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

DCIT4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Arcadia Share & Stock Brokers P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal Revenue is dismissed and the CO of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5712/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 5712/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2008-09) The Dy. Commissioner Of Arcadia Shares & Stock Income Tax, Circle 4(1)(1) Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 640, 6Th Floor, 328/324, Ninad Chs, 1St Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Floor, Bldg No. 7, Service Mumbai-400 020 Road, Near Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan, Mumbai-400 051 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aaaca4562G प्रत्याक्षेप M./ Co No. 44/Mum/2019 (Arising In Ita No. 5712/Mum/2017 For Ay 2008-09) Arcadia Shares & Stock The Dy. Commissioner Of Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Circle 4(1)(1) 328/324, Ninad Chs, 1St Room No. 640, 6 Th Floor, Vs. Floor, Bldg No. 7, Service Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Near Bhavishya Nidhi Road, Mumbai-400 020 Bhavan, Mumbai-400 051 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Satischandra Rajore, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Dr. K. Shivaram, Ms Neelam Jadhav, Ars सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13-05-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21-05-2019

For Appellant: Shri Satischandra Rajore, DRFor Respondent: Shri Dr. K. Shivaram
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…der section 148 of the Act is beyond four years. Here, it is to mention that this issue is squarely 12 CO No. 44/Mum/2019 covered in favour of assessee and against Revenue by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Foramer France (2003) 264 ITR 566 (SC). 10. In the similar circumstances, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Foramer France (Supra) has taken the view that the first proviso to section 147 of the Act lays down an exception whereby the AO is not permitted to exercise his jurisdiction in reopening the assessment beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment…

Haryana Distillery Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1452/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09 Haryana Distillery Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 16, Community Centre, Circle-11(1), New Friends Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabch0933K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate Shri Raj Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 4Th December, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-35, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31St March, 2010 Declaring Income At Rs.1,73,82,410/-. The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act Was Completed On 30Th December, 2010 At An Income Of Rs.1,73,93,322/-. Subsequently, The Assessing Officer Reopened The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act By Recording The Following Reasons:-

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 68

…T. & T.D.C. Ltd. ACIT (2010) 324 ITR 234 (Del); x) JSRS Udyog Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 313 ITR 321 (Del); xi) Wel Intertrade P. Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del); xii) CIT vs. Indian Farmers Fert. (2008) 171 Taxman 379 (Del); xiii) CIT vs. Foramer France (2003) 264 ITR 566 (SC); xiv) ITO vs. Madnani Engineering Works Ltd. (1979) 118 ITR 1 (SC). 8. So far as the allegation of the Revenue that the assessee has not fully and truly disclosed all material facts necessary for completion of the assessment is concerned, he submitted that the same is untenable in view of the fact that the issue has been the subject matter…

Muktha Infrastructure (P) Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward -4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 361/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.361/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 M/S. Muktha Infrastructure (P) Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 4/318, Marg Axis, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Vs. Corporate Ward 4(1), Kottivakkam, Chennai 600 041. Chennai. [Pan: Aafcm0703Q] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Shri D. Anand, Advocate अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Vijayaprabha, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 8, Chennai Dated 06.11.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. The Ground Raised By The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Upholding The Reopening Of Assessment Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] & Also Confirming The Addition Of ₹.3,10,33,094/- Under Section 115Jb Of The Act.

For Respondent: Ms. Vijayaprabha, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…n disclosing material facts necessary for completion of assessment, the reassessment made under section 147 of the Act beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year is bad in law. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Foramer France [264 ITR 566] affirmed the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Foramer France [247 ITR 436], wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that when there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts for assessment, the assessment cannot be reopened under section 147 of the Act and is barred by…