Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. v. CIT

224 ITR 560Supreme Court of India1997#4406 most cited

What is Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer's belief that income has escaped assessment must be based on some material, a nexus between that material and the belief, an application of the officer's mind to the material, and a tentative inference drawn from reasons.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Associated Stone Industries Kotah Ltd v CIT · 224 ITR 560 · SC · reassessment · section 147 · reason to believe · material facts · application of mind · escapement of income

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 131Section 132Section 263Section 40A(3)

Issues it is cited on

companyindiabusinessdocumentinterest

Judgments citing Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. v. CIT

G S BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6581/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] G.S.Buildwell Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito A-12, Swasthya Vihar, Ward-10(1) East Delhi, Delhi-110092. Delhi Pan-Aaccg1781H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri Rajesh Kr. Dhanistha, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.04.2026

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2012-13] G.S.Buildwell Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO A-12, Swasthya Vihar, Ward-10(1) East Delhi, Delhi-110092. Delhi PAN-AACCG1781H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, CA Respondent by Shri Rajesh Kr. Dhanistha, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 08.04.2026 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, New…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA, PANCHKULA vs. KONARK RAJHANS ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 805/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 805/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit M/S Konark Rajhans Estate Private Limited Panchkula Circle बनाम/ Vs. Nh 73, Village Kot Extension-Ii, Sector 14, Panchkula. Panchkula. "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaeck-2405-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Manav Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Appeal By The Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011- 12 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 27-05-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 29-12-2018. The Revenue Is Aggrieved By Deletion Of Twin Quantum Additions Of Rs.40.85 Lacs & Rs.707.75 Lacs As Made By Ld. Ao In The Assessment Order. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: -

For Appellant: Sh. Manav Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA)-Ld. AR
Section 131oSection 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 68Section 68o

…n statement in para-6 while observing that the assessee did not file return of income and accordingly, formed opinion of escapement of income. Reference was made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. (224 ITR 560) which mandate that reason to believe must have four elements viz. some material before Ld. AO; a nexus of such material and belief of escapement of income; an application of mind by AO to such material; an inference based on reasons drawn tentatively by Ld. AO that income had escaped assessment. However, in the present case, the assessee had fil…

ASHOK SHARMA,KOTA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 - KOTA, KOTA

ITA 359/JPR/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Nov 2024AY 2014-2015
For Appellant: Shri Priyank Kabra (C.A.) (V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

…acts' necessary_for assessment in relation to the year of assessment. The expression "material facts" was considered by the Supreme Court in the context of Section 34(1) (a) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 in Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 560/90 Taxman 553 (SC), wherein the assessee was granted a lease for quarrying stones by the then Maharao of Kotah State under an agreement of lease. The royalty was inclusive of income tax. When the State of Kotah later merged with United State of Rajasthan, a tri-partite dispute amongst the assessee, State of Rajasthan and Union of India arose purs…

SUNDARAM FASTENERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 3236/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3236/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. M/S.Sundram Fasteners Ltd., The Dcit, 98-A, 7Th Floor, Corporate Circle-6(2), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. [Pan: Aaacs 8779 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

…elies on the following decisions for admission of additional grounds: a. CIT Vs M.K.Yashwant Singh (231 ITR 145 (Del)) b. National Thermal Power Co Ltd (229 ITR 383 (SC)) c. CIT (vs) Ashok Leyland Ltd (253 ITR 425 (Mad)) d. CIT Vs Associated Stone Industries (224 ITR 560 (SC)) In addition to the grounds of objections raised in Form 36B before the Hon'ble Tribunal, the Petitioner hereby wishes to file the following Additional grounds and it is prayed that additional grounds may be admitted and decided on merits. 13.2 Since we find that this issue was not raised by the assessee before the AO, hence, there was no o…

NVH INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2773/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2773/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Nvh India Auto Parts Private Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income-Tax, B-68, Sipcot Industrial Park, Corporate Circle -4(2), Irungattukottai, Sriperumbadur Nungambakkam, Taluk, Kancheepuram – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aaccn-2857-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. S.P. Chidambaram, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

…al grounds raised by the Appellant herewith being legal grounds, this Hon'ble Tribunal has the authority/power to accept and :-6-: ITA. No: 2773/Chny/2017 adjudicate the same as held by the following judicial precedents:  CIT VS Associated Stone Industries (224 ITR 560 (SC)  CIT VS M. K. Yashwant Singh (231 ITR 145 (Del)  National Thermal Power Co Ltd (229 ITR 383 (SC) 3. Prayer In these circumstances, the Appellant hereby humbly prays that your Honours may kindly be pleased to admit the additional grounds of appeal by exercising the power vested in Your Honours under Rule 11 of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribu…

T.L.SRITHARAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-14, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1596/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1596/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 T.L. Sritharan, The Assistant Commissioner Of New No. 13, (Old No. 1), V. Income Tax, Swaminathan Street, Non-Corporate Circle -14, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 033. [Pan: Aepps-6766-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate & Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 2(47)

…and further, all facts are on record. Therefore, additional grounds filed by the assessee may be admitted. In this regard, he relied upon following judicial precedence: (i) CIT vs Ashok Leyland Ltd [253 ITR 425 (Mad)] (ii) CIT vs Associated Stone Industries [224 ITR 560 (SC)] (iii) CIT vs M.K. Yashwant Singh [231 ITR 145 (Del)] 7. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) submitted that, the assessee is not disputing applicability of provisions of section 2(47) of the Act for exchange of lands, and thus, once exchange of lands falls within the ambit of transfer as defined u/s. 2(14) o…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ARIHANT INTERNATIONAL LIMITED , GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 275/GTY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 43(5)Section 73

…justify initiation of action for reopening the assessment, it held. Page 15 of 23 I.T.A. No.: 275/Gau/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Arihant International Limited. 45. The same view was expressed in Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 5601 (SC). The Bombay High Court on the same issue in Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar, Asstt. CIT (No. 1) [2004] 268 ITR 3322, held that the reasons in support of the proposed action under section 147 of the Act must necessarily reveal all facts or materials that had not been disclosed by the assessee fully and truly necessary for assessment so a…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. V2 RETAIL LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and C

ITA 724/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No.724/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dcit, Circle-10(2), Kolkata Vs. M/S V2 Retail Ltd. Plot- No.8, Pocket-2, Block-A, Rangpuri Extensions, Nh-8, New Delhi-110037. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcv5632P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) C.O No.11/Kol/2020 (In I.T.A No.724/Kol/2018) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S V2 Retail Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-10(2), Kolkata Plot- No.8, Pocket-2, Block-A, Rangpuri Extensions, Nh-8, New Delhi-110037. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcv5632P (Cross-Objector) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Manish Kanojia, Dr Respondent By : Shri K. K. Chhaparia, Fca & Nirav Sheth, Fca सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11/11/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Cross-Objection Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Order Dated 25.01.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Arising Out Of The Order Dated 20.03.2015 Passed

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kanojia, DRFor Respondent: Shri K. K. Chhaparia, FCA & Nirav Sheth, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69A

…efrom. If such officer draws any inference which appears to be subsequently erroneous, a mere change of opinion would not justify initiation of action for reopening the assessment, it held. 45. The same view was expressed in Associated Stone Industries [1997] 224 ITR 560 (SC). The Bombay High Court on the same issue in Hindustan Lever Ltd. [2004] 268 ITR 332, held that the reasons in support of the proposed action under Section 147 of the Act must necessarily reveal all facts or materials that had not been disclosed by the assessee fully and truly necessary for assessment so as to establish the link between the r…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(3), KOLKATA vs. M/S. GRD COMMODITIES LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections of assessee are allowed

ITA 2277/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] It(Ss)A Nos.120 To123/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 To 2012-13

Section 132Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…1 IT(SS)A Nos.120-123/Kol/2018 & C.O. Nos. 123 to 126/Kol/2018 GRD Commodities Ltd., AYs- 2009-10 to 2012-13 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")"ी पी. एम.जगताप,उपा"य" एवं "ी ए.ट". वक!,"या"यक सद$य) [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) &Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] IT(SS)A Nos.120 to123/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. G R D Commodities Ltd. Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata. (PAN: AACCG1217C) Appellant Respondent & C.O. Nos. 123 to 126/Kol/2018 In IT(SS)A Nos.120 to 123/Kol/2018 Assessme…

M/S. ALCATEL LUCENT INDIA LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 6001/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: And Ms. Ananya Kapoor,AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 154(1)

…[1986] 159 ITR 956 (SC) held that “no case under section 148 is made-out when the facts were known all along with to the Revenue while making the original assessment”. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Associated Stone Industries Ltd., vs., CIT [1997] 224 ITR 560 (SC) held that “assessee shall have to disclose only the primary facts.” It is, thus, clear that the assessee disclosed all the primary facts at the original assessment which have been considered by the A.O. and assessment under section 143(3) have been framed. There is, thus, no failure on the part of the assessee to 10 ITA.No.6001/Del./2014 M/s…

M/S. VIJAYA BANK,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGLORE

ITA 1836/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 220Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1835/Bang/18 2006-07 Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Joint Commissioner of Central Accounts Dept., Income Tax, 41/2, M.G. Road, Large Tax Payers Unit, BANGALORE BANGALORE 1836/Bang/18 2007-08 [PAN: AAACV4791J] 1830/Bang/18 2006-07 Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Joint Commissioner of Central Accounts Dept., Income Tax (LTU), 41/2, M.G. Road, BANGALORE BANGALORE 1831/Bang/18 2007-08 [PAN: AAACV4791J] Assessee by : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A., Revenu…

M/S. VIJAYA BANK,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, BANGALORE

ITA 1835/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 220Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1835/Bang/18 2006-07 Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Joint Commissioner of Central Accounts Dept., Income Tax, 41/2, M.G. Road, Large Tax Payers Unit, BANGALORE BANGALORE 1836/Bang/18 2007-08 [PAN: AAACV4791J] 1830/Bang/18 2006-07 Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Joint Commissioner of Central Accounts Dept., Income Tax (LTU), 41/2, M.G. Road, BANGALORE BANGALORE 1831/Bang/18 2007-08 [PAN: AAACV4791J] Assessee by : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A., Revenu…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (LTU),, BENGALURU vs. M/S. VIJAYA BANK, BENGALURU

ITA 1831/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 220Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1835/Bang/18 2006-07 Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Joint Commissioner of Central Accounts Dept., Income Tax, 41/2, M.G. Road, Large Tax Payers Unit, BANGALORE BANGALORE 1836/Bang/18 2007-08 [PAN: AAACV4791J] 1830/Bang/18 2006-07 Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Joint Commissioner of Central Accounts Dept., Income Tax (LTU), 41/2, M.G. Road, BANGALORE BANGALORE 1831/Bang/18 2007-08 [PAN: AAACV4791J] Assessee by : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A., Revenu…

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (LTU),, BENGALURU vs. M/S. VIJAYA BANK, BENGALURU

ITA 1830/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 220Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1835/Bang/18 2006-07 Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Joint Commissioner of Central Accounts Dept., Income Tax, 41/2, M.G. Road, Large Tax Payers Unit, BANGALORE BANGALORE 1836/Bang/18 2007-08 [PAN: AAACV4791J] 1830/Bang/18 2006-07 Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Joint Commissioner of Central Accounts Dept., Income Tax (LTU), 41/2, M.G. Road, BANGALORE BANGALORE 1831/Bang/18 2007-08 [PAN: AAACV4791J] Assessee by : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A., Revenu…

PREMIER VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 15(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1010/KOL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Premier Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 15(2), Pan: Aadcp 8876D Kolkata Appellant/Assessee Respondent/Department

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…r draws any inference which appears to be subsequently erroneous, a mere change of opinion would not justify initiation of action for reopening the assessment, it held. 45. The same view was expressed in Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 5601 (SC). The Bombay High Court on the same issue in Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar, Asstt. CIT (No. 1) [2004] 268 ITR 3322, held that the reasons in support of the proposed action under section 147 of the Act must necessarily reveal all facts or materials that had not been disclosed by the assessee fully and truly necessary for assessment so a…

PREMIER VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-15(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1953/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Premier Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 15(2), Pan: Aadcp 8876D Kolkata Appellant/Assessee Respondent/Department

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…r draws any inference which appears to be subsequently erroneous, a mere change of opinion would not justify initiation of action for reopening the assessment, it held. 45. The same view was expressed in Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 5601 (SC). The Bombay High Court on the same issue in Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar, Asstt. CIT (No. 1) [2004] 268 ITR 3322, held that the reasons in support of the proposed action under section 147 of the Act must necessarily reveal all facts or materials that had not been disclosed by the assessee fully and truly necessary for assessment so a…

MANGLESH KALYANCHAND LALWANI, HUF,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

ITA 1893/PUN/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Feb 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148

…was actually paid to assessee on 15-6-1982, he could not be held guilty of not disclosing truly and correctly material facts, therefore, impugned notices were not valid in law. Supreme Court in case of Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd V CIT reported in 224 ITR 560 (Page 14 of legal compilation) held that The primary fact in the instant case was the lease agreement entered into by the appellant with the Kotah State dated 2-5-1945. It was placed before the ITO at the time of original assessments. It was not the duty of the assessee to draw the attention of the ITO to any particular clause or portion of the d…

KAMLESH KALYANCHAND LALWANI, HUF,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

ITA 1892/PUN/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Feb 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148

…was actually paid to assessee on 15-6-1982, he could not be held guilty of not disclosing truly and correctly material facts, therefore, impugned notices were not valid in law. Supreme Court in case of Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd V CIT reported in 224 ITR 560 (Page 14 of legal compilation) held that The primary fact in the instant case was the lease agreement entered into by the appellant with the Kotah State dated 2-5-1945. It was placed before the ITO at the time of original assessments. It was not the duty of the assessee to draw the attention of the ITO to any particular clause or portion of the d…

KALYANCHAND MANAKCHAND LALWANI, HUF,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

ITA 1891/PUN/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Feb 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148

…was actually paid to assessee on 15-6-1982, he could not be held guilty of not disclosing truly and correctly material facts, therefore, impugned notices were not valid in law. Supreme Court in case of Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd V CIT reported in 224 ITR 560 (Page 14 of legal compilation) held that The primary fact in the instant case was the lease agreement entered into by the appellant with the Kotah State dated 2-5-1945. It was placed before the ITO at the time of original assessments. It was not the duty of the assessee to draw the attention of the ITO to any particular clause or portion of the d…

DIXIT PROCESSORS,BHIWANDI vs. ITO WD 1(1), KALYAN

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 937/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Dixit Processors, Ito-1(1) H. No. 1581, New Kaneri, Kalyan Vs. Near Jain Compound, Kalyan Road, Bhiwandi-421302. Pan No. Aaefd1227G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Dr. P. Daniel, Ar Revenue By : Mr. V. Vidhyadhar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/01/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/01/2017

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Vidhyadhar, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tricity Co. P. Ltd. vs. CIT (1970) 78 ITR 466 (SC), CIT vs. Bhanji Lavji (1971) 79 ITR 582 (SC), CIT vs. Burlop Dealers Ltd. (1971) 79 ITR 609 (SC),ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437, 445 (SC),Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 560, 572 (SC). Every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. A disclosure may be a false one or true one. It may be a full disclosure or it may not be. A partial disclosure may very often be a misleading one. In Shri Krishna (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO [1996] 87 Taxman 315 (SC) it has been held that what is required is a full…

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. v. CIT (224 ITR 560) — Cited in 27 Judgments | BharatTax