What is CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia authority for?

Section 153A can be invoked to reassess income for all years under consideration prior to a search, even if returns for those years were processed under Section 143(1)(a). The Assessing Officer has the power to reassess total income in such cases without fetters.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia?

537 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia (352 ITR 493), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 132, Section 148, Section 153A, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 139(1).

CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia (352 ITR 493)

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3953/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…MeetaGutgutia [2018] 257 Taxman 441 (SC) affirming the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. MeetaGutgutia: 395 ITR 526 (Del) - CIT vs. Kabul Chawla: 234 Taxman 300 - CIT vs. Chetan Das Lachman Das: 254 CTR 392 (Del) - CIT vs. Anil Bhatia: 211 Taxmann 453 (Del) - CIT vs. Lachman Das Bhatia: 254 CTR 383 (Del) - PCIT v. Vikas Gutgutia: 396 ITR 691 (Delhi) 3.2 Specific reliance was placed by the Ld. Sr. Counsel on the decision of coordinate Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Anurag Dalmia vs. DCIT: ITA 5395 of 2017, wherein the Tribunal quashed similar assessments completed under section…

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3952/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…MeetaGutgutia [2018] 257 Taxman 441 (SC) affirming the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. MeetaGutgutia: 395 ITR 526 (Del) - CIT vs. Kabul Chawla: 234 Taxman 300 - CIT vs. Chetan Das Lachman Das: 254 CTR 392 (Del) - CIT vs. Anil Bhatia: 211 Taxmann 453 (Del) - CIT vs. Lachman Das Bhatia: 254 CTR 383 (Del) - PCIT v. Vikas Gutgutia: 396 ITR 691 (Delhi) 3.2 Specific reliance was placed by the Ld. Sr. Counsel on the decision of coordinate Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Anurag Dalmia vs. DCIT: ITA 5395 of 2017, wherein the Tribunal quashed similar assessments completed under section…

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3951/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…MeetaGutgutia [2018] 257 Taxman 441 (SC) affirming the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. MeetaGutgutia: 395 ITR 526 (Del) - CIT vs. Kabul Chawla: 234 Taxman 300 - CIT vs. Chetan Das Lachman Das: 254 CTR 392 (Del) - CIT vs. Anil Bhatia: 211 Taxmann 453 (Del) - CIT vs. Lachman Das Bhatia: 254 CTR 383 (Del) - PCIT v. Vikas Gutgutia: 396 ITR 691 (Delhi) 3.2 Specific reliance was placed by the Ld. Sr. Counsel on the decision of coordinate Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Anurag Dalmia vs. DCIT: ITA 5395 of 2017, wherein the Tribunal quashed similar assessments completed under section…

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2894/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…MeetaGutgutia [2018] 257 Taxman 441 (SC) affirming the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. MeetaGutgutia: 395 ITR 526 (Del) - CIT vs. Kabul Chawla: 234 Taxman 300 - CIT vs. Chetan Das Lachman Das: 254 CTR 392 (Del) - CIT vs. Anil Bhatia: 211 Taxmann 453 (Del) - CIT vs. Lachman Das Bhatia: 254 CTR 383 (Del) - PCIT v. Vikas Gutgutia: 396 ITR 691 (Delhi) 3.2 Specific reliance was placed by the Ld. Sr. Counsel on the decision of coordinate Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Anurag Dalmia vs. DCIT: ITA 5395 of 2017, wherein the Tribunal quashed similar assessments completed under section…

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2893/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…MeetaGutgutia [2018] 257 Taxman 441 (SC) affirming the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. MeetaGutgutia: 395 ITR 526 (Del) - CIT vs. Kabul Chawla: 234 Taxman 300 - CIT vs. Chetan Das Lachman Das: 254 CTR 392 (Del) - CIT vs. Anil Bhatia: 211 Taxmann 453 (Del) - CIT vs. Lachman Das Bhatia: 254 CTR 383 (Del) - PCIT v. Vikas Gutgutia: 396 ITR 691 (Delhi) 3.2 Specific reliance was placed by the Ld. Sr. Counsel on the decision of coordinate Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Anurag Dalmia vs. DCIT: ITA 5395 of 2017, wherein the Tribunal quashed similar assessments completed under section…

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2892/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…MeetaGutgutia [2018] 257 Taxman 441 (SC) affirming the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. MeetaGutgutia: 395 ITR 526 (Del) - CIT vs. Kabul Chawla: 234 Taxman 300 - CIT vs. Chetan Das Lachman Das: 254 CTR 392 (Del) - CIT vs. Anil Bhatia: 211 Taxmann 453 (Del) - CIT vs. Lachman Das Bhatia: 254 CTR 383 (Del) - PCIT v. Vikas Gutgutia: 396 ITR 691 (Delhi) 3.2 Specific reliance was placed by the Ld. Sr. Counsel on the decision of coordinate Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Anurag Dalmia vs. DCIT: ITA 5395 of 2017, wherein the Tribunal quashed similar assessments completed under section…

Shri Surya Kant Jaipuria, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2586/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhita No. 2586/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Sh. Surya Kant Jaipuria, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income S-25, Green Park Main Market, Tax, Central Circle-7, New Delhi-110016 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaipj6008K Assessee By : Sh. P. C. Yadav, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Pramita M. Biswas, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :01.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.07.2019 Order Per R. K. Panda:

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR

Section 132Section 153A

…during search operation but also with regard to material available at time of original assessment. She also relied on the following decisions: " CIT Vs St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles 385 ITR 624 " Smt. Dayawanti Vs CIT (2017) 390 ITR 496 " CIT Anil Kumar Bhatia 352 ITR 493 " Filatex India Ltd. Vs CIT 49 taxmann.com 465 11 Surya Kant Jaipuria 18. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the authorities below and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. Before adjudicating the grounds on merit, we would…

M/S.Geetanjali Space Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 782/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Lakhani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…f various documents, etc. that pointed to undeclared income. In these circumstances, the assessee's argument that they could not be acted upon or given any weight is insubstantial and meritless. This court also notices that the decision in CIT Vs. Anil Bhatia 352 ITR 493 (Del) which held that such statements are relevant, though noticed, has not been doubted in any later decision, including Kabul Chawla, which is the mainstay of the assessee's case. Consequently the first question of law is answered against the assessee and in the revenue's favour." 26.12 To conclude, it is held that the statement of Shri. Rajes…

Smt. Kundan Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 2061/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT_D.R

Section 132Section 153ASection 69B

…vs. O. Abdul Razak (supra), decision of ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Pravinbhai Keshavbhai Patel vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad (2014) 162 TTJ 171 (Ahd.-Tribunal), Judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Anil Kumar Bhatia (2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del.) and Order of ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Shailesh S. Patel vs. ITO, Ward-5, Palanpur (2018) 97 taxmann.com 570 (Ahd.Tribunal). The Ld. D.R, therefore, submitted that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the addition in respect of 28 ITA.No.2061/Del./2015 & 1797/Del./2015 Smt. Kundan Singh, New Delhi. the amount mentioned in th…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Kundan Singh, New Delhi

Appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1797/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT_D.R

Section 132Section 153ASection 69B

…vs. O. Abdul Razak (supra), decision of ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Pravinbhai Keshavbhai Patel vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad (2014) 162 TTJ 171 (Ahd.-Tribunal), Judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Anil Kumar Bhatia (2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del.) and Order of ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Shailesh S. Patel vs. ITO, Ward-5, Palanpur (2018) 97 taxmann.com 570 (Ahd.Tribunal). The Ld. D.R, therefore, submitted that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the addition in respect of 28 ITA.No.2061/Del./2015 & 1797/Del./2015 Smt. Kundan Singh, New Delhi. the amount mentioned in th…

M/S Aggarwal Sales, Zirakpur vs. DCIT, CC, Patiala

ITA 1443/CHANDI/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: The High Court Of Bombay In The Case Of Cit Vs. M/S Murli Agro Products Ltd. (Supra), Wherein On The Issue Of Exercise Of Revisionary Powers By The Commissioner Of Income Tax U/S 263 Of The Act, On The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 153A, It Was Contended By The Revenue That The Impugned Order Was Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue Since The Assessing Officer Had Only Determined The Undisclosed Income & Not The Total Income Which Is The Mandate Of Section 153A .The Hon'Ble High Court, While Adjudicating The Issue, Dealt At Length With The Purpose Of Introduction Of The New Search Assessment Procedures, As Against The Earlier Block Assessment Procedures & Then Went On To Interpret The Proviso To Section 153A(1) & Held That It Is Only Pending Proceedings Which Are Abated On Initiation Of Proceedings Under Section 153A Of The Act, While The Assessments Which Have Attained Finality Cannot Be Disturbed Unless Materials Gathered In The Course Of Proceedings Under Section 153A Of The Act Established Otherwise.

Section 143(1)(a)Section 153Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 263

…, while the assessments which have attained finality cannot be disturbed unless materials gathered in the course of proceedings under section 153A of the Act established otherwise. 18. Thereafter, the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia 352 ITR 493, interpreted the provisions of section 153A of the Act at length, and held that as against the earlier block assessment procedure which roped in only the undisclosed income and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved, resulting in multiple assessments, under the present assessment procedures prescribed under section 153A/B/C of the Act,…

M/S Aggarwal Sales, Zirakpur vs. DCIT, CC, Patiala

ITA 1442/CHANDI/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: The High Court Of Bombay In The Case Of Cit Vs. M/S Murli Agro Products Ltd. (Supra), Wherein On The Issue Of Exercise Of Revisionary Powers By The Commissioner Of Income Tax U/S 263 Of The Act, On The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 153A, It Was Contended By The Revenue That The Impugned Order Was Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue Since The Assessing Officer Had Only Determined The Undisclosed Income & Not The Total Income Which Is The Mandate Of Section 153A .The Hon'Ble High Court, While Adjudicating The Issue, Dealt At Length With The Purpose Of Introduction Of The New Search Assessment Procedures, As Against The Earlier Block Assessment Procedures & Then Went On To Interpret The Proviso To Section 153A(1) & Held That It Is Only Pending Proceedings Which Are Abated On Initiation Of Proceedings Under Section 153A Of The Act, While The Assessments Which Have Attained Finality Cannot Be Disturbed Unless Materials Gathered In The Course Of Proceedings Under Section 153A Of The Act Established Otherwise.

Section 143(1)(a)Section 153Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 263

…, while the assessments which have attained finality cannot be disturbed unless materials gathered in the course of proceedings under section 153A of the Act established otherwise. 18. Thereafter, the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia 352 ITR 493, interpreted the provisions of section 153A of the Act at length, and held that as against the earlier block assessment procedure which roped in only the undisclosed income and the regular assessment proceedings were preserved, resulting in multiple assessments, under the present assessment procedures prescribed under section 153A/B/C of the Act,…

Shri Mahesh D. Gupta, Nagpur vs. ACIT-Central-Circle-2(3), Nagpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 183/NAG/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Loya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT

Section 131Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…vs. DCIT (2017) 88 taxmann.com 259 (Kol. Trib) • CIT (Central) vs. Murli Agro Products Ltd.[2014] 49 taxmann.com 172 (Bom.) • CIT Vs. Pratibha Industries Ltd.[2013] 141 ITD 151 • CIT Vs. Lancy Constructions [2016] 383 ITR 168 • CIT Vs. Anupkumar Bhatia (2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del.) • Jai Steel India Jodhpur Vs. ACIT (2013) Tax Pub. (DT) 1647 (Raj.) (3) The copy statement of assessee recorded u/s 131 on 11-09- 2009 relied upon by AO and reproduced in assessment order was not 5 provided to the assessee inspite of repeated requests made to the Investigation Wing and AO.” 3. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue reli…

M/S Kurele Fragranes Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3198/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar,CAFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra . DR

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…f search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment.” 8. The Hon'ble High Court has also taken note of the judgment of their earlier judgment in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia reported in [2013] 352 ITR 493 (Del) and observe that this was not the issue before the Court. Again in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Meeta Gutgutia’s (supra), their Lordships have again reiterated the same principle in a very detailed manner and have also distinguished one of their earlier judgment in the case of Smt. Dayawanti Gupta reported in 390 ITR 496. The relevant observatio…

M/S Kurele PAN Products Pvt. Ltd., Dehradun vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3051/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar,CAFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra . DR

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…f search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment.” 8. The Hon'ble High Court has also taken note of the judgment of their earlier judgment in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia reported in [2013] 352 ITR 493 (Del) and observe that this was not the issue before the Court. Again in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Meeta Gutgutia’s (supra), their Lordships have again reiterated the same principle in a very detailed manner and have also distinguished one of 7 their earlier judgment in the case of Smt. Dayawanti Gupta reported in 390 ITR 496. The relevant observa…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Ajmer vs. M/S Shri Rajlaxmi Denim, Bhilwara

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 1134/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Bhateja (ITP)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 124(3)Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)Section 292BSection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1134/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2015-16 cuke Deputy Commissioner of M/s Shri Rajlaxmi Denim, Vs. Income Tax, No. 35, Badal Complex, Central Circle, Ajmer. Bhilwara. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AASCS 5931 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering & Infrasturcture Limited, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1540/HYD/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai

Section 153ASection 2Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…under section 153A would not result in any addition and the assessment passed earlier may have to be reiterated. In this regard, Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court referred to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del.) wherein it was held that where an assessment order has already been passed either under section 143(1)(a) or 143(3), the A.O. is empowered to reopen those proceedings and re- assess the total income taking note of the undisclosed income, if any, un-earthed during the search. While highlighting these observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High C…

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering & Infrasturcture Ltd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 610/HYD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai

Section 153ASection 2Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…under section 153A would not result in any addition and the assessment passed earlier may have to be reiterated. In this regard, Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court referred to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del.) wherein it was held that where an assessment order has already been passed either under section 143(1)(a) or 143(3), the A.O. is empowered to reopen those proceedings and re- assess the total income taking note of the undisclosed income, if any, un-earthed during the search. While highlighting these observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High C…

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering & Infrasturcture Ltd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 609/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai

Section 153ASection 2Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…under section 153A would not result in any addition and the assessment passed earlier may have to be reiterated. In this regard, Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court referred to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del.) wherein it was held that where an assessment order has already been passed either under section 143(1)(a) or 143(3), the A.O. is empowered to reopen those proceedings and re- assess the total income taking note of the undisclosed income, if any, un-earthed during the search. While highlighting these observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High C…

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering & Infrasturcture Ltd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 608/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai

Section 153ASection 2Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

…under section 153A would not result in any addition and the assessment passed earlier may have to be reiterated. In this regard, Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court referred to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del.) wherein it was held that where an assessment order has already been passed either under section 143(1)(a) or 143(3), the A.O. is empowered to reopen those proceedings and re- assess the total income taking note of the undisclosed income, if any, un-earthed during the search. While highlighting these observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High C…

CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia

What is CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Shri Surya Kant Jaipuria, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

M/S.Geetanjali Space Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT CC-1(1), Mumbai

Smt. Kundan Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Kundan Singh, New Delhi

M/S Aggarwal Sales, Zirakpur vs. DCIT, CC, Patiala

M/S Aggarwal Sales, Zirakpur vs. DCIT, CC, Patiala

Shri Mahesh D. Gupta, Nagpur vs. ACIT-Central-Circle-2(3), Nagpur

M/S Kurele Fragranes Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur vs. ACIT, New Delhi

M/S Kurele PAN Products Pvt. Ltd., Dehradun vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Ajmer vs. M/S Shri Rajlaxmi Denim, Bhilwara

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering & Infrasturcture Limited, Hyd, Hyderabad

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering & Infrasturcture Ltd, Hyderabad

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering & Infrasturcture Ltd, Hyderabad

DCIT, Central Cirlce-2(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering & Infrasturcture Ltd, Hyderabad