CIT v. Foramer France

232 CTR 260High Court2010#5135 most cited

What is CIT v. Foramer France authority for?

Reopening assessment proceedings after four years is invalid unless the assessee failed to disclose true and material facts.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Foramer France · section 147 · proviso to section 147 · failure to disclose true and material facts · reopening assessment · four years limitation · assessment procedure

Also reported as

247 ITR 463287 Taxmann 413

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 151Section 80ICSection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

true and full disclosureamp expendituresection 92bafresh tangible materialsanction under section 151first proviso to section 147transfer pricing ordermaterial facts necessary for assessmentsection 148(2)sanctioning authoritymere change of opinionkelvinator

Judgments citing CIT v. Foramer France

Lasco Chemie Private Limited, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), New Delhi, Delhi

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…utta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO: [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) - CIT v. Foramer France: [2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) - CIT vs. Motor & General Finance Ltd: [2009] 184 Taxman 465 (Del) - BLB Limited vs. ACIT: [2012] 206 Taxman 37 (Del) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACIT: [2010] 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd: [2013] 215 Taxman 495 (Del) - JSRS Udyog Ltd. v. ITO: [2009] 313 ITR 321 (Del) - Vatika Ltd. vs. ITO: [2013] 357 ITR 170 (Del) 13. In view of the above, it is submitted that the reassessment proceedings are barred by limitation in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act. Re (b): There is no valid reas…

DCIT, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2445/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ngs after the expiry of four years shall be invalid in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act unless there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose true and material facts. - CIT v. Foramer France: 264 ITR 566 (SC) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACTT: 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT v. Fenner India Ltd.: 241 ITR 672 (Del) - Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company: - Purolator India Ltd: 343 ITR 155 (Del) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In th…

DCIT, CC-20, Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2444/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ngs after the expiry of four years shall be invalid in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act unless there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose true and material facts. - CIT v. Foramer France: 264 ITR 566 (SC) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACTT: 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT v. Fenner India Ltd.: 241 ITR 672 (Del) - Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company: - Purolator India Ltd: 343 ITR 155 (Del) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In th…

DCIT, CC-20, Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2443/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ngs after the expiry of four years shall be invalid in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act unless there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose true and material facts. - CIT v. Foramer France: 264 ITR 566 (SC) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACTT: 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT v. Fenner India Ltd.: 241 ITR 672 (Del) - Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company: - Purolator India Ltd: 343 ITR 155 (Del) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In th…

DCIT, CC-20, Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2442/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ngs after the expiry of four years shall be invalid in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act unless there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose true and material facts. - CIT v. Foramer France: 264 ITR 566 (SC) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACTT: 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT v. Fenner India Ltd.: 241 ITR 672 (Del) - Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company: - Purolator India Ltd: 343 ITR 155 (Del) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In th…

DCIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi vs. Lotus Herbals P.Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 200/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ngs after the expiry of four years shall be invalid in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act unless there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose true and material facts. - CIT v. Foramer France: 264 ITR 566 (SC) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACTT: 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT v. Fenner India Ltd.: 241 ITR 672 (Del) - Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company: - Purolator India Ltd: 343 ITR 155 (Del) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In th…

Bses Yamuna Power Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-5(1), New Del;Hi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4853/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

…ta Discount Co. Ltd. Vs. ITO: [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) - CIT Vs. Foramer France: [2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) - CIT Vs. Motor & General Finance Ltd.: [2009] 184 Taxman 465 (Del) - BLB Limited Vs. ACIT: [2012] 206 Taxman 37 (Del) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. Vs. ACIT: [2010] 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.: [2013] 215 Taxman 494 (Del) - JSRS Udyog Ltd. Vs. ITO: [2009] 313 ITR 321 (Del) - Vatika Ltd. Vs. ITO: [2013] 357 ITR 170 (Del) 13. The ld. AR further submitted that the AO has failed to mention specific failure on the part of the assessee truly and fully disclosing the material / facts. The ld. AR stated…

Bses Yamuna Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4852/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

…ta Discount Co. Ltd. Vs. ITO: [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) - CIT Vs. Foramer France: [2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) - CIT Vs. Motor & General Finance Ltd.: [2009] 184 Taxman 465 (Del) - BLB Limited Vs. ACIT: [2012] 206 Taxman 37 (Del) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. Vs. ACIT: [2010] 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.: [2013] 215 Taxman 494 (Del) - JSRS Udyog Ltd. Vs. ITO: [2009] 313 ITR 321 (Del) - Vatika Ltd. Vs. ITO: [2013] 357 ITR 170 (Del) 13. The ld. AR further submitted that the AO has failed to mention specific failure on the part of the assessee truly and fully disclosing the material / facts. The ld. AR stated…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2444/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ngs after the expiry of four years shall be invalid in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act unless there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose true and material facts. - CIT v. Foramer France: 264 ITR 566 (SC) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACTT: 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT v. Fenner India Ltd.: 241 ITR 672 (Del) - Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company: - Purolator India Ltd: 343 ITR 155 (Del) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In th…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2443/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ngs after the expiry of four years shall be invalid in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act unless there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose true and material facts. - CIT v. Foramer France: 264 ITR 566 (SC) - D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACTT: 232 CTR 260 (Del) - CIT v. Fenner India Ltd.: 241 ITR 672 (Del) - Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company: - Purolator India Ltd: 343 ITR 155 (Del) 308 IIR 38 (Del.) - Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd. v. DCIT: 343 ITR 141 (Del) 23 - Avtee Ladi v, DCIT: 370 ITR 611 (Del) - CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) DCIT vs. Lotus Hearbals Pvt. Ltd. In th…

Nita Padamchand Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-24(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3122/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "K(SMC)" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. M. GolvalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Pardeshi
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "K(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Nita Padamchand Agarwal 706, 5/6, Manish Tower, Manish Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400058 Maharashtra [PAN:AAIPA4389E] …………. Appellant Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 24(3)(2), Mumbai Income Tax Office, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400012 Maharashtra …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri M. M. Golvala Shri Darshit Naik For the Respondent/Department : Shri Rajesh Pardeshi Date Conclusion of hearing : 07.08.2024 Pronouncement of order : 05.1…

Hero Motocorp Ltd (As Successor of Hero Investment P.Ltd), New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1053/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)

…as cited by Ld. Sr. Counsel. 1. CIT v. Foramer France: 264 ITR 566 (SC) 2. Purolator India Ltd: 343 ITR 155 (Del.) 3. CIT v. Motor & General Finance: 184 Taxman 465 (Del.) 4. Titanor Components Ltd. v. ACIT: 343 ITR 183 (Bom.) 5. D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACIT: 232 CTR 260 (Del.) 6. Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company: 308 ITR 38 (Del.) 7. German Remedies Ltd. v. DCIT: 287 ITR 494 (Bom.) 8. Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. ACIT: 268 ITR 339 (Bom.) 9. Grindwell Norton v. ACIT: 267 ITR 673(Bom.) 10. Orient Beverages Ltd. v. ITO: 208 ITR 509 (Cal.) 11. Peico Electronics & Electricals Ltd. v. DCIT: 210 ITR 991 (Cal.) 12. Kair…

Puri Oil Mills Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7726/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 44A

…however, remain the same." For the afore-stated reasons, we see no merit in these civil appeals filed by the Department, hence, dismissed with no order as to costs.” 20. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in the case of D.T & T.D. C. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 232 CTR 260 (Del) held as under:- “9. We may also point out that insofar as the assessment year 1997- 98 and 1998-99 are concerned, the same would require application of the proviso to Section 147 of the said Act, inasmuch as the notices under Section 148 of the said Act in respect of these two years have been issued beyond the period of four years prescrib…

Puri Oil Mills Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6971/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 44A

…however, remain the same." For the afore-stated reasons, we see no merit in these civil appeals filed by the Department, hence, dismissed with no order as to costs.” 20. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in the case of D.T & T.D. C. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 232 CTR 260 (Del) held as under:- “9. We may also point out that insofar as the assessment year 1997- 98 and 1998-99 are concerned, the same would require application of the proviso to Section 147 of the said Act, inasmuch as the notices under Section 148 of the said Act in respect of these two years have been issued beyond the period of four years prescrib…

ACIT, Circle- 20(2), New Delhi vs. Rps Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, C.O No. 70/Del/2021 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6300/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

…wever, remain the same." For the afore-stated reasons, we see no merit in these civil appeals filed by the Department, hence, dismissed with no order as to costs.” 18. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in the case of D.T & T.D. C. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 232 CTR 260 (Del) held as under:- “9. We may also point out that insofar as the assessment year 1997- 98 and 1998-99 are concerned, the same would require application of the proviso to Section 147 of the said Act, inasmuch as the notices under Section 148 of the said Act in respect of these two years have been issued beyond the period of four years prescrib…

Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Gurgaon

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 672/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usi.T.A. No. 672/Del/2018 (A.Y 2008-09)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 234BSection 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…utta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO: [1961] 41 ITR 191 (SC) • CIT v. Foramer France: [2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) • CIT vs. Motor & General Finance Ltd: [2009] 184 Taxman 465 (Del) • BLB Limited vs. ACIT: [2012] 206 Taxman 37 (Del) • D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. vs. ACIT: [2010] 232 CTR 260 (Del) • CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd: [2013] 215 Taxman 495 (Del) • JSRS Udyog Ltd. v. ITO: [2009] 313 ITR 321 (Del) • Vatika Ltd. vs. ITO: [2012] 357 ITR 170 (Del) 14. Further in order to validly reopen and already concluded assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment, it is incumbent upon the A…

Arun Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 35(8), New Delhi

In the result the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1204/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: V. Rajkuamr, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. D. R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…years by reason of failure on the part of the assessee and as such, there was no jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under the provision of Section 147 of IT Act. 14. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in the case of D.T & T.D. C. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 232 CTR 260 (Del) held as under:- 9. We may also point out that insofar as the assessment year 1997-98 and 1998- 99 are concerned, the same would require application of the proviso to Section 147 of the said Act, inasmuch as the notices under Section 148 of the said Act in respect of these two years have been issued beyond the period of four years prescribe…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the ld AO on the limited issue that order passed by the ld AO is barred by limitation. Ground No. 1 is dismissed

ITA 6079/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(Ltu), Vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd, Circle-1, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place, Nbcc Plaza Pusp Vihar, Rk Puram, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263

…MP) 59. United Electrical Co. (P) Limited, 258 ITR 317 (Del) 60. Foramer France 364 ITR 566 (SC) 61. Purolator India Ltd. 343 ITR 155 (Del) 62. Motor & General Fiance, 184 Taxman 465 (Del) 63. Titanor Components Ltd. 343 ITR 183 (Bom) 64. D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd, 3\232 CTR 260 (Del) 65. Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company, 308 ITR 38 (Del) 66. German Remedies Ltd. 287 ITR 494 (Bom) 67. Grindwell Norton , 267 ITR 673 (Bom) 68. Pe/co Lectronics & Electricals Ltd, 210 ITR 991 (Cal) 69. Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. 216 ITR 317 (Guj) 70. Garden Silk Mills Ltd, 222 ITR 27 (Guj) 71. Veer Overseas Ltd…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dsl Software Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3723/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 80HSection 90

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘B’, New Delhi Before : Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 3722/Del/2014 & 3723/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2005-06 DCIT, Central Circle-2, vs. DSL Software Ltd. (Now amalgamated New Delhi. with HCL Technologies Ltd.), 806, Siddharth, 96, Nehru Place, New Delhi. PAN- AAACH1545P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2003-04 ACIT, Central Circle-18, vs. DSL Software Ltd. (Now amalgamated New Delhi. with HCL Technologies Ltd.), 806, Siddharth, 96, Nehru Place, New Delhi. PAN- AAACH1545P (Appellant) (Resp…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dsl Software Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3722/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 80HSection 90

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘B’, New Delhi Before : Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 3722/Del/2014 & 3723/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2005-06 DCIT, Central Circle-2, vs. DSL Software Ltd. (Now amalgamated New Delhi. with HCL Technologies Ltd.), 806, Siddharth, 96, Nehru Place, New Delhi. PAN- AAACH1545P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2003-04 ACIT, Central Circle-18, vs. DSL Software Ltd. (Now amalgamated New Delhi. with HCL Technologies Ltd.), 806, Siddharth, 96, Nehru Place, New Delhi. PAN- AAACH1545P (Appellant) (Resp…

CIT v. Foramer France (232 CTR 260) — Cited in 23 Judgments | BharatTax