CIT v. Foramer France

264 ITR 566Supreme Court of India2003#335 most cited

What is CIT v. Foramer France authority for?

Reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year are invalid unless the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Without such failure, the notice issued under Section 148 is time-barred and without jurisdiction.

253

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 368,155 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Foramer France · 264 ITR 566 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment beyond four years · failure to disclose material facts · full and true disclosure · time-barred notice · invalid reopening · mere change of opinion · tangible material · live link

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Foramer France

Rabindra Kumar Mohanty, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, Appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 300/CTK/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.300/Ctk/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Rabindra Kumar Mohanty, Vs Ito, Ward-2(2), C/O Dr. Basudev Mishra, Bhubaneswar Plot No.3C/1, 1St Floor, Near Raj Bhawan Square, Unit-8, Bhubaneswar- 751012 Pan No. : Abxpm 8506 B (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee : Shri Natabar Panda, Advocate By िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date : 21/12/2021 Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Captioned Appeal Filed At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Bhubaneswar (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 22.02.2016 For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. This Appeal Itano.300/Ctk/2016 Was Dismissed By This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 30.08.2017 On Account Of Non- Appearance On The Part Of The Assessee. Thereafter The Assessee Took The Matter Before The Hon’Ble High Court & The Hon’Ble High Court In W.P.(C) No.2487 Of 2019, Vide

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, Advocate byFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 234B

…total turnover as per form No.26AS. Since there was no other tangible material before Ld. AO to form the belief that the income has escaped assessment we in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Former Finance (2003) 264 ITR 566(SC) and also ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Balkrishna Hiralal Wani vs. ITO (2010) 321 ITR 519(Bom), are of the considered view that the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act in the instant case was not valid and reassessment proceedings deserves to be quashed. Ground No.1, 2 & 3 of the assessee’s appeal…

Shriram Epc Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 2425/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.2425/Chny/2019 Assessment Year: 2011 - 2012 Shriram Epc Limited, The Assistant Commissioner Of No.18/03, Income Tax, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Vs. Company Circle – 6(1), 1St Floor, R.A. Building, Chennai – 600 034. Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. [Pan: Aafcs 1410C] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By Mr. R. Sivaraman, Advocate : प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. S. Bharath, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2021

For Respondent: Mr. S. Bharath, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ble in the reasons recorded, the reopening is not valid. For the above preposition, the learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Vs. Foramer France reported in 264 ITR 566. He also relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Fenner (India) Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 241 ITR 672 and submitted that in view of the above two decisions of the Hon‟ble I.T.A No.2425/Chny/2019 :- 5 -: Supreme Court and the Hon‟ble High Court the reopening u/s.147 of the Income Ta…