CIT v. Canara Bank

63 ITR 328Supreme Court of India1967#4257 most cited

What is CIT v. Canara Bank authority for?

Reopening of assessment is invalid if based merely on a change of opinion without any new tangible material, especially after a scrutiny assessment under section 143(3).

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Canara Bank · section 143(3) · section 148 · change of opinion · tangible material · reopening of assessment · reassessment proceedings · reason to believe · beyond four years · escapement of income

Also reported as

155 Taxmann.com 290

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 10(38)Section 139Section 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

beyond four yearsmere change of opinionchange of opinionprincipal commissioner of income-taxtangible materialreopening of assessmentescapement of incomesection 148areassessment proceedingsreason to believenotice under section 148section 40

Judgments citing CIT v. Canara Bank

ITO 16(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Surya Gems, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 292/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-16(2)(4), M/S Surya Gems, बनाम/ 02Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Flat No.4, 02Nd Floor, Tardeo Road, Bhaveshwar Sgar Patel Vs. Mumbai-400007 Compound 20 Napean Sea Road, Mumbai-400020 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aakfs6513Q याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri B.S. Bist-Dr यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By None ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2017 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 08/03/2017

…sessee relied on the decision of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank v CIT,240 ITR 355 and also on following decisions:- 1. Bank of Tokyo v IAC, 13 ITD 32 2. State Bank of Mysore v CIT, 114 ITR 704 (Kerala) 3. CIT v. Canara Bank, 63 ITR 328 (sc) 4. ONGC v DCIT, 83 ITD 151 (Delhi) Ld CIT (A) allowed the assessee‘s appeal, inter alia, observing that the assessee was offering profits resulting from such revaluation as and when they so arise and the AO had never objected to the profits which was shown on revaluation of outstanding foreign exchange forward contracts. In this regard, ld C…

Income Tax Officer-Ward-12(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Attire Arts Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Nishant Overseas Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2618/KOL/2013[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2006-2007
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ne of the transactions was notational in nature and loss has actually incurred. I have considered the facts of the case and the material brought on record and also submissions put forth on behalf of the appellant. In the case of CIT v. Canara Bank Ltd [ 1967] 63 ITR 328 (SC), it has been held that if by virtue of exchange operations profits are made during the course of business and in connection with business transactions, the excess receipts on account of conversion of one currency into another would be revenue receipts. But if the profit by exchange operations comes in, not by way of business of the assessee,…

Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2834/CHNY/2014[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Arun C. Bharath, IRS, CIT
Section 35D(2)Section 35D(2)(c)

…ery will not make the deposit a: capital asset. The assessee has relied on the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tata Locomotive & Engineering Co. Ltd 60 ITR 405. However in another decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Canara Bank 63 ITR 328, the Apex Court has held that foreign exchange gains are assessable as revenue receipt. Both the decisions of the Apex Court are delivered before the insertion of Section 43A of the I. T. Act. The Jurisdictional Madras High Court discussed the import of both the above decisions of the Apex Court in its decision in the case of M/s.Universal Spic…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2827/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Arun C. Bharath, IRS, CIT
Section 35D(2)Section 35D(2)(c)

…ery will not make the deposit a: capital asset. The assessee has relied on the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tata Locomotive & Engineering Co. Ltd 60 ITR 405. However in another decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Canara Bank 63 ITR 328, the Apex Court has held that foreign exchange gains are assessable as revenue receipt. Both the decisions of the Apex Court are delivered before the insertion of Section 43A of the I. T. Act. The Jurisdictional Madras High Court discussed the import of both the above decisions of the Apex Court in its decision in the case of M/s.Universal Spic…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2825/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2825, 2826 & 2827/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-2008. The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd, Income Tax, Vs. No.1, Sardar Patel Road, Large Taxpayer Unit -Ii, Guindy, Chennai 600 101. Chennai 600 032. [Pan Aaaca 4651L] (Department) (Assessee )

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Arun C. Bharath, IRS, CIT
Section 35D(2)Section 35D(2)(c)

…ery will not make the deposit a: capital asset. The assessee has relied on the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tata Locomotive & Engineering Co. Ltd 60 ITR 405. However in another decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Canara Bank 63 ITR 328, the Apex Court has held that foreign exchange gains are assessable as revenue receipt. Both the decisions of the Apex Court are delivered before the insertion of Section 43A of the I. T. Act. The Jurisdictional Madras High Court discussed the import of both the above decisions of the Apex Court in its decision in the case of M/s.Universal Spic…

D.C.I.T. Cir-12, Kolkata vs. Usha Martin Telematics Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee on this ground is dismissed

ITA 838/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, J.M. &Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: G. Mallikarjuna, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…ied by the A.O. (viz.Coca cola Exp. Corp. 158 ITR 446) is in favour of the appellant. ITA No. 838 & 815 /Kol/2009 A.Y.2004-05 Usha Martin Telematics Limited • The case on which reliance placed by the AO on the principle of revenue recognition ( CITVs.Mysore 63 ITR 328) can be distinguished on facts. • Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. 116 ITR 1, the case on which A.O. placed reliance to distinguish capital account with that of revenue account, the Apex Court only laid down the general principles for deciding the nature of ‘gain’ and the facts can be distinguished. • Foreign exchange gain is on account of fixed capital a…

ITO, Ward - 12(3), Kolkata vs. Umt Investment Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed subject to the direction contained hereinabove

ITA 554/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: S/Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjun, CIT/ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(2)

…. On the other hand, the case law relied by the ITA No. 554/Kol/09-C-AM M/s. UMT Investment Ltd 3 AO (viz Coca Cola Exp. Corpn 158 ITR 446 ) is in favour of the assessee. e. The case on which reliance placed by the AO on the principle of revenue recognition (63 ITR 328) can be distinguished on facts. f. Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd case (116 ITR 1) , the case on which AO placed reliance to distinguish capital account with that of revenue account, the Apex court only laid down the general principles for deciding the nature of ‘gain’ and the facts can be distinguished. g. Foreign exchange gain is on account of fixed ca…

Inventurus Knowledge Services P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee company is partly allowed

ITA 5922/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: - 2009-10 Inventurus Knowledge Services V. Income Tax Officer Pvt. Ltd. 5(2)(1), C/O. Seren Properties Pvt. Ltd. 525, Aaykar Bhavan, (Sez), Unit No. 204, Build No. 5, M.K. Road, Mindspace Airoli Camp, Plot No. Mumbai - 400 020. 3, Gat No. 95, Kalwa Trans, Thane Creek, Midc Industrial Area, Thane Belapur Road, Airoli, Navi Mumbai – 400 708. Pan/Gir No. Aabck4601P

…0 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial bank v CIT,240 ITR 355 and also on following decisions:- 1. Bank of Tokyo v Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, 13 ITD 32 2. State bank of Mysore v CIT, 114 ITR 704 (Kerala) 3. CIT v. Canara Bank, 63 ITR 328 (sc) 4. ONGC v DCIT, 83 ITD 151 (Delhi) Ld Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the assessee's appeal, inter alia, observing that the assessee was offering profits resulting from such revaluation as and when they so arise and the assessing officer had never objected to the profits which was shown on revaluation of outstanding foreign exchange forward co…