CIT v. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd.

354 ITR 549High Court2013#4926 most cited

What is CIT v. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

When information comes to the assessing officer's notice in the course of proceedings under Section 147, it can be used to reassess income.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. · Section 147 · Section 148 · income escaping assessment · reassessment proceedings · information coming to notice · Bombay High Court · Delhi High Court · Jet Airways

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 133a(2a)disallowance under section 40(a)(ia)section 148(2)order under section 148a(d)income escaping assessmentsection 148a(b)section 148a(d)tangible materialescapement of incomesection 148asection 36(1)(va)reason to believe

Judgments citing CIT v. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd.

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 8(1) , MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 1444/MUM/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2020-2021
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194Section 250Section 40

…ourse of proceedings u/s 147. The\nHon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236\n(Bom) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi\nHigh Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549\n(Del).\nWe further notice that the coordinate bench in the case of Suraksha DB\nRealty.(supra) has applied the ratio in the above decision of the Pune Bench while\nconsidering the similar issue. We also notice that the Hon'ble Delhi Court in the\ncase of Adhunik Niryat Ispat Ltd (Supra) has considered the identical issue and held\nthat\n“The ret…

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly we direct the AO to delete the disallowance made under section\n36(1)(va) of the Act for AY 2019-20 & 2020-21 also.\n15. In result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2018-19 to AY 2020...

ITA 1443/MUM/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2019-2020
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194Section 250Section 40

…ourse of proceedings u/s 147. The\nHon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236\n(Bom) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi\nHigh Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549\n(Del).\nWe further notice that the coordinate bench in the case of Suraksha DB\nRealty.(supra) has applied the ratio in the above decision of the Pune Bench while\nconsidering the similar issue. We also notice that the Hon'ble Delhi Court in the\ncase of Adhunik Niryat Ispat Ltd (Supra) has considered the identical issue and held\nthat\n“The ret…

SHIVALIK VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 1442/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194ISection 250Section 40

…e course of proceedings u/s 147. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). 9. We further notice that the coordinate bench in the case of Suraksha DB Realty.(supra) has applied the ratio in the above decision of the Pune Bench while considering the similar issue. We also notice that the Hon'ble Delhi Court in the case of Adhunik Niryat Ispat Ltd (Supra) has considered the identical issue and held that – “The retu…

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3176/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…e course of proceedings u/s 147. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). 7. When we test the facts of the instant case on the touchstone of the principle as discussed hereinabove, it turns out that the only addition made by the AO out of the recorded reasons stands deleted. In view of the above referred judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Jet Airways (supra), we order to delete the addition of…

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3136/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…e course of proceedings u/s 147. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). 7. When we test the facts of the instant case on the touchstone of the principle as discussed hereinabove, it turns out that the only addition made by the AO out of the recorded reasons stands deleted. In view of the above referred judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Jet Airways (supra), we order to delete the addition of…

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3135/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…e course of proceedings u/s 147. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). 7. When we test the facts of the instant case on the touchstone of the principle as discussed hereinabove, it turns out that the only addition made by the AO out of the recorded reasons stands deleted. In view of the above referred judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Jet Airways (supra), we order to delete the addition of…

JSD STEEL P.LTD (FORMERLY CBS STEEL P.LTD),NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-5(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 2884/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 JSD Steel Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), (formerly CBS Steel Pvt. New Delhi Ltd.), C/o. S.B. Garg & Co., CAs, 20/17, Shakti Nagar, New Delhi-1100 07 PAN :AACCC7004P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Sachin Kumar, FCA Respondent by Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR Date of hearing 08.02.2023 Date of pronouncement 17.02.2023 ORDER The assessee has filed the present appeal challenging the order dated 05.12.2022 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for…

SUREAKSHA DB REALTY,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 30(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 482/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Suraksha Db Realty The Dy. Commissioner Of Behind Orchid Suburbia, Ground Income-Tax 30(3), Floor, Off; Link Road, Kandivali Room No.601, C-13, Vs. 6Th Floor, Bkc, (West), Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abofs0694R Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar Department By : Shri Op Sharma, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri OP Sharma, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69CSection 80

…/05/2019. The coordinate bench in that case followed the decision Sureaksha DB Realty; AY 11-12 of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Jet Airways Ltd (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) and CIT versus Cheil communications India private limited (2013) 354 ITR 549 (del). In that particular case the learned assessing officer initiated reassessment proceedings with respect to an escapement of income of Rs 4 lakhs. In the assessment the addition of ₹ 4 lakhs were paid and also apart from that another addition was made to the extent of 15% amounting to ₹ 81,405/– the additions were confirmed by the learned CIT…

MEGHANA KAILASH GIDWANI,,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -2,, SANGLI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessees are allowed on the legal issue

ITA 1803/PUN/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalश्री आर. एस.स्याल, उपाध्यक्ष के समक्ष आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.328/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

Section 68

…ioned in re-assessment notice are non-existent i.e. if no addition is made on the basis of the grounds which led to the initiation of re-assessment. Similar view has been taken by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Cheil Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). It has been brought to my notice that Pune Benches of Tribunal in the assessee- group cases has also taken similar view. Copies of such orders namely, ITA No.769/PUN/2014, dated 11.09.2019 and ITA No.329/PUN/2017, dated 12.02.2020 have also been placed on record. 7. The ld. DR candidly admitted that the facts and circumstances of instant a…

MEGHANA KAILASH GIDWANI,,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, SANGLI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessees are allowed on the legal issue

ITA 1802/PUN/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalश्री आर. एस.स्याल, उपाध्यक्ष के समक्ष आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.328/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

Section 68

…ioned in re-assessment notice are non-existent i.e. if no addition is made on the basis of the grounds which led to the initiation of re-assessment. Similar view has been taken by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Cheil Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). It has been brought to my notice that Pune Benches of Tribunal in the assessee- group cases has also taken similar view. Copies of such orders namely, ITA No.769/PUN/2014, dated 11.09.2019 and ITA No.329/PUN/2017, dated 12.02.2020 have also been placed on record. 7. The ld. DR candidly admitted that the facts and circumstances of instant a…

KAILASH KANHAIYALAL GIDWANI, L/H OF LATE DEVI K. GIDWANI,,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, SANGLI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessees are allowed on the legal issue

ITA 1800/PUN/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalश्री आर. एस.स्याल, उपाध्यक्ष के समक्ष आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.328/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

Section 68

…ioned in re-assessment notice are non-existent i.e. if no addition is made on the basis of the grounds which led to the initiation of re-assessment. Similar view has been taken by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Cheil Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). It has been brought to my notice that Pune Benches of Tribunal in the assessee- group cases has also taken similar view. Copies of such orders namely, ITA No.769/PUN/2014, dated 11.09.2019 and ITA No.329/PUN/2017, dated 12.02.2020 have also been placed on record. 7. The ld. DR candidly admitted that the facts and circumstances of instant a…

KAILASH KANHAIYALAL GIDWANI,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , CIRCLE- - 2,, SANGLI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessees are allowed on the legal issue

ITA 1794/PUN/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalश्री आर. एस.स्याल, उपाध्यक्ष के समक्ष आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.328/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

Section 68

…ioned in re-assessment notice are non-existent i.e. if no addition is made on the basis of the grounds which led to the initiation of re-assessment. Similar view has been taken by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Cheil Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). It has been brought to my notice that Pune Benches of Tribunal in the assessee- group cases has also taken similar view. Copies of such orders namely, ITA No.769/PUN/2014, dated 11.09.2019 and ITA No.329/PUN/2017, dated 12.02.2020 have also been placed on record. 7. The ld. DR candidly admitted that the facts and circumstances of instant a…

AMIT KANHAIYALAL GIDWANI,,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, SANGLI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessees are allowed on the legal issue

ITA 1789/PUN/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalश्री आर. एस.स्याल, उपाध्यक्ष के समक्ष आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.328/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

Section 68

…ioned in re-assessment notice are non-existent i.e. if no addition is made on the basis of the grounds which led to the initiation of re-assessment. Similar view has been taken by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Cheil Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). It has been brought to my notice that Pune Benches of Tribunal in the assessee- group cases has also taken similar view. Copies of such orders namely, ITA No.769/PUN/2014, dated 11.09.2019 and ITA No.329/PUN/2017, dated 12.02.2020 have also been placed on record. 7. The ld. DR candidly admitted that the facts and circumstances of instant a…

AMIT KANHAYALAL GIDWANI,,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, SANGLI

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessees are allowed on the legal issue

ITA 328/PUN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalश्री आर. एस.स्याल, उपाध्यक्ष के समक्ष आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.328/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08

Section 68

…ioned in re-assessment notice are non-existent i.e. if no addition is made on the basis of the grounds which led to the initiation of re-assessment. Similar view has been taken by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Cheil Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). It has been brought to my notice that Pune Benches of Tribunal in the assessee- group cases has also taken similar view. Copies of such orders namely, ITA No.769/PUN/2014, dated 11.09.2019 and ITA No.329/PUN/2017, dated 12.02.2020 have also been placed on record. 7. The ld. DR candidly admitted that the facts and circumstances of instant a…

P RAHIM ABDULLA,,RAIGAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2757/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2757/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 P. Rahim Abdulla, Mumbai – Pune Highway, Taluka, Kolhapur-410203. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Ajlpk6873B बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-4, ……""यथ" / Respondent Panvel. Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan Revenue By : Shri Abdhesh Kumar Jha सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2020 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2020 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-2, Thane Dated 30.09.2016 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Before Us, Deviating From The Original Grounds & Not Pressing The Additional Ground No.1, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Mentioned That The Additional Ground No.2 Is The Relevant Ground & The Same Should Be Adjudicated First In View Of The Applicability Of The Judgement Of The Hon’Ble Bombay High Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd., 331 Itr 236 (Bom.-Hc). The Said Additional Ground No.2 Is Extracted Hereunder :- “The Additions Of Rs.6,85,720/- Made To The Income Of The Assessee On Account Of Unsecured Loan From M/S. C.K. Traders & Rs.621/- On Account Of Bank

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Abdhesh Kumar Jha
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…e course of proceedings u/s 147. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del)." In the present case also as already discussed above the assessment was re- opened for the reason that the assessee has made huge cash deposits in his bank account which was not disclosed the department. The addition 4 of Rs.45,94,000/- made on this account has been deleted by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) accordingly in vi…

SAFEPACK INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2376/PUN/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Dec 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 80HSection 80I

…imited of proceedings u/s 147. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del). 11. When I test the facts of the instant case on the touchstone of the principle as discussed hereinabove, it turns out that the only reason taken note of by the AO before issuing notice u/s 148 is non-existent and, resultantly, there is no question of making any other addition or adjustment to the amount of income. I, therefore, set asi…

VISHESH INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 4464/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Batra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SL Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ge of opinion, which is not permissible under the law settled by the various Courts. To support his contention, he relied upon the following case laws:- i) Rallis India Ltd. vs. ACIT (2010) 323 ITR 54. ii) CIT vs. Cheil Communications India (P) Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549. iii) Gujarat Power vs. ACIT (2013) 350 ITR 266 iv) Lanxess ABS Ltd. vs. DCIT (Special Civil Application No. 17530 of 2011 dated 11.4.2012). v) Ralson India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2014) 43 taxmann.com 293 vi) CIT vs. Mirza International Ltd. (2015) 54 taxman.com 217 vii) CIT vs. Orient Craft 354 ITR 536 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the order…

SUBRATA SAHA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 41(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2395/KOL/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2004-05 Subrata Saha….…………….........…..…….……………………..…………………………………..……….……..Appellant C/O. D.J. Shah & Co Kalyan Bhawan 2 Elgin Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Avqps 9056 F] Income Tax Officer, Ward-41(2), Kolkata……………………………….…….…...…………….......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Satyajit Mondal, Addl. Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 28Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 25Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(1)Section 144(1)Section 147Section 250Section 68

…o debarred from making additions for other incomes chargeable to tax which escaped assessment and come to his notice subsequently in the course of proceedings u/s 147. The Honble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del) and CIT VS. Adhunik Niryat Ispat Ltd. (2011) 63 DTR 0212 (Del) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Honble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom). When I test the facts of the instant case on the touchstone of the principle as discussed hereinabove, it turns out that the solitary re…

DHARA SINGH,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2213/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri T.S. Kapooray: 2012-13 Dhara Singh Ito, Ward 1(2), C/O Rupinder Kumar Vs. Ghaziabad Aggarwal, Uttar Pradesh Advocate, Ab-1A/22, Sector-51, Noida -201301 (Pan: Czjps0155A) (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. V.K. Jiwani, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234CSection 48Section 50CSection 54F

…of the assessee had escaped assessment u/s 147 of the Act for the instant assessment year. Reliance was also placed on the following judgments: i) 336 ITR 136 (Del) M/s Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT ii) 331 ITR 236 (Bom)CIT v. M/s Jet Airways (I) Ltd. iii) 354 ITR 549 (Del) CIT v. Cheil Communication India (P) Ltd. iv) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) CIT v. Shri Ram Sing v) 341 ITR 240 (Del) CIT v. Software Consultants vi) 355 ITR 172 (Guj) CIT v. Mohmed Juned Dadani vii) 394 ITR 733 (Mad Martech Peripherals (P) Ltd. v. DIT) 8 It was also submitted that action u/s 147 has been taken mechanically on the basis of AIR inform…

PRAGATI FINSEC LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD -20(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 634/DEL/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalita No. 634/Del./2018 Assessment Year : 2002-03

For Appellant: Sh. Mayank Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. B.R.Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…ebarred from making additions for other incomes chargeable to tax which escaped assessment and come to his notice subsequently in the course of proceedings u/s 147. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 549 (Del) and CIT VS. Adhunik Niryat Ispat Ltd. (2011) 63 DTR 0212 (Del) has held to this extent. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom). When I test the facts of the instant case on the touchstone of the principle as discussed hereinabove, it turns out that the solitar…

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2