CIT v. Chiel Communications India Pvt. Ltd.

354 ITR 549High Court2013#4848 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 366,339 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.

M/S Prosperous Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2648/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2006-07 Prosperous Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Vs Pr. Cit, 17-B, Mgf House, Delhi-7, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aadcp4389H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Gaurav Jain, Adv. Respondent By : Smt. Pramita Tripathy, Cit Dr

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Pramita Tripathy, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 40A(3)

…er issue could be examined by the AO. Similar view was held by the Hon’ble reported in 387 ITR 416 (Delhi), Oriental Bank of Commerce versus Additional CIT reported in 272 CTR 56 (Delhi) and CIT versus Cheil Communications India Private Limited reported in 354 ITR 549 (Delhi). 5.3 Thus, we are of the considered opinion the Ld. Pr. CIT could not have sought to revise an order passed under section 147 read with 143 (3) of the Act on an issue which was not a subject matter of the reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the first place and the of assumption of jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act loses…

Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd vs. DCIT, Circle-1

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 86/DEL/2006[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2000-01

For Appellant: Shri Akhelesh Kuamr, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Aasish Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148

…debarred for 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), 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 we test the facts of the instant case on the touchstone of the principle as discussed hereinabove, it turns out that all the four reasons taken note of by the AO before issuing notice u/s 1…

DCIT, Circle-1 vs. Tikaula Sugar Mills Ltd

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 442/DEL/2006[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2000-01

For Appellant: Shri Akhelesh Kuamr, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Aasish Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148

…debarred for 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), 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 we test the facts of the instant case on the touchstone of the principle as discussed hereinabove, it turns out that all the four reasons taken note of by the AO before issuing notice u/s 1…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Nandan Auto Tech Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 3166/DEL/2009[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: S/Shri Ved Jain, Ashish Chadha, AshishFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU ITA Nos. 3166 & 3203/Del/2009 Assessment Years: 2000-01 Deputy CIT, vs. Nandan Auto Tech Ltd., Circle 13(1), (Formerly known as M/s. Garg New Delhi. Forgings and Casting Ltd.), 12A/6, Saraswati Marg, Channa Market, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. (PAN: AAACG4005A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: S/Shri Ved Jain, Ashish Chadha, Ashish Goel, CAs & Pranjal Srivastava, Adv. Respondent by: Shri R.L. Meena, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 20 .08.2015 Date of pronouncement: 30 .09.2015 ORDER PER I.C. SUDHIR:…