Anusandhan Investment Ltd. v. DCIT

287 ITR 482High Court#5580 most cited

What is Anusandhan Investment Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

A notice for reassessment under section 148 is valid even if based on the assessment of a subsequent assessment year, and even if an appeal for that subsequent year is pending.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Anusandhan Investments Ltd v DCIT · reassessment proceedings · section 148 notice · subsequent assessment year · pending appeal · section 147 · validity of notice

Issues it is cited on

colourable devicechange of opiniontangible materialreason to believecross objectionnotice under section 148genuineness of the transactionreassessment proceedingssection 148section 147transfersection 14

Judgments citing Anusandhan Investment Ltd. v. DCIT

Vinod K Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 1264/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: S/s. Saboo & Deepak S. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

…mation obtained during assessment proceedings of a subsequent year can also validate the proceedings initiated u/s.147 for earlier year. Similarly, Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Anusandhan Investments Ltd. vs. M.R .. Singh, DCIT, Shri Vinod K. Shah 287 ITR 482 held that a notice issued u/s.148 based on assessment of subsequent assessment year is valid even if the appeal is pending for such assessment. Further, in the case of Piaggio Vehicles P. Ltd. YS. DCIT 290 ITR 377 (Bom), the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held that in a case of reopening after 4 years subsequent to scrutiny assessments, contra…