CIT v. Associated Food Products (P) Ltd.

280 ITR 377High Court2006#3268 most cited

What is CIT v. Associated Food Products (P) Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner can only invoke revisionary powers under section 263 if the Assessing Officer's order is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, requiring a prima facie finding on merits.

36

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Associated Food Products · section 263 · revisionary powers · erroneous order · prejudicial to revenue · prima facie finding · assessment order

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 131(1)(d)Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 45(5)(b)section 80hhc(3)section 23(2)section 145a(b)lack of enquiryinadequate enquirymalabar industrialsection 45(5)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)revision under section 263prejudicial to interest of revenue

Judgments citing CIT v. Associated Food Products (P) Ltd.

Subhash Chand Dhingra, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1063/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

For Appellant: Smt. Kavita Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 10(37)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 263Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…vs. CIT: 244 CTR 380 (Del.)  CIT vs. Vodafone Essar : 212 Taxman 184 (Del.)  CIT vs. Arvind Jewellers 259 ITR 502 (Guj.)  CIT vs. Ratlam Coal Ash Co. 171 ITR 141 (MP)  CIT vs. Mehrotra Brothers 270 ITR 157 (MP)  CIT vs. Associated Food Products (P) Ltd. 280 ITR 377 (MP)  CIT vs. Girdhari Lai: 258 ITR 331 (Raj.)  CIT vs. Raman Singh: 73 DTR 297 (MP.)  CIT vs. Development Credit Bank Ltd: 323 ITR 206 (Bom.)  CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd.: 262 CTR 604 (Del.) 19. On merits the ld counsel submitted that in the case of CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF), the Hon‟ble Supreme Court held in unequivocal terms that the a…

Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle-1(1), Gurgaon

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1061/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

For Appellant: Smt. Kavita Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 10(37)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 263Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…vs. CIT: 244 CTR 380 (Del.)  CIT vs. Vodafone Essar : 212 Taxman 184 (Del.)  CIT vs. Arvind Jewellers 259 ITR 502 (Guj.)  CIT vs. Ratlam Coal Ash Co. 171 ITR 141 (MP)  CIT vs. Mehrotra Brothers 270 ITR 157 (MP)  CIT vs. Associated Food Products (P) Ltd. 280 ITR 377 (MP)  CIT vs. Girdhari Lai: 258 ITR 331 (Raj.)  CIT vs. Raman Singh: 73 DTR 297 (MP.)  CIT vs. Development Credit Bank Ltd: 323 ITR 206 (Bom.)  CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd.: 262 CTR 604 (Del.) 19. On merits the ld counsel submitted that in the case of CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF), the Hon‟ble Supreme Court held in unequivocal terms that the a…

Satish Kumar Dhingra, Haryana vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), Gurgaon

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 1060/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmasubhash Chand Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Central Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpd8652J Satish Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aanpd1971A Ashok Kumar Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abupd6730B Giriraj Dhingra, Vs. Acit, House No. 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Achpd9434E

For Appellant: Smt. Kavita Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 10(37)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 263Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…vs. CIT: 244 CTR 380 (Del.)  CIT vs. Vodafone Essar : 212 Taxman 184 (Del.)  CIT vs. Arvind Jewellers 259 ITR 502 (Guj.)  CIT vs. Ratlam Coal Ash Co. 171 ITR 141 (MP)  CIT vs. Mehrotra Brothers 270 ITR 157 (MP)  CIT vs. Associated Food Products (P) Ltd. 280 ITR 377 (MP)  CIT vs. Girdhari Lai: 258 ITR 331 (Raj.)  CIT vs. Raman Singh: 73 DTR 297 (MP.)  CIT vs. Development Credit Bank Ltd: 323 ITR 206 (Bom.)  CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd.: 262 CTR 604 (Del.) 19. On merits the ld counsel submitted that in the case of CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF), the Hon‟ble Supreme Court held in unequivocal terms that the a…

M/S. North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd., Shillong vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - Shillong, Shillong

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 45/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 263

…ITA No. 45/GAU/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 & Assessment Year:2014-2015 M/s. North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-GUWAHATI ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Virtual Court Hearing] Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 45/GAU/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 M/s. North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited,………………………………………………… Appellant Brookland Compound, Lower New Colony, Shillong-793003 [PAN:AAACN9991J] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,....Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, M.G. Road, Shillong,…

M/S. North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd., Shillong vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - Shillong, Shillong

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 418/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 263

…ITA No. 45/GAU/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 & Assessment Year:2014-2015 M/s. North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-GUWAHATI ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Virtual Court Hearing] Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 45/GAU/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 M/s. North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited,………………………………………………… Appellant Brookland Compound, Lower New Colony, Shillong-793003 [PAN:AAACN9991J] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,....Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, M.G. Road, Shillong,…

Hemant Kumar Mulchandani, Jabalpur vs. DCIT Circle 1(1), Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 42/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 183Section 263

…eedings. The other of course is the investment in the sundry assets of the business, which appears to be of job work. Reference in this context is made to the decision by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Associated Food Products (P) Ltd. [2006] 280 ITR 377 (MP), wherein it stands held as under:- 10. …….. As is manifest the said authority has been governed by a singular factor that the order of the Assessing Officer is wrong. That may be so but that is not enough. What was the sequitur or consequence of such order qua prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue should have been focussed upon. That ha…

Privilege Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT - 14, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 3317/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax– M/S Privilege Industries Ltd. 14 3Rd Floor, Dheeraj Arma, Anant Room No. 415, Vs. Kanekar Marg, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecs6532N

For Appellant: Mr. Nimesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sanjay V. Deshmukh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 56(2)(viib)

…ew taken is erroneous particularly when a view is already taken after enquiry. AR further relied upon the decision of the coordinate bench in case of blue Dart express Ltd versus JCIT 75 ITD 414, honourable Delhi High Court in case of associated food products 280 ITR 377, honourable Andhra Pradesh High Court in 114 ITR 404 and Hon. Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Gopal purohit 228 CTR 582. He further submitted that the AO has held that the method of valuation of share is correct and accepted accordingly this is one of the possible view in accordance with the law and therefore he relied upon decision of ho…

Cygnus Vanijya Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-11(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 361/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 26Section 263

…ITA No. 361/KOL/2020 A.Y. 2015-2016 Cygnus Vanijya Private Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 361/KOL/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Cygnus Vanijya Private Limited,....................................................Appellant BL-East, 5 th Floor-5EB, 3A, Canel Circular Road, Kankurgachi, Kolkata-700054 [PAN: AADCC7075M] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Kolkata,......................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances…

Karan Polymers Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. PCIT-2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated herein above

ITA 270/KOL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Aby T. Varkey & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri Aby T. Varkey, Judicial Member & Sri Manish Borad, Accountant Member) I.T.A. No.: 270/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Karan Polymers Pvt. Ltd.........................................................Appellant [PAN: AABCK 3114 F] Vs. Pr. CIT, Kolkata-2................................................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv. and Ms. Puja Somani, appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Md. Ghayas Uddin, CIT (D/R), appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : February 28th, 2022 Dat…

Andritz Hydro P Ltd, Bhopal vs. Pr CIT-1, Bhopal

ITA 199/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing

Section 115JSection 253Section 263

…ons are required to be satisfied simultaneously – (i) the order should be erroneous and also (ii) prejudicial to the interest of Revenue as held in the cases Malabar Industrial Co. Limited vs CIT (243 ITR 83) (SC); CIT vs Associated Food Products (P.) Ltd. (280 ITR 377) (Madhya Pradesh HC); Manish Kumar vs Commissioner of Income-tax (16 taxmann.com 212) (Indore ITAT). We find that the assessee in its submission to the Ld. PCIT, the Appellant had explained that the deduction for utilisation/reversal of warranty provision has been claimed only in respect of the pre-merger provision brought from Andritz Hydro Pr…

Shri Shaligram Barod, Indore vs. Pr. CIT-1, Indore

ITA 625/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble’ Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Shri Shaligram Barod, Pr. Cit-I, Ah/29, Hig, Sukhliya Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. Ahfpp4068H Appellant By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri S.B. Prasad, Cit-Dr

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)Section 54Section 54BSection 54FSection 54F(1)

…(SC) 6.4.2] The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT (Central) v. Max India Ltd. as reported in [2007] 295 ITR 282 (SC) 6.4.3] The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Associated Food Products (P.) Ltd. as reported in [2006] 280 ITR 377 (Madhya Pradesh) 6.4.4] The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. as reported in [2009] 227 CTR 133 (Delhi) 6.4.5] The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT v. Jyoti Foundation as reported in [2013] 357 ITR 388 (Delhi) 6.4.6] The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Pr CIT-2 v. Shree Gayatri Associates…

Smt. Shweta Agrawal, Indore vs. The Pr. CIT-2, Indore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 280/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Shweta Agrawal Pr.CIT 82, Ashok Nagar, Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.AESPA1653H Appellant by Shri S.N. Agrawal, CA Revenue by Shri Puneet Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 20.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 21.12.2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (in short ‘Ld. Pr. CIT’)-2, Indore…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1764/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…and accepted in-turn by the revenue for several preceding years on the pretext of dubbing them as erroneous. In our view the answer has to be in the negative otherwise. 12.1 In the case of CIT v. Associated Food Products (P.) Ltd. Popular Bread Factory [20061 280 ITR 377 the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court while considering the issue as to whether the CIT had correctly exercised its power under section 263 of the Act by re-opening a block assessment, had cited with approval the following passage from the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. v. ITO [19781…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1763/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…and accepted in-turn by the revenue for several preceding years on the pretext of dubbing them as erroneous. In our view the answer has to be in the negative otherwise. 12.1 In the case of CIT v. Associated Food Products (P.) Ltd. Popular Bread Factory [20061 280 ITR 377 the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court while considering the issue as to whether the CIT had correctly exercised its power under section 263 of the Act by re-opening a block assessment, had cited with approval the following passage from the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. v. ITO [19781…

Technip Uk Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4284/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillai[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Technip Uk Limited Vs. The D.I.T. C/O Bmr & Associates Llp International - Ii 22Nd Floor, Building No. 5 New Delhi Tower ‘A’, Dlf Cyber City, Dlf Phase Iii, Gurgaon Haryana Pan : Aacct 8268 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Arora, Sr- DR
Section 263Section 4Section 44BSection 44D

…: 244 CTR 380 (Del.) • CIT vs. Vodafone Essar: 212 Taxman 184 (Del.) • CIT v. Ratlam Coal Ash Co: 171 ITR 141 (MP) • CIT vs. Ganpat Ram Bishonoi: 152 Taxman 242 (Raj.) • CIT vs. Mehrotra Brothers : 270 ITR 157 (MP) • CIT vs. Associated Food Profits (P) Ltd. : 280 ITR 377 • CIT vs. Development Credit Bank Ltd: 323 ITR 206 (B • 36. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue regarding taxability of in-country and out-country receipts in any case is debatable. Therefore, in view of the decisions of different Benches of the Tribunal and Hon'ble High Courts including the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Co…

CIT vs. M/S Escorts Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 14 / 1999HC Delhi01 Feb 2011
For Appellant: Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. R.M. Mehta, Advocate
Section 260ASection 263Section 80

…pted in-turn by the revenue for several preceding years on the pretext of dubbing them as erroneous. In our view the answer has to be in the negative otherwise. 12.1 In the case of CIT vs Associated Food Products P. Ltd & Popular Bread Factory (2006) 280 ITR 377 (MP) the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court while considering the issue as to whether the CIT had correctly exercised its power under Section 263 of the Act by re-opening a block assessment, had cited with approval the following passage from the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. vs I…