Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO

ITO, Rishikesh vs. M/S. M.L. Creations, Dehradun

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

…wn by the Hon'ble Court: "What the Supreme Court has now done in the GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd.'s case [2003] 259 ITR 19 is not to whittle down the principle laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Apex court in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. case [1961] 41 ITR 191 but to require the assessee first to lodge preliminary objection before the Assessing Officer who is bound to decide the preliminary objections to issuance of the reassessment notice by passing a speaking order and, therefore, if such order on the preliminary objections is still against the assessee, the assessee will get an opportunity to chal…

M/S. Statcon Power Controls Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 5953/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 M/S Statcon Power Controls Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 19-E, Pocket-Ii, Kondli Gharoli-Ii, Ward-9(2), Mayur Vihar, Phase-Iii, New Delhi New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcs1814N Assessee By : Sh. Anil Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2016 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.09.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Ao In Making The Assessment At The Income Of Rs. 27,05,220 As Against The Returned Income Of Rs, 15,05,220. 2. The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Ld. Ao In Issuing Notice Under Section 148 & Subsequent Proceedings Thereafter Against The Appellant Company. 3. The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Ld. Ao In Treating The Investment By M/S Geecee Finance Limited In Shares Of The Appellant Company As An Accommodation Entry & Consequently Adding It Back To Income Of The Appellant Under Section 68 Of Income Tax Act,1961. 2 Statcon Power Controls Ltd. 4. The Order Of The Cit(A) Is Against Law & Facts Of The Case. 5. The Appellant Craves The Right To Add, Amend Or Withdraw Any Grounds Of Appeal At The Time Of Hearing.” 3. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee In This Appeal Relates To The Reopening The Assessment By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act) & Making The Addition Of Rs.12,00,000/- U/S 68 Of The Act.

…Court supporting this view. The latest being the case of Signature Hotels (P.) Ltd. Vs. ITO and Anr. (2011) 60 DTR 30 by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court.” 8. The reliance was also placed on the following case laws: " Calcutta Discount Co. Vs ITO and Anr. (1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC) " Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO and Anr. (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC) 9. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued after proper recording of reasons for reopening and statutory approval was taken. He further observed that the notice was issued on time i.e. 31.03.2012…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Vinod Chadha, New Delhi

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

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Ward-30(1), Vs. Sh. Vinod Chadha, C/O- Moti Mahal New Delhi Restaurant, 3704, Netaji Subhash Marg, Darya Ganj, New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aadpc9701H (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 219/Del/2014 (In Ita No. 6709/Del/2013) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Sh. Vinod Chadha, C/O- Moti Mahal Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-30(1), Restaurant, 3704, Netaji Subhash New Delhi Marg, Darya Ganj, New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aadpc9701H (Appellant) (Respondent) Department By Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.Dr Assessee By Sh. Naresh Chandra Agarwal, Ca Date Of Hearing 18.05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 13.07.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 20/09/2013 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income- Tax (Appeals)-Xxv, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2009-10. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: 1. On The Fact & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting Addition Of Rs. 63,47,405/- Made On Account Of Cash Deposit In Bank Account U/S 69A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. C.O. No. 219/Del/2014 2. Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Correct In Not Appreciating The Prohibition Of Section 19(2) Of The Indian Partnership Act, 1932 On The Opening Of Account By A Partner In His Own Name On Behalf Of The Firm, Which Is Further Not In Consonance With The Terms Of The Partnership Deed Of The Firm M/S. Moti Mahal Restaurant. 3. Whether Learned Cit(A) Is Correct In Not Appreciating That The Bank Account In The Assessee’S Individual Name Was Not The Bank Account Of The Firm M/S. Moti Mahal Restaurant, In Which The Assesse Was A Partner. 4. The Appellant Craves Leave For Reserving The Right To Amend, Modify, Alter, Add Or Forego Any Ground(S) Of Appeal At Any Time Before Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.

…ourt as to when the ITO can assume jurisdiction under s. 147 of the Act. We, however, think that it is not necessary for us to refer to any of those decisions as law is well settled on the subject starting from Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO & Anr. (1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC) : TC 51R.779. In the present case what we find is that though proceeding for each assessment initiated by the ITO was under s. 147(a) of the Act but the High Court considered the same to be one under s. 147(b) of the Act without further examining the question if notices under s. 148 of the Act on that ground will be within the period of limit…

Mitsui Prime Advanced Composites India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri C.M. Garg, Jm Assessment Year : 2010-11

…hat each and every addition does not lead to imposition of penalty as has been canvassed on behalf of the Revenue. 23. The reliance of the ld. DR on the judgments in CIT vs. Mussadi Lal Ram Bharose 165 ITR 14 (SC) and Calcutta Discount Company Ltd. vs. ITO 41 ITR 191 (SC) is again improper because unlike those decisions, we 27 are not faced with a situation in which the explanation of the assessee for determining the ALP in the manner as done by it, was not bona fide. Similar is the position insofar as the reliance of the ld. DR on CIT vs. Zoom Communication Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 327 ITR 0510 (Del) is concerned.…

Smt. Chaya Sinha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shria.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIA.T.VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITANo.2462/Del/2014 (Assessment Year: 2006-07) Chaya Sinha, ACIT, C/o. M/s. RRA Taxindia, Circle-II, Vs. D-28, South Extension, Part-I, Faridabad New Delhi PAN:ABOPS3215J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by :Sh.Rakesh Gupta, Adv Sh. Somil Agarwal, CA Respondent by:Sh Susan George, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12/01/2016 Date of pronouncement 11/03/2016 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is preferred by the assessee for the Assessment Year 2006-07 aga…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…s pertaining to the instant year. Inferences are in the domain of the AO and not in the realm of the assessee. This was so held by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court by majority order in the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 41 ITR 191 (SC). The facts of the case was that in the original assessments of the company (i.e. Calcutta Discount Ltd.) for the assessment years 1942-43, 1943-44 and 1944-45, the profits realized by the company by sales of shares were not assessed to tax. The Income-tax Officer proposed to initiate reassessment proceedings against the company and in his r…

M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…s pertaining to the instant year. Inferences are in the domain of the AO and not in the realm of the assessee. This was so held by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court by majority order in the case of Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 41 ITR 191 (SC). The facts of the case was that in the original assessments of the company (i.e. Calcutta Discount Ltd.) for the assessment years 1942-43, 1943-44 and 1944-45, the profits realized by the company by sales of shares were not assessed to tax. The Income-tax Officer proposed to initiate reassessment proceedings against the company and in his r…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Visisth Chay Vyapar Ltd

…. Ltd. v. ITO [1991] 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfilment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential.” 28. In Calcutta Discount Company v. Income Tax Officer 41 ITR 191 the Supreme Court, while considering the import of the words "omission or failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment", observed as under: "The words used are "omission or failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that year". It postulates a duty on every…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Vishsht Chay Vyapar Ltd

…. Ltd. v. ITO [1991] 191 ITR 662, for initiation of action under section 147(a) (as the provision stood at the relevant time) fulfilment of the two requisite conditions in that regard is essential.” 28. In Calcutta Discount Company v. Income Tax Officer 41 ITR 191 the Supreme Court, while considering the import of the words "omission or failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment", observed as under: "The words used are "omission or failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that year". It postulates a duty on every…