officer- 9(1)(2), Mumbai A-109, Akshay Mittal Indl. Premises, M.V. Road, Sanjay Vs. Building No. 5, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400059. PAN: AAJCA 8264 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Ramesh Kumar Malpani Revenue by : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 09.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal of…

PUNRASAR JUTE PARK LIMITED,PURNEA vs. CIT, PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 432/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

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

…ion under section 147 could be taken beyond the four year period. ” 14 Punrasar Jute Park Limited 13. Further we find that Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of ANANTA LANDMARK PVT. LTD. v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND O THERS reported in [2021] 439 ITR 168 (Bom), wherein it was held as under: “It is settled law that where the assessment is sought to be reopened after the expiry of a period of four years from the end of the relevant year, the proviso to section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, stipulates a requirement that there must be a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and tru…

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2938/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO xiv) 456 ITR 316 (Kar) CIT v. Canara Bank 8.1 Similar view has been expressed in the context of section 153C of the Act in the following judicial pronouncements: i) 439 ITR 154 (Bom) Jainam Investments v. ACIT (115-224 of JPB) ii) 439 ITR 168 (Bom) Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (pages 125-137 of JPB) iii) 459 IR 100 (Bom) Ashok Commercial Enterprises v. ACIT (pages 350-375 of JPB) iv) ITA No. 1973/D/2022 dated 30.11.2023 Decent Realtech (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (pages 280-305 of JPB) 9 Ground 3 to 3.7 of grounds of appeal is in respect of issue of addition representing alleged cash payme…

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2937/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO xiv) 456 ITR 316 (Kar) CIT v. Canara Bank 8.1 Similar view has been expressed in the context of section 153C of the Act in the following judicial pronouncements: i) 439 ITR 154 (Bom) Jainam Investments v. ACIT (115-224 of JPB) ii) 439 ITR 168 (Bom) Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (pages 125-137 of JPB) iii) 459 IR 100 (Bom) Ashok Commercial Enterprises v. ACIT (pages 350-375 of JPB) iv) ITA No. 1973/D/2022 dated 30.11.2023 Decent Realtech (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (pages 280-305 of JPB) 9 Ground 3 to 3.7 of grounds of appeal is in respect of issue of addition representing alleged cash payme…

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2936/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO xiv) 456 ITR 316 (Kar) CIT v. Canara Bank 8.1 Similar view has been expressed in the context of section 153C of the Act in the following judicial pronouncements: i) 439 ITR 154 (Bom) Jainam Investments v. ACIT (115-224 of JPB) ii) 439 ITR 168 (Bom) Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (pages 125-137 of JPB) iii) 459 IR 100 (Bom) Ashok Commercial Enterprises v. ACIT (pages 350-375 of JPB) iv) ITA No. 1973/D/2022 dated 30.11.2023 Decent Realtech (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (pages 280-305 of JPB) 9 Ground 3 to 3.7 of grounds of appeal is in respect of issue of addition representing alleged cash payme…

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2935/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO xiv) 456 ITR 316 (Kar) CIT v. Canara Bank 8.1 Similar view has been expressed in the context of section 153C of the Act in the following judicial pronouncements: i) 439 ITR 154 (Bom) Jainam Investments v. ACIT (115-224 of JPB) ii) 439 ITR 168 (Bom) Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (pages 125-137 of JPB) iii) 459 IR 100 (Bom) Ashok Commercial Enterprises v. ACIT (pages 350-375 of JPB) iv) ITA No. 1973/D/2022 dated 30.11.2023 Decent Realtech (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (pages 280-305 of JPB) 9 Ground 3 to 3.7 of grounds of appeal is in respect of issue of addition representing alleged cash payme…

ECGC LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 3(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 352/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…earlier before the ld. AO. Here in this case there is no whisper by the ld. AO as to what has not been disclosed. The Hon’ble High Court has relied upon the earlier decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Ananta Landmark Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 439 ITR 168 and made the following observation:- This Division Bench in Ananta Landmark Pvt. Ltd. has considered the 15 various decisions of the Supreme Court as well as this court in matters concerning reopening of assessment under section 147 and proviso thereto of the Act. It is clear from the settled law that where a period of four years has been lapsed…

GLOBAL GREEN COMPANY LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 10(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 3899/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: FixedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Ankit AggarwalFor Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…assessment, reassessment could not have been initiated for which he has relied on the following:- i) CIT vs. Eicher Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 310 (Del); ii) Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2012) 343 ITR 141 (Del); iii) Ananta Landmark P. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2021) 439 ITR 168 (Bom); iv) Noshir Darabshaw Talati v DCIT (2023) 156 taxmann.com 498 (Bom); & v) Space Capital Services Ltd. vs. ITO (2005) 148 Taxman 44 (Del Trib.) 3.2 The ld. DR has, however, supported the findings of the ld. tax authorities. 3.3 As we appreciate the matter on record, it comes up that the basis of reopening is purely the information and doc…

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

Ananta Landmark (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (439 ITR 168) — Cited in 29 Judgments | BharatTax