CIT and anr. v. Rinku Chakraborty

56 DTR 227High Court#8516 most cited
13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 132Section 144Section 144BSection 153CSection 69A

Issues it is cited on

mere change of opinionchange of opinionkelvinatortangible materialliable to taxescapement of incomereason to believeincome escaping assessmentreassessment proceedingscross objectionreopening of assessmentscrutiny assessment

Judgments citing CIT and anr. v. Rinku Chakraborty

NATHARAM PANAJI CHOUDHARY,PUNE vs. I.T.O. WARD 8(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1826/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar (Virtually)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…he information is obtained after proper investigation from the materials on record or from any enquiry or research into facts or law. There is a plethora of judgment that such information need not be from external source vide CIT and anr. vs. RinkuChakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and KalyanjiMavji and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s.148, tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidences on record itself. The reference may be had of ACIT vs. Kanga & Company (2010) –…

NATHARAM PANAJI CHOUDHARY,PUNE vs. I.T.O. WARD 8(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1823/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar (Virtually)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…he information is obtained after proper investigation from the materials on record or from any enquiry or research into facts or law. There is a plethora of judgment that such information need not be from external source vide CIT and anr. vs. RinkuChakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and KalyanjiMavji and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s.148, tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidences on record itself. The reference may be had of ACIT vs. Kanga & Company (2010) –…

AGRI GOLD FOODS AND FARM PRODUCTS LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

ITA 2000/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)

…taxpayer cannot be allowed to take advantage of any of those lapses, as ultimately if such an advantage is allowed, it would be prejudicial to the interests of the revenue and public interests. i. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr Vs. Rinku Chakraborthy (Kar) 56 DTR 227. ii. Kalyanji Mavji & Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(SC) 102 ITR 287. 5.2.8. In appellant's case, Assessing Officer has recorded the following reasons for reopening of assessment REASONS FOR RE-OPENING U/S 148 FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08 The assessee company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2007-08 on 26/04/2008 admitting loss of R…

MACK STAR MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4994/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)\nAND\nSHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER)\nITA No. 4994/MUM/2024\nAssessment Year: 2013-14\nMack Star Marketing Pvt. Ltd.,\nUnit 404, Kaledonia, 19 Sahar Road,\nAndheri (E),\nMumbai-400069.\nPAN NO. AADCM 7564 K\nAppellant\nNational Faceless Appeal Centre.\nVs.\nRespondent\nAssessee by\n: Mr. Yash Varmani\nRevenue by\n: Mr. R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR\nDate of Hearing\n: 17/12/2024\nDate of pronouncement\n: 21/01/2025\nORDER\nPER OM PRAKASH KANT (Accou

Section 144BSection 147

…n from other assessment year etc. (i.e.\ninternal source), but same cannot be by way of a dream or rethinking\non same material, which will be in the nature of review of the\nassessment rather than reassessment. In the case of CIT & Ars v. Rinku\nChakraborthy 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Kalyanji Mavji and Company v.\nCIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) it is held that such information need not be from\nexternal sources only. The information obtained in assessment\nproceedings of subsequent assessment year can also be utilized for\nreopening of the completed assessment (Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd. v.\nITO & Others 236 ITR 34 (SC) and Rev…

DCIT 13(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. PEBBLE BAY DEVELOPERS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the application of the assessee under rule 27 is ...

ITA 5744/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- M/S Pebble Bay Developers Tax-13(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Room No. 218, Vs. Raheja Chambers, Linking Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Road, Main Avenue Santacruz Mumbai-400020. (West), Mumbai-400054. Pan No. Aaccg 1645 E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Vranda Matkari, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Nishit Gandhi, Ar Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda Matkari, DR
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 69C

…There is a record or from any enquiry or research into facts or law. There is a plethora of judgments that such information of judgments that such information need not be from external need not be from external source – refer CIT & anr. vs. Rinku Chakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and CIT & anr. vs. Rinku Chakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Kalyanji Mavji and Company Vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent Kalyanji Mavji and Company Vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent Kalyanji Mavji and Company Vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s 148,…

ITO 1(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. M PALLONJI ENERPRISES P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas dismissed whereas cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1907/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito-1(2)(3), M/S M Pallonji Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., R. No. 527, 5Th Floor, Aayakar 46/A, Cawasji Patel Street, Fort, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aafcm 3357 A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 68

…ing on same material, which will be nature of review of the assessment rather than reassessment. In the review of the assessment rather than reassessment. In the review of the assessment rather than reassessment. In the case of CIT & Ars v. Rinku Chakraborthy 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Ars v. Rinku Chakraborthy 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Ars v. Rinku Chakraborthy 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Kalyanji Mavji and Company v. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) it is held that Kalyanji Mavji and Company v. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) it is held that Kalyanji Mavji and Company v. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC) it is held that M/s M Pallonji Enterprises M/s M Pallonji En…

SHRI AMIT MANGILAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, - 33(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed and the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3331/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 3331 & 3332/Mum/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Shri Amit Mangilal Jain Vs. Acit – 33(1) 2Nd Floor, Arkade House, 103, 1St Floor, Atmaram Sawnt Marg, Eastern House, Kandivali (E), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400101. Mumbai – 400021. Pan/Gir No. : Aabpj0925G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JainFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar.DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…information is obtained after proper investigation from the materials on record or from any enquiry or research into facts or law. There is a plethora of judgement that such information need not be from external source vide CIT and anr. vs. Rinku Chakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and KalyanjiMavji and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s.148, tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidences on record itself. The reference may be had of ACIT vs. Kanga & Company (2010) -…

HITESH CHHATWAL,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC -5(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed while for the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6418/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: Vinay Sinha
Section 54F

…nformation 1s obtained after proper investigation from the materials on record or from any enquiry or research into facts or law. There 1s a plethora of judgements that such information need not be from external source refer CIT and anr. vs. Rinku Chakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Kalyan: Mav): and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s 148, 11 Appeals Shri Hitesh Chhatwal Vs. DCIT, CC-5(4) 40 tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidence on record itself The refer…

M/S. SATYAM REALTORS P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CC-5(4)DY CIT CC-5(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 552/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

Section 147Section 148Section 234B

…nformation is obtained after proper investigation from the materials on record or from any enquiry or research into facts or law. There is a plethora of judgements that such information need not be from external source-refer CIT and anr. vs. Rinku Chakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Kalyanji Mavji and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s.148, tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidences on record itself. The reference may be had of ACIT vs. Kanga & Company (2010) -…

NITAN CHHATWAL,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC -5(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 6422/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rahul RamanFor Respondent: Shri Mani Jain
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 14A

…formation is obtained after proper investigation from the materials on record or from any enquiry or research into facts or law. There is a plethora of judgements that such information need not be from external source- refer CIT and anr, vs. Rinku Chakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Kalyanji Mavji and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s.148, tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidences on record itself. The reference may be had of ACIT vs. Kanga & Company (2010) -…

DCIT-CC-5(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SHRI NITAN CHHATWAL , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 6351/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rahul RamanFor Respondent: Shri Mani Jain
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 14A

…formation is obtained after proper investigation from the materials on record or from any enquiry or research into facts or law. There is a plethora of judgements that such information need not be from external source- refer CIT and anr, vs. Rinku Chakraborty 56 DTR 227 (Kar) and Kalyanji Mavji and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s.148, tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidences on record itself. The reference may be had of ACIT vs. Kanga & Company (2010) -…

M/S NXP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 847/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…n if the information is obtained after proper investigation from the material on record or from any enquiry or research into facts or Page 9 of 11 law. Information need not be from external source as held in the case of CIT & Anr Vs. Rinku Chakraborthy (Kar) 56 DTR 227 and Kalyanji Mavji & Co. Vs CIT(S) 102 ITR 287. In view of the above discussion, the CIT(Appeals) was of the opinion that the Assessing Officer has got jurisdiction in reopening the assessment by issuing the notice u/s.148 of the Act as the communication received by the Assessing Officer in discharge of official duty is information for issue of no…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the ld AO on the limited issue that order passed by the ld AO is barred by limitation. Ground No. 1 is dismissed

ITA 6079/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(Ltu), Vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd, Circle-1, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place, Nbcc Plaza Pusp Vihar, Rk Puram, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263

…ssible even if the information is obtained after proper investigations from the material on records or from any enquiry or research into facts or law- information need not to be from external source. This has been held in CIT & Anr Vs Rinku Chakraborthy (Kar) 56 DTR 227 & Kalyanji Mavji & Co. Vs CIT(SC) 102 ITR 287. Besides in the decisions ACIT Vs Kanga & Co. 2010—TIOL- 464-ITAT-MUM with respect to reopening u/s 148 it is held that “ Tangible material “ need not be from outside the returned income . In this case in the details under the head “ Other expenses" filed during the assessment proceedings an amount of…

CIT and anr. v. Rinku Chakraborty (56 DTR 227) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax