How many judgments cite CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries?

212 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries (180 ITR 319), spanning 2009 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 151.

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 367,154 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

Also reported as

46 Taxmann 315

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 151 Section 139(1)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 140a(1)section 215 section 207 section 2(43)section 13(1)(c)(ii)section 262 section 147(1)section 209 section 2(1)section 148(2)section 208 section 210

Judgments citing CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries

Meena Gupta, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(5), Faridabad

In the result, ITA.No.7376/Del

ITA 7372/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…pening of the assessment and as such, the same are liable to be quashed. In support of this contention, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee has relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319 (P&H), Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., SNG Developers Ltd., 404 ITR 312 and Order of ITAT, SMC-Bench in the case of Shri S.N.Arora/ Sapra in ITA.Nos.4251 & 4252/Del./2018 pronounced on 30.01.2020 in which it was held that “in case incorrect, wrong and non-existing reasons are recorded by the A.O. for reopening of…

A.C.I.T., Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata vs. Smt. Madhu Neotia, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2144/KOL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri S. S. Godara, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court]

Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…cision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High 4 I.T.A. Nos. 2143 & 2144/Kol/2019 Shri Harsh Vardhan Neotia & Smt. Madhu Neotia Court in the case of Shri Ram Singh 306 ITR 346 and the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319. The assessee also relied on the decision of Kolkata Bench of ITAT in the case of Dipti Mehta vs ITO (ITA No. 2032/Kol/2018 dated 01.03.2019) to contend that this legal position propounded in the various judicial pronouncements was further strengthened by insertion of Explanation 3 to section 147 by the Finance No. 2 Act 2009 with retrospective e…

A.C.I.T., Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata vs. Shri Harsh Vardhan Neotia, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2143/KOL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble(Kz) & Shri S. S. Godara, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court]

Section 147Section 148Section 14A

Rmp Holding (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 7243/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Rmp Holding (P) Ltd., Vs Ito, Shop No.9, Plot No.51, Block-C, Ward-20(3), Mahendru Enclave, Near Hans Cinema, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacr5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suresh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 5Th August, 2019 Of The Cit(A)-7, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 17Th August, 2011, Declaring A Loss Of Rs.20,53,019/-. The Case Was Scrutinized U/S 143(3) On 10Th March, 2014, Determining The Income At Rs.20,06,714/-. Thereafter, On The Basis Of Information Received During The Course Of Search & Seizure Operation In The Case Of Entry Provider Shri Anand Kumar Jain & Shri Naresh Kumar Jain & Subsequent Investigation That The Assessee Is A Beneficiary Of Rs.39,00,055/-, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Recording Reasons U/S 147. Subsequently, Notice U/S 148 Was Issued On 26Th March, 2018 After Obtaining Prior Approval Of The Pcit-7, New Delhi. In Response To The Same, The Assessee Filed A Letter Stating That The Return Already Filed U/S 139 May Be Treated As The Return Filed In Response To The Notice U/S 148 Of The Act. However, Another Letter Dated 7Th August, 2018 Was Issued To The Assessee Requesting Him To File The Return In Response To Notice U/S 148 Of The Act. The Assessee Ultimately Filed Its Return On 13Th August, 2018 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.4,053/-. Subsequently, The Ao Issued Notice U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The It Act & Copies Of The Reasons Recorded Were Also Handed Over To The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Barnwal, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

…reasons with that of the return submitted by the assessee and quashed the reassessment proceedings on account of non-application of mind. 9. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Atlas Cycles Industries , 180 ITR 319, he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that the Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment as both the grounds on which the reassessment notice was issued were not found to exist and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer did not get jurisdiction to make reassessment. He also relied on various other decisions 7…

Ak Lumber Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 8761/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh Dahiya, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/s A.K. Lumbers Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T 92/4, WHS Block - 2 Circle 1(1) Kirti Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AACCA 6546 N [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 08.07.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 10.07.2020 Assessee by : Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv Revenue by : Shri Jagdish Singh Dahiya, Sr. DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, With this appeal the assessee has challenged the validity of…

Aakshi Bajaj, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-50(5), New Delhi

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 264/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y.: 2011-12

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

…sessment recorded incorrect facts in the reasons for reopening of assessment. Therefore reopening of the assessment u/s 147 is clearly invalid and bad in law. I rely decision of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319. Further the AO after obtaining the AIR information wanted to verify the same and issued a letter of enquiry to the assessee. The AO thus did not apply in his independent mind to the information received from AIR. Since no proceedings were pending before AO when he issued the letter of enquiry to the assessee, therefore such enquiry letter was no…

Sheela Foam Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4096/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.4096/Del/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2005-06 Sheela Foam Ltd., C-55, Preet Vihar, Vikas Marg, New Delhi-110092. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaacs0189B Vs The Dcit, Central Circle-6, …………. ""यथ" / Respondent New Delhi-110016

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ngh (supra), Expln. 3 as inserted by Parliament would not take away the basis of that decision. The view which was taken by the Rajasthan High Court was also taken in another judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P&H) : (1989) 46 Taxman 315 (P&H). The decision in Atlas Cycle Industries (supra) held that the AO did not have jurisdiction to proceed with the reassessment, once he found that the two grounds mentioned in the notice under s. 148 were incorrect or nonexistent. The decisions of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Atlas Cycle Industries (supra) an…

M/S K R Construction, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Central-3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7615/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathak.R.Construction Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Basement, Hinal Residency Income Tax-Central-3 19Th Floor Datta Mandir Road Dahanukar Wadi Air India Building Kandivali(W) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 021

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER K.R.Construction Vs. Principal Commissioner of Basement, Hinal Residency Income Tax-Central-3 19th Floor Datta Mandir Road Dahanukar Wadi Air India Building Kandivali(W) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 021 PAN/GIR No.AANFK0144N Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue by Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri Naresh Jain, AR Date of Hearing 11/02/2020 Date of Pronouncement 28/02/2020 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER G.MANJUNATHA (A.M): This appeal filed by the…

M/S. Bull Riders Financial Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 1891/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Somil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…f the assessment. Thus, the assessee has not received any amount from M/s. Vasudeva Champ Finvest, Shri Suresh Gupta and M/s. Vasudeva Farms of Rs.13,50,000/-. 5.2. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs., Atlas Cycle Industries [1989] 180 ITR 319 (P&H) held as under : “Held, (i) that the Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment as both the grounds on which the reassessment notice was issued were not found to exist, and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer did not get jurisdiction to make the reassessment.” 14 ITA.No.1891/Del./2017 M/s. Bull Riders Financial Services (P) Ltd., Gha…

S.N. Arora/Sapra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee for the A

ITA 4252/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, C.A. And Shri Satyajeet Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…Act, 1961 may kindly be accorded for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2006-07. Umesh Kumar Income Tax Officer, Ward-23(2), New Delhi.” 9.1. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs., Atlas Cycle Industries [1989] 180 ITR 319 (P&H) held as under : “Held, (i) that the Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment as both the grounds on which the reassessment notice was issued were not found to exist, and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer did not get jurisdiction to make the reassessment.” 12 ITA.Nos.4251 & 4252/Del./2018 Shri S.N. Arora/Sapra, New Delhi. 9.2. Th…

S.N. Arora/Sapra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee for the A

ITA 4251/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, C.A. And Shri Satyajeet Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

Behat Holdings Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-4(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 8066/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Jain, C.A. And Shri Arpit Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “A”: DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.8066/Del./2019 Assessment Year 2010-2011 M/s. Behat Holdings Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 14, 4380/4B Murari Lal vs., Ward-4(3), Room No.385A, Street, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Central Delhi C.R. Building, PIN - 110 002. New Delhi. PAN AADCB7691L (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A. Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate, For Assessee : Shri Deepesh Jain, C.A. And Shri Arpit Goel, C.A. For Revenue : Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.01.2020 Da…

Charbuja Marmo (India) Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr.CIT- 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 4749/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

…ts mentioned in the reasons for reopening of the assessment are incorrect and non- 48 ITA.No.4749/Del./2019 M/s. Charbuja Marmo (India) Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. existent. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P & H) held as under : “Held (i) that the Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment as both the grounds on which the reassessment notice was issued were not found to exist, and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer did not get jurisdiction to make a reassessment.” 13.2. Since the facts are totally different as A.O. had reason to believ…

Devki Nandan Bindal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 4271/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 144Section 147Section 148

…“when notice for reassessment basing on non-existing reasons and provisions inapplicable at relevant time – Not constituting reasons to believe. Notice invalid.” The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs., Atlas Cycle industries (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P&H) held as under : “Held, (i) that the Tribunal was right in cancelling the reassessment as both the grounds on which the reassessment notice was issued were not found to exist, and, therefore, the Income-tax Officer did not get jurisdiction to make a reassessment.” 11.1. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ankita A. Choksey vs.…

Prakash Ramji Gavali, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(2), Thane

In the result, the appeal is allowed, in the terms indicated above

ITA 1087/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…(supra), Explanation 3 as inserted by Parliament would not take away the basis of that decision. The view which was taken by the Rajasthan High Court was also taken in another judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Atlas Cycle Industries [1989] 180 ITR 3191. The decision in Atlas Cycle Industries' case (supra) held that the Assessing Officer did not have jurisdiction to proceed with the reassessment, once he found that the two grounds mentioned in the notice under section 148 were incorrect or non-existent. The decisions of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Atlas Cycle Industries' case (supra) and…

Vibhut Builders & Engg. P.Ltd, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 7331/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam

Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…ing of the assessment. Thus, the A.O. recorded incorrect facts in the assessment order. Therefore, reopening of the assessment is clearly invalid and bad in law. I rely upon Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319 in which it was held that “initiation of re-assessment proceedings is invalid, if the ground on which reopening have been done has disappeared or incorrect reasons have recorded.” Learned Counsel for the Assessee further stated that A.O. in the reasons recorded has merely mentioned that assessee has undertaken all market transactions of 7000 shar…

Ganesh Ganga Investments Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 10(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 1579/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Ahuja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Parmit M. Biswas, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…is well settled Law if wrong facts and wrong reasons are recorded for reopening of the assessment, reopening of the assessment would be invalid and bad in Law. We rely upon Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319 (P&H). It is well settled Law that note already filed with return disclosing nature of capital receipt and no other tangible material found, therefore, 50 ITA.No.1579/Del./2019 M/s. Ganesh Ganga Investments Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. reopening of the assessment under section 148 was quashed. We rely upon Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kvf Securities (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Cross-Objection of the Assessee allowed and appeal of Revenue dismissed

ITA 5731/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: And Shri Himanshu Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg, Sr. D.R

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ntries received by the assessee in assessment year under appeal. These facts clearly show that A.O. recorded incorrect facts in the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High court in the case of Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319 (P & H) held that “when incorrect facts are mentioned in the reopening of the assessment, the reopening of the assessment is not valid and liable to be quashed.” In the present case, as noted above the reasons to believe contain no reasons but conclusion of the A.O. one after other. The A.O. recorded incorrect facts in the reasons. Thus, there is…

Balwan Singh, Kurukshetra vs. ITO, W-1, Kurukshetra

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

ITA 1441/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga &For Respondent: Shri Hemant Gupta, Sr.DR

Section 147

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए”, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH "ीमती "दवा "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं, एवं "ीमती अ"नपूणा" गु"ता, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1441/CHD/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Balwan Singh S/o Shri Kehar The ITO, बनाम Singh, R/o H.No. 2121/5, Vashisht Ward-1, VS Colony, Mohan Nagar, Kurukshetra. Kurukshetra. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AYBPS9443A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri B.M.Monga & Shri Rohit Kaura, Advocate राज"व क" ओर…

Abdul Samad, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(5), Ghaziabad

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 7404/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainiita No. 7403/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Hameeda Begum, Vs Income Tax Officer, W/O Shri Bundhu Khan, Ward-1(3), A-393-394, Sector-11, New Vijay Ghaziabad-201001 Nagar, Ghaziabad-201009 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahepb8139L Ita No. 7404/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Abdul Samad, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Shri Aas Mohammad, Ward-1(5), A-262, Nahal-2, Ghaziabad-201002 Ghaziabad-201302 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Issps5169A Assessee By : Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Sanjay Prashar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.08.2019 Order Both The Appeals By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Ghaziabad Dated 28.09.2018 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. I Have Heard Ld. Representatives Of Both The Parties & Perused The Materials Available On Record. Both The Parties Mainly Argued In The Case Of Assessee Abdul Samad & Have Stated That Issue Is Same In Both The Appeals, Therefore, Order In This Case Could Not Followed In The Case Of Assessee Smt. Hameeda Begum.

For Appellant: Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148

…sessment recorded incorrect facts in the reasons for reopening of assessment. Therefore reopening of the assessment u/s 147 is clearly invalid and bad in law. I rely decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries 180 ITR 319. Further the AO after obtaining the AIR information wanted to verify the same and issued a letter of enquiry to the assessee. The AO thus did not apply in his independent mind to the information received from AIR. Since no proceedings were pending before AO when he issued the letter of enquiry to the assessee, therefore such enquiry letter was no…