CIT v. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd.

240 Taxmann 659High Court#10390 most cited

What is CIT v. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

An Assessing Officer must record specific reasons demonstrating the assessee's failure to fully and truly disclose material facts before reopening an assessment under Section 147. A mere change of opinion by the AO does not suffice.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. · 240 Taxmann 659 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment · reopening assessment · failure to disclose · material facts · change of opinion · reasons recorded

Judgments citing CIT v. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd.

Eci Engineering & Construction Company Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 968/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. ECI Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AAACE74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/s. ECI Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. PAN : AAACE74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas Rev…

DCIT, Circle-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Eci Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. ECI Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AAACE74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/s. ECI Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. PAN : AAACE74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas Rev…

Gmr Air Cargo & Aerospace Engineering Ltd(Successor to Gmr Hyderabad Air Cargo & Logistics Pvt Ltd), Shamshabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 183/HYD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Gmr Air Cargo & Vs. Ito,Ward-2(3) Aerospace Engineering Signature Towers Ltd.(Successor To Gmr Kondapur, Kothaguda Hyderabad Air Cargo & Opp. Botanical Gardens Logistics Pvt Ltd.) R.R.District Rajiv Gandhi International Hyderabad-500 084 Airport, Samshabad Hyderabad-500 409

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2008-09 GMR Air Cargo and Vs. ITO,Ward-2(3) Aerospace Engineering Signature Towers Ltd.(Successor to GMR Kondapur, Kothaguda Hyderabad Air Cargo and Opp. Botanical Gardens Logistics Pvt Ltd.) R.R.District Rajiv Gandhi International Hyderabad-500 084 Airport, Samshabad Hyderabad-500 409 PAN : AACCD8269K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.C.Devdas Revenue by: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR Date of hearing: 08.09.2022 Date of pronouncement:…

M/S. Ue Development India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2381/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ange of opinion. Hence in our opinion, there was no fault on the part of assessee to disclose full and truly all the material facts necessary for the assessment. Further as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR in the case of CIT Vs. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. 240 Taxmann 659, it was held that reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, no where the A.O. states that there was failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts during the assessment year under consideration. It is for the Assessing Officer to apply his mind through mentioning reasons. He has to justify through his reasons.…

Tata Advanced Materials Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(4), Bangalore

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2182/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ange of opinion. Hence in our opinion, there was no fault on the part of assessee to disclose full and truly all the material facts necessary for the assessment. Further as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR in the case of CIT Vs. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. 240 Taxmann 659, it was held that reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, no where the A.O. states that there was failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts during the assessment year under consideration. It is for the Assessing Officer to apply his mind through mentioning reasons. He has to justify through his reasons.…

M/S Tata Advanced Materials Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(4), Bangalore

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2181/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ange of opinion. Hence in our opinion, there was no fault on the part of assessee to disclose full and truly all the material facts necessary for the assessment. Further as rightly pointed out by the ld.AR in the case of CIT Vs. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. 240 Taxmann 659, it was held that reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, no where the A.O. states that there was failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts during the assessment year under consideration. It is for the Assessing Officer to apply his mind through mentioning reasons. He has to justify through his reasons.…

Epsilon Advisors P. Ltd., Bangalore vs. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1608/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/s. Epsilon Advisors The Deputy Pvt. Ltd., No. 642, 4th Main, Commissioner of ITA Nos. 1569 & 2nd Stage, Income Tax, 1600/Bang/2014 Circle – 4 (1) (1), Indira Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 38. PAN: AAACE4111H 2006-07 M/s. Epsilon Advisors Pvt. Ltd., The Commissioner of No. 642, 4th Main, ITA Nos. 1607 & Income Tax (Appeals) 2nd Stage, 1608/Bang/2014 – I, Indira Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 38. PAN: AAACE4111H As…

Epsilon Advisors P. Ltd., Bangalore vs. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1607/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/s. Epsilon Advisors The Deputy Pvt. Ltd., No. 642, 4th Main, Commissioner of ITA Nos. 1569 & 2nd Stage, Income Tax, 1600/Bang/2014 Circle – 4 (1) (1), Indira Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 38. PAN: AAACE4111H 2006-07 M/s. Epsilon Advisors Pvt. Ltd., The Commissioner of No. 642, 4th Main, ITA Nos. 1607 & Income Tax (Appeals) 2nd Stage, 1608/Bang/2014 – I, Indira Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 38. PAN: AAACE4111H As…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Epsilon Advisors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1600/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/s. Epsilon Advisors The Deputy Pvt. Ltd., No. 642, 4th Main, Commissioner of ITA Nos. 1569 & 2nd Stage, Income Tax, 1600/Bang/2014 Circle – 4 (1) (1), Indira Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 38. PAN: AAACE4111H 2006-07 M/s. Epsilon Advisors Pvt. Ltd., The Commissioner of No. 642, 4th Main, ITA Nos. 1607 & Income Tax (Appeals) 2nd Stage, 1608/Bang/2014 – I, Indira Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 38. PAN: AAACE4111H As…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Epsilon Advisors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1569/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/s. Epsilon Advisors The Deputy Pvt. Ltd., No. 642, 4th Main, Commissioner of ITA Nos. 1569 & 2nd Stage, Income Tax, 1600/Bang/2014 Circle – 4 (1) (1), Indira Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 38. PAN: AAACE4111H 2006-07 M/s. Epsilon Advisors Pvt. Ltd., The Commissioner of No. 642, 4th Main, ITA Nos. 1607 & Income Tax (Appeals) 2nd Stage, 1608/Bang/2014 – I, Indira Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 38. PAN: AAACE4111H As…

CIT v. Chaitanya Properties Pvt. Ltd. (240 Taxmann 659) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax