CIT v. Dr. N. Thippa Setty

322 ITR 525High Court2010#3683 most cited

What is CIT v. Dr. N. Thippa Setty authority for?

Reassessment under section 148 is illegal and without jurisdiction if the Assessing Officer lacks cogent and valid reasons for reopening the assessment, particularly when the basis for reopening, such as a statement under section 132(4), is subsequently withdrawn or retracted and the department accepts the retraction.

32

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Dr. N. Thippa Setty · section 132(4) · retracted statement · section 148 · reopening assessment · withdrawal of statement · assessment without jurisdiction · no cogent reasons · lack of valid reasons

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 131(1A)

Issues it is cited on

section 158bb(1)retraction of statementsection 158bbsurrender of incomesection 153c(1)section 131(1a)section 292bsection 34material facts necessary for assessmentblock periodfirst proviso to section 147admission of additional evidence

Judgments citing CIT v. Dr. N. Thippa Setty

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 66/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ed that statement recorded was erroneous and no reliance could be placed upon the same for making re- opening the assessment or making any addition. He relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Thippa Setty reported in 322 ITR 525, wherein held that “the statement made by the assessee u/s 132(4) of the Act were retracted not once but twice and the department had accepted the retraction. No pungent and valid reasons had been assigned by the AO for re- opening the assessment. There was no good and sufficient reason for re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act against…

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 65/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ed that statement recorded was erroneous and no reliance could be placed upon the same for making re- opening the assessment or making any addition. He relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Thippa Setty reported in 322 ITR 525, wherein held that “the statement made by the assessee u/s 132(4) of the Act were retracted not once but twice and the department had accepted the retraction. No pungent and valid reasons had been assigned by the AO for re- opening the assessment. There was no good and sufficient reason for re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act against…

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 64/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ed that statement recorded was erroneous and no reliance could be placed upon the same for making re- opening the assessment or making any addition. He relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Thippa Setty reported in 322 ITR 525, wherein held that “the statement made by the assessee u/s 132(4) of the Act were retracted not once but twice and the department had accepted the retraction. No pungent and valid reasons had been assigned by the AO for re- opening the assessment. There was no good and sufficient reason for re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act against…

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 63/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ed that statement recorded was erroneous and no reliance could be placed upon the same for making re- opening the assessment or making any addition. He relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Thippa Setty reported in 322 ITR 525, wherein held that “the statement made by the assessee u/s 132(4) of the Act were retracted not once but twice and the department had accepted the retraction. No pungent and valid reasons had been assigned by the AO for re- opening the assessment. There was no good and sufficient reason for re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act against…

M/S. Yashaswi Fish Meal and Oil Company, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 62/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shi V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ed that statement recorded was erroneous and no reliance could be placed upon the same for making re- opening the assessment or making any addition. He relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr. Thippa Setty reported in 322 ITR 525, wherein held that “the statement made by the assessee u/s 132(4) of the Act were retracted not once but twice and the department had accepted the retraction. No pungent and valid reasons had been assigned by the AO for re- opening the assessment. There was no good and sufficient reason for re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act against…

Maa Jagdambe Tradelinks Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asstt Comm of Income Tax Circle -12(3) (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1873/MUM/2022[ 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Maa Jagdambe Tradelinks Ltd. Asst. Cit, Circle-12(3)(2) Shop No. 7, Ground Floor, Mumbai A-Wing, Navkar Building, Vs. Yashwant Gaurav Complex, Nalasopara (W), Mumbai -400 101

For Appellant: Shri Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U. Matkarni
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

…sequently retracted by the deponent. The assessee has challenged the reopening on the basis that the retracted statement was held to be bad in law and had relied on the decision of Hon’ble Karnatka High Court in the case of CIT vs Dr. N. Thippa Setty [2010] 322 ITR 525 (Karnataka) along with the other decisions. 6. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR for short) for the assessee contended that the reopening of the assessee’s case based upon the statement of Shri Vipul Vidur Bhatt, which was subsequently retracted was bad in law, as the A.O. has failed to apply his mind and it was merely based on th…

Noble Tradelink Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Ward 1(5), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 302/JPR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 148Section 68

…ITR 302 (Guj) 3. PCIT vs Meenakshi Overseas Pvt Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 (Del. H.C.) 7 M/S. NOBLE TRADELINK PVT LTD. VS ITO, WARD 1(5), JAIPUR 4. Balaji Health Care Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO (2019) 199 TTJ 966 (Jaipur Trib) 5. CIT &Anr. Vs Dr. N. Thippa Shetty (2010) 322 ITR 525 (Ker.) 6. G.K. Consultants Ltd. VS ITO (ITA No.1502/Del/2013 dated 27- 06-2014 (Del. Trib) ACIT vs Adhunik Cement Ltd. (2018) 168 DTR 25 (Kol-Trib) 7. The ld. AR further submitted that the AO has reopened the assessment by invoking clause (b) of Explanation 2 to section 147 without recording any reason as to how he noticed that assessee has under…

Shri.J M Vrushabendraiah, Hospet vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 299/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Narayana K.R., D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250

…able Investment Co. [P.] Ltd. vs ITO G- Ward And Others 174 ITR 714 (Cal) (iv) Hindustan Lever Limited V. R.B. Wadkar, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 268 ITR 332 (Bom) (v) Birla VXL Ltd Vs ACIT [1995] 217 ITR 1 (Guj) (vi) CIT Vs. N. Thippashetty [2010] 322 ITR 525 (Kar) (vii) Assam Co. Ltd v. UOI 150 Taxman 571 (Gau) (viii) Commissioner of Income-tax-V v. Orient Craft Ltd. [2013] 29 taxmann.com 392 (DELHI) Shri J.M. Vrushabendraiah, Hospete Page 30 of 58 (ix) Prashant S. Joshi v. Income-tax Officer, Ward 19(2)(4) [2010] 189 TAXMAN 1 (BOM.) 6. The Ld. D.R. submitted with regard to ground Nos.1 to 6 of the…

Sri. H.J. Siwani, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Assessees are partly allowed to the extent indicated

ITA 601/BANG/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. Annamalli, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…x Court in the case of M/s.Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd., Vs. ITO & Others, reported in 130 ITR 1. vii) M/s. WEL Intertrade (P) Ltd and Another Vs. ITO, reported in 308 ITR 22(Delhi). viii)CIT Vs. Dr. N. TippaSetty in ITA No. 102, 105 & 106 of 2002, reported in 322 ITR 525 (Karn), wherein all the decisions have been considered and held that there is no reason to believe. ix) In view of the foregoing decisions of various Courts the appellant wishes to submit that the learned Assessing officer did not had any reason to believe that the income of the appellant has escaped assessment and hence the reopening of assessme…

Sri. M.J. Siwani, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Assessees are partly allowed to the extent indicated

ITA 600/BANG/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. Annamalli, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…x Court in the case of M/s.Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd., Vs. ITO & Others, reported in 130 ITR 1. vii) M/s. WEL Intertrade (P) Ltd and Another Vs. ITO, reported in 308 ITR 22(Delhi). viii)CIT Vs. Dr. N. TippaSetty in ITA No. 102, 105 & 106 of 2002, reported in 322 ITR 525 (Karn), wherein all the decisions have been considered and held that there is no reason to believe. ix) In view of the foregoing decisions of various Courts the appellant wishes to submit that the learned Assessing officer did not had any reason to believe that the income of the appellant has escaped assessment and hence the reopening of assessme…

M/S Navodaya Grama Vikas Charitable Trust, Mangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 553/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…held by him that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment and hence, it was submitted that the reopening of the assessment is bad in law. 4.4 The Ld. AR placed reliance on the judgment of the Karnataka High court in the case of CIT Vs Thippa Shetty 322 ITR 525 and the unreported decision 9 of the Karnataka High court in the case of CIT Vs Nagappa in Writ Appeal Number 928 of 1991. It was submitted that the single bench judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of A. Nagappa V. ACIT, wherein the reasons of the Assessing Officer, were elaborate, were reproduced, yet the High Court proceeded to qu…

M/S.Navodaya Grama Vikas Charitable Trust, Mangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 552/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…held by him that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment and hence, it was submitted that the reopening of the assessment is bad in law. 4.4 The Ld. AR placed reliance on the judgment of the Karnataka High court in the case of CIT Vs Thippa Shetty 322 ITR 525 and the unreported decision 9 of the Karnataka High court in the case of CIT Vs Nagappa in Writ Appeal Number 928 of 1991. It was submitted that the single bench judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of A. Nagappa V. ACIT, wherein the reasons of the Assessing Officer, were elaborate, were reproduced, yet the High Court proceeded to qu…