Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee v. Income Tax Officer

93 ITR 130High Court1974#2098 most cited

What is Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee v. Income Tax Officer authority for?

The sanctioning authority must apply its mind to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer before granting approval for reassessment or other proceedings, and cannot grant such approval in a mechanical manner by merely rubber-stamping "Yes".

55

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee · 93 ITR 130 · Section 151 · Section 148 · mechanical approval · rubber stamping · application of mind · sanctioning authority · approval for reassessment · reasons recorded · reassessment validity

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 151Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 153DSection 132Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

section 271aab(1a)section 151(2)section 144basection 158bgsection 142(2a)approval under section 151section 271aabsection 148(2)section 151(1)section 271aac(1)section 153bsanctioning authority

Judgments citing Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee v. Income Tax Officer

Sankar Paikaray, Balugaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Khurda Ward, Khurda

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 367/CTK/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack14 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA &For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…Yes” would suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under: - “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case (1977) 109 ITR 370 (Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by…

Sankar Paikaray, Balugaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Khurda Ward, Khurda

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 366/CTK/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack14 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA &For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…Yes” would suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under: - “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case (1977) 109 ITR 370 (Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by…

Sankar Paikaray, Balugaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Khurda Ward, Khurda

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 365/CTK/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack14 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita No.365 365/Ctk/2023: Assessment Year-2010 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA &For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)

…Yes” would suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under: - “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case (1977) 109 ITR 370 (Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to approval by…

Biswajit Behera vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2), Bbsr

ITA/17/2024HC Orissa08 Oct 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central 2 vs. Ms Bhudeva Estates Pvt Ltd

ITA/577/2023HC Delhi06 Sept 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

Section 153ASection 153DSection 264Section 68

…ITA 577/2023 Page 1 of 10 $~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 577/2023 PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC, Mr. Sanjeev Menon, JSC and Mr. Rahul Singh, JSC. versus MS BHUDEVA ESTATES PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gautam Jain and Mr. Manish Yadav, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA O R D E R % 06.09.2024 1. The Principal Commissioner impugns the order of the Income Tax A…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central 2 vs. Gopal Kumar Goyal

ITA/653/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…d suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to appr…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central II vs. M/S Witness Builders Pvt Ltd

ITA/641/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

…d suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to appr…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central- II, New Delhi vs. M/S Witness Constructions (P) Ltd

ITA/638/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…d suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to appr…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Central- II, New Delhi vs. M/S Kartikeya Buildcon (P) Ltd

ITA/639/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…d suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to appr…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax Central II vs. M/S Gee Gee Buildtech Pvt. Ltd

ITA/2/2024HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

…d suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to appr…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-02 vs. M/S Mdlr Hotels Pvt Ltd

ITA/593/2023HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…d suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to appr…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ms Believe Developers and Promoters P Ltd

ITA/21/2024HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

…d suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under:— \{ “19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal, (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee, (1974) 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case, (1977) 109 ITR 370(Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which the proforma was stamped amounting to appr…

Radha Mittal, Ludhiana vs. ITO- Ward 7(3), Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in light

ITA 1140/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavradha Mittal, Ito बनाम H. No. 85-A, Aggar Nagar, Ward- 7(3), Ludhiana- 141012 Ludhiana

For Appellant: Shri Sarabjit Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…with the observations of the Assessing Officer which clearly shows the approval granted by the ld. Pr.CIT was mechanical without application of mind and in support, reliance was placed on the following decisions as under:- • Kumar Chatterjee v. ITO [1974] 93 ITR 130 (Calcutta) • Lakhmani Mewal. Chhugamal Rajput v. Chaliha [1971] 79 ITR 603 (SC) • Chanchal Das v. ITO [1975] 99 ITR 296 (Calcutta) • Arjun Singh v. CIT [2000] 246 Taxman 363 (M.P) • United Electrical Co. (P) Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 125 Taxman 775 (Delhi) 6. Per contra, the ld. Sr DR submitted that notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee on 30.03.201…

Sh. Vikas Kapoor, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5936/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: SH. V.K.SABHARWAL, ADV. &For Respondent: MS. BEDOBINA CHAUDHURI, SR. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tive House Building Society Ltd. v. CIT & Anr., (2010) 327 ITR 39 (P&H) 49.ITO, Calcutta & Ors. v. Lakhmani Mewal Das, (1972) 103 ITR 437 (SC) 50. Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee v. Income Tax Officer, "B" Ward, Central Salaries Circle, Calcutta & Ors., (1972) 93 ITR 130 (CAL). 51. Govinda Choudhury & Sons v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-A" 52. Berhampur & Ors., (1975) 109 ITR 370 (ORI) Details of judgments relied upon on Mechanical Approval uls 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: Pro CIT-6 Vs. M/s NC Cables Ltd. in ITA No. 3351Del12015 Hon'ble Delhi High Court, New Delhi vide order dated 11.01.2017 held as under S…

M/S Central India Electric Supply Co.Ltd vs. ITO-Company Circle X & Ors

The appeal is allowed leaving the parties to bear their own

ITA - 17 / 1999HC Delhi28 Jan 2011

Bench: Us In The Present Appeal, Are: “(1) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Tribunal Was Justified In Holding That Re-Assessment Proceedings Under Section 147(A) Read With Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Had Been Rightly Initiated Against The Assessee?

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 54

…asons for coming to the conclusion that it is a fit case for issue of the notice under Section 148 of the IT Act. This judgment was relied upon in Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee v. Income Tax Officer, „B‟ Ward, Central Salaries Circle, Calcutta & Ors., (1972) 93 ITR 130 (CAL). In this case, there was only a rubber stamp above the signature of the Commissioner and no other relevant material was produced before the Court even when asked for. This was held to be a case of non-application of mind. The judgment in Govinda Choudhury & Sons v. Income Tax Officer Ward „A‟ Berhampur & Ors (1975) 109 ITR 370 2011:…