CIT v. Corporation Bank Ltd.

254 ITR 791Supreme Court of India2002#8918 most cited

What is CIT v. Corporation Bank Ltd. authority for?

Disclosure of amounts in a balance sheet filed with the income tax return is considered a sufficient disclosure of material facts. If such disclosure was made and verified during original assessment, reopening under Section 147 or 148 is not permissible on a mere change of opinion.

12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT vs. Corporation Bank Ltd. · 254 ITR 791 · SC · section 147 · section 148 · true and full disclosure · change of opinion · reopening of assessment · reason to believe · balance sheet disclosure · audited balance sheet · doubtful debt · interest suspense account

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 147(a)true and full disclosuremere change of opinionchange of opinionreopening of assessmentreason to believeincome-tax officerreassessment proceedingssection 142scrutiny assessmentundisclosed incomesection 139

Judgments citing CIT v. Corporation Bank Ltd.

Brand India Real Estate Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013
For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…the assessee and the same do not empower to revenue authorities to play a second inning by taking the shelter of section 148 of I Tax Act. Without prejudice to above submission it is submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Corporation Bank Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 791 (SC) has held that disclosure in balance sheet also amounts to disclosure. c) From the assessment record of original assessment proceedings and as submitted in forgoing paras in is apparent that during the course of original assessment proceedings this issue by duly raised by ld. AO, replied by assessee and verified by then AO. Thus, this issue w…

Nvidia Graphics Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee s party allowed

ITA 1111/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathi. Sr Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Nvidia Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Mahadevpura Village, Central Circle – 2(4), K. R. Puram Hobli, Marathalli Bangalore. Bagmane Goldstone Building, North Tower, Mahadevpura S.O, Bangalore – 560 048. Pan : Aabcn 9200 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 28

…Ltd.,, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court held that in absence of a failure on the part of the asseesee to furnish all material facts and disclosures, the reopening of assessment proceedings is invalid in law.  In the case of CIT vs Corporation Bank Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 791 (SC), the assessee was a banking company and interest was credited to interest suspense account since it was in the nature of a doubtful debt. The amount was disclosed in the balance sheet filed along with the return. The original assessment was done excluding such interest. In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that where the relevant s…

Bestline Properties Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO-12(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 3500/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy S

Section 148Section 68

…n of income the Appellant has filed Audited Balance Sheet with the Audited figures of Relevant Assessment Year and Preceding Assessment Year. This amounts to true and full disclosure by the Appellant. Reliance is placed on CIT vs. Corporation Bank Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 791 (SC). Cases relied: a) In the case of Yash Raj Films P. Itd v ACIT and Others reported in 332 ITR 428 the Hon'ble Bombay High Court held as under: Held, allowing the petition, that admittedly the question regarding allow ability of the sum in question as bad debt was specifically raised in the original assessment proceedings and on receiving expl…

ITO 8(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Sentia Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2661/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, Adv./Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 28

…ure of material facts. This has been held in sheet also amounts to disclosure of material facts. This has been held in sheet also amounts to disclosure of material facts. This has been held in numerous decisions such as: uch as: CIT vs. Corporation Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 791 (SC) • CIT vs. Corporation Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 791 (SC) Arthur Anderson & Co, vs. ACIT (2010) 324 ITR 240 (Bom) erson & Co, vs. ACIT (2010) 324 ITR 240 (Bom) 5.1.11 As stated, the appellant had already made a disclosure of all material stated, the appellant had already made a disclosure of all material stated, the appellant had already made a dis…

Lokesh Talanki, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 261/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Waghale CAFor Respondent: Shri Shehnawaz Ul Rahaman Addln CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 54F

…the assessee are disclosed was produced before the AO at the time of regular assessment and therefore the reopening is done on the basis of a mere change of opinion by the AO. In this regard the learned AR placed reliance on CIT vs Corporation Bank Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 791 (SC). The learned AR also submitted the details submitted before the AO during the course of regular assessment. 6. The learned DR submitted that the nature and character of the asset sold during the assessment year 2015-16 was never verified by the AO and had he done it with due diligence the ownership of two Page 5 of 23 assets of two residen…

M/S Nxp India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commmissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 847/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Court) Notice for reassessment proceedings issued beyond expiry of four years is time barred in case of no failure on the part of the Assessee to disclose facts 17. CIT vs Foramer France [129 Taxman 72] (Supreme Court) 18. CIT vs Corporation Bank Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 791 (Supreme Court) S Ganga Saran and Sons Pvt Ltd vs ITO & Ors 3 SCC 143 (1981) 19. (Supreme Court) Supreme Traverse (P) Ltd vs CIT & U013231TR 323 (2009) (Bombay 20. High Court) Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company vs CIT 308 ITR 38 (2009) 21. (Delhi High Court) Gujarat Ginning & Mfg Co Ltd vs CIT 108 ITR 674 (1977) (Gujarat High 22. Court) Modepr…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Dibrugarh vs. T & T Projects Ltd., Guwahati

In the result and for the reasons discussed above, we find no merit in this appeal

ITA 208/GTY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.208/Gau/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Bhardwaj, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Goenka, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…/s 80-IB on the ground that the value of plant and machinery exceeded Rs. 1 crore. Similar views that disclosure in Balance Sheet amounts to disclosure for purpose of section 147 of the Act, had been held in the following cases: i) Corporation Bank Ltd (2002) 254 ITR 791 (SC) ii) Arthus Anerson& Co v AClT (2010) 324 ITR 240 (Bom) 9. We note that when there is no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts and when income is reassessed based on same sets of facts that were available earlier, the assessee cannot be said to have failed in its duty of disclosing material facts. In view of the fact…

M/S Alp Overseas Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6140/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi Before : Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 6140/Del./2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 ALP Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 25/31, vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), East Patel Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN : AAACG6366L (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by Shri Baljit Singh, CA Assessee by Shri S.R. Senapati, Sr DR Date of Hearing 20.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement 30.07.2018 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-I, New Delhi dated 07.09.2015 for the assessment…

Jilco Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3409/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Kumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Ominingsen, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…asis of change of opinion. In defence of his argument the Ld. A.R. relied on a series of decisions namely; (a) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) (b) CIT vs. Foramer France [2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) (c) CIT vs. Corporation Bank Ltd. [2002] 254 ITR 791 (SC) (d) CIT vs. Andhra Bank Ltd. [1997] 225 ITR 447 (SC). The another alternative plea taken by the Ld. A.R. was that the proceedings under section 148 read with section 147 of the Act were initiated on the basis of objection filed by audit party and therefore it is not permissible under Act. On merit Ld. A.R. relied on the decision of Jurisdic…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Punjab & Sind Bank, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2732/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Punjab & Sind Bank, Circle-20(1), Ho Accounts & Audit New Delhi Department, Bank House 21, Rajendra Place, New Delhi Pan:Aaacp1206G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 147Section 148

…sessment. There was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly material fact of the computation of total income. This stand of the assessee is also supported by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Corporation Bank 254 ITR 791. The Hon Supreme court held that “Turning attention to the first question as regards the provisions under section 147(a) be it noted and as the facts depict, there is no failure on the part of the assessee in furnishing the particulars pertaining to the above noted sum as not recoverable for the relevant accounting year and the statements filed a…

Shapoorji Pallanji and Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3053/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Shapporji Pallonji Centre, Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Vs. 41/44 Minoo Desai Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Colaba Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaacs6994C

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…escaped assessment, thus, the law does not permit such a action. The following decisions supports our view:- 1) CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del.) 2) Sheth Brother vs JCIT (2001) 251 ITR 270 (Guj.) 3) CIT vs Corporation Bank Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 791 (SC) 4) Garden Silk Mills P. Ltd. Vs DCIT (1999) 237 ITR 668 (Guj.) 5) CIT vs Hickson & Dadajee Ltd. (1980) 121 ITR 368 (Born.) 6) Jindal Photo Films Ltd. vs DCIT (1998) 234 ITR 170 (Del.) 7) Garden Silk Mills vs DCIT (1996) 222 ITR 68 (Guj.) 8) Mercury Travels DCIT (2002) 258 ITR 533 (Cal.) 9)JCIT vs George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. (2002) 258 ITR…

Concorde Motors (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD) 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 234/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: S/Sh.Joginder Singh & Rajendraआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./234/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2003-04 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Concorde Motors (India) Ltd. The Acit, Circle-(Osd)-2(1) 3Rd Floor, Nanavati Mahalaya, 16, Homi Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mody Street, Hutatma Chowk Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 001. Pan:Aaacm 0154 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ganesh Bare-Dr Assessee By: Shri Farrokh V.Irani-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23.05.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 24.06.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dt. 04.10.2012 Of Cit(A)-4,Mumbai, The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Servicing & Maintenance Of Vehicles, Filed Its Return Of Income 05.01.2006, Declaring Total Income At Nil .The Assessment Order U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act, Was Passed On 3.12.2008,Determining The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.58,53, 770/-.

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh V.Irani-ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 79

…g was based on very same records available on the file of AO, that there was no new or fresh material for forming the belief of escapement of income. He referred to the cases of Kelvinator India Ltd.(320ITR561);Foramer France(264 ITR566);Corporation Bank Ltd.(254 ITR 791);Asterioidds Trading and Investments P. Ltd. (308ITR190); Sanghvi Swiss Refills P.Ltd.(300ITR276);Bhavesh Developers (329ITR 249); Multi screen media Private Limited(324ITR54);Siemens Information systems Ltd. (295 ITR 333)and Godrej Agrovet Ltd(290ITR252).The Departmental Representative (DR)supported the order of the AO and the FAA. 5.We have he…

CIT v. Corporation Bank Ltd. (254 ITR 791) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax