CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries

180 ITR 319High Court1989#426 most cited

What is CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries authority for?

The Assessing Officer lacks jurisdiction to make a reassessment if the very grounds on which the notice under Section 148 was issued are subsequently found not to exist. In such a scenario, the reassessment proceedings must be cancelled.

212

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries · Atlas Cycle Industries · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment jurisdiction · grounds for reassessment · validity of reassessment notice · cancellation of reassessment · Assessing Officer jurisdiction

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries

Indo Pacific Finlease Ltd, Chandigarh vs. PCIT Chandigarh 1, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals are filed by the

ITA 448/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrilaliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं . / I.T.A. Nos.448 & 449/Chd/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Vs Pcitchandigarh 1, Chandigarh Indo Pacific Finlease Ltd., Sco-98-99, Sector 34 Sub City Centre, Chandigarh 160002 स्थायीलेखासं./Panno. Aaaci2176E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By : Sh. Ashok Goel, C.A. Revenue By : Sh.Rohit Sharma, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing :19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement ;16/04/2025 Physical Hearing Order Per Laliet Kumar, J.M.: Both The Appeals Are Being Filed By The Assessee, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chandigarh-1 Dated 28.03.2024& 23.03.2024 U/S 263 For The Assessment Years: 2014-15& 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Common Grounds Of Appeal In Ita Nos.448 & 449/Chd/2024 As Under:

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Sh.Rohit Sharma, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 203(1)Section 263

…NDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS DCIT, CIRCLE-16 (1), DELHI (DEL-Trib.) 2024 ITL 687 Fortune metalics limited Vs DCIT Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench ITA 1090/chd/2019 2021 ITL 50 Smt. Simar Kaur V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 212 TTJ 236 Atlas Cycle Industries, 180 ITR 319 M/s Century Fiscal Services LTD V. Income Tax Officer 2020 ITL 3642 (CAL-HC) 2024 ITL 949 : (2024) 298 Taxman 673 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, KOLKATA V. SHRI SANJAY MEНТА • M/s Prince Polutry Farm, C/o Shri Nitin Bhasin, Advovcate V. The PR. CIT, Panchkula 2023 ITL 4604 11. The learned Departmental Representative (DR) supported the…

Lakhmi Chand Yadav, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue

ITA 516/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 516/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Lakhmi Chand Yadav, Vs Income Tax Officer, Village Mirzapur Hardet Haveli Ward-1(4), Mujehri, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaepy4744P Assessee By : Sh. M. K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12, Arises Against The Order Of Cit(A), Faridabad Dated 28.11.2019 In Case No. 10339/2018-19 In Proceedings U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. M. K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr
Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260A

…but has to be disjunctive. It is submitted that the judgment in the case of Majinder Singh Kang Versus CIT and Ors.6 , CIT Versus Atlas Cycle Industries 7 and (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) (2011) 336 ITR 136 2015 SCC Online Kar 7386 (2012) 344 ITR 358 (P&H) (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P&H) ITAT NO. 143 OF 6 Lakhmi Chand Yadav 2021 CIT Versus Shri Ram Singh 8 were taken note of and the said decision clearly applies to the facts of the case on hand. 6. Mr. Bagaria placed reliance on the decisions in Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Jet Airways (I) Limited 9, Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Versus CIT 10, Principal Commissioner of I…