CIT v. Batra Bhatta & Co.

319 ITR 221High Court2009#5031 most cited

What is CIT v. Batra Bhatta & Co. authority for?

Reasons recorded for reassessment must be based on material that has a live nexus with the belief of escapement of income.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Batra Bhatta & Co. · section 147 · section 148 · reasons recorded · validity of reopening · fresh tangible material · live nexus · escapement of income

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 65B
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 55(2)section 139(9)section 49fresh tangible materialsection 55going concernvaluation of sharesfull value of considerationtransfer of capital assetindexed cost of acquisitiondate of transfersection 48

Judgments citing CIT v. Batra Bhatta & Co.

M/S. Meditronics India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6251/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahui. T. Appeal No. 6251/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-2005. M/S. Meditronics India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 41, Pocket–Ii, Jasola, Vs. Ward : 6 (3), D E L H I – 110 025. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm 3622 Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri Gudrun Nehra, Sr. D. R
Section 147

…6 Inductotherm (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT SCA vii. 858 of 2006) HC (Gujarat) Telco Dadajee Dhackjee Ltd. vs DCIT, viii. ITA No. 4613/Mum/2005 12 May 2010 Third Member Jay Bharat Maruti Ltd. vs CIT ix. 324 ITR 289 Delhi High Court Shipra Srivastava vs ACIT x. 319 ITR 221 Delhi High Court CIT vs Batra Bhatta Co. xi. 174 Taxman 444 Delhi High Court Prashant S. Joshi and Dattaram Shridhar Bhosale vs xii. ITO and UOI 324 ITR 154 Bombay High Court ACIT vs O.P. Chawla xiii. 114 ITD 69 ITAT Third Member Dy.CIT Vs. M/s SPA Enterprises Limited xiv. 10 I. T. Appeal No. 6251/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-2005. (ITA No.4…

Smt. Chaya Sinha, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2462/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shria.T.Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh.Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh Susan George, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)

…he officer, subsequent to finalization of the assessment u/s 143(1) and therefore the reassessment notice is without any foundation and hence not valid. He relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Sipra Srivastava and another Vs. ACIT 319 ITR 221. d. He further stated that reopening was made as per the reasons recorded, holding that the land in question was situated in adjoining area Tehsil Palwal. Further the report Page 5 of 11 of the inspector shows that from that area the distance of the main land is about 11 kms. Therefore there is wrong assumption of the fact. 7. In view of the fac…

M/S Veena Enterprises Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2517/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. H. S. Sidhu, Jm Ita No. 2517/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 M/S Veena Enterprises Ltd., Vs Assistant Commissioner Of 81, Vigyan Vihar, Income Tax, Circle 17(1), New Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacv3918K Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Sh. Rohit Garg, Fca Sh. Deepesh Jain, Ca & Sh. Udit Naresh, Adv. Revenue By: Sh. J. P. Chandrakar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2015 Order Per N.K. Saini, A.M. This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.01.2013 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-19, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Sh. Rohit Garg, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. J. P. Chandrakar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…assessment u/s 147 of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC) " CIT Vs Orient Craft Ltd. 354 ITR 536 (Del) " Mohan Gupta (HUF) Vs CIT (2014) 366 ITR 115 (Del) " Shipra Srivastava Vs ACIT 319 ITR 221 (Del) " Telco Dadajee Dhackjee Ltd. Vs DCIT, ITA No. 4613/Mum/2005 (TM) (Mum) order dated 12.05.2010 16. It was further submitted that all the information were furnished by the assessee to the AO. Therefore, the reassessment framed was only a change of opinion. 16 Veena Enterprises Ltd. 17. In his rival submissions the ld. DR strongly supported…