CIT v. Ganpat Ram Bishnoi

152 Taxmann 242High Court2006#3950 most cited

What is CIT v. Ganpat Ram Bishnoi authority for?

Revision under section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Assessing Officer did not conduct exhaustive enquiries. Jurisdiction under section 263 is not for re-examining the assessment process or for conducting further enquiries if the initial assessment was based on the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer.

30

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. Ganpat Ram Bishnoi · section 263 · revision · inadequate enquiry · lack of enquiry · prejudicial to interest of revenue · Assessing Officer satisfaction · process of assessment

Also reported as

198 CTR 546

Sections most often in play

Section 263Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 131(1)(d)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhc(3)section 45(5)(b)inadequate enquirysection 23(2)section 145a(b)malabar industrialrevision u/s 263lack of enquiryrevision under section 263section 45(5)prejudicial to interest of revenuesection 57(iv)

Judgments citing CIT v. Ganpat Ram Bishnoi

Bhartesh Jain, Jaipur vs. PCIT, Jaipur-1, Jaipur

ITA 326/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish AgarwalFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 326/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2017-18 cuke Bhartesh Jain PCIT, 53, Syopur Road Siyaram Nagar, Vs. Jaipur-1, Jaipur Near Sector 64, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AIOPJ 6618 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assesseeby : Sh. Manish Agarwal jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Sh. Ajay Ma…

Hindustan Sales Industrial Corporation, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CA &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 94/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 cuke Hindustan Sales Industrial Corporation The Pr. CIT Vs. 1193, Churukon Ka Rasta, SMS Highway Jaipur-1 Jaipur – 302 001 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAAFH 9961 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Rajeev Sogani, C…

Castamet Works Private Limited, Kharwa vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur

ITA 187/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. Prakul Khurana (Adv.) &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’B’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM deys’k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 187/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2017-18 cuke Castamet Works Private Limited Principle Commissioner of Vs. Village – Kharwa,Tehsil- Masuda Income Tax, Udaipur Kharwa, Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AADCC 5624 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Prakul Khurana (A…

Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jaipur

ITA 126/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Sh. Prathviraj Meena (CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 6(3)(ii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 126/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 cuke Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. Principal Commissioner of Vs. D-44, Subhash Marg C- Scheme, Income Tax-2, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAKCS 1090B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Rajeev Sogani (CA) &…

Rajendra and Ursula Joshi Food Industries Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Incometax-1, Jaipur

ITA 191/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Us On The Following Grounds In This Appeal;

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Birla (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the AO cannot be held to be erroneous simply because in his order not make an elaborate discussion in that regard.” He further relied on the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Ganpat Ram Bishnoi 198 CTR 546 (Raj) where in the court held that jurisdiction u/s. 263 cannot be invoked for making short enquiries or to go into the process of assessment again and again merely on the basis of that more enquiry ought to have been conducted to find something. 10. Au contraire, the ld. DR justifies the order of the ld. PCIT and stated that the assessee has i…

Renu Poddar, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 188/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jul 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev SoganiFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 3Section 54Section 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 188/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Smt. Renu Poddar Principal Commissioner of Vs. 2 KA 9, Jawahar Nagar Income Tax-2 Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADJPP 5049 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Sh. Rajeev Sogani jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Sh. S…

Shri Pankaj P. Khara, Navi Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-7, Mumbai

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

ITA 801/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshri Pankaj P Khara, Vs. Pr. Cit-27 64D,Askini, Op Chs Room No. 401, 4Th Ltd,Plotno.20, Secotr- Floor, Tower No. 6, 11, Behind Kanchan Vashi Railway Station Junga, Koparkhairne, Commercial Complex, Navi Mumbai – 400709 Vashi – 400703 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Akhpk0207E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Hiral Sejpal.Ca. Dr Respondent By : Mr.Nikhil Chaudhary.Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.01.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit)-27, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms.Hiral Sejpal.CA. DRFor Respondent: Mr.Nikhil Chaudhary.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…supported the submissions relying on the following judicial decisions. 1. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nirav Modi [71 taxmann.com272]. Shri Pankaj P Khara, Mumbai. 2. Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganpat Ram Bishnoi 198 CTR 546. 3. Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. RK Metal Works, 112 ITR 445. 4. Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. PV Bhoopathy. 5. Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mangilal Didwania, [2006] 286 ITR 126. 6. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bharat Aluminum Co. Ltd, 163 taxman 430. 7…

Shree Cement Limited, Beawar vs. Pr.CIT, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4/JPR/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 04/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Cement Limited, Cuke Pr.Cit, Vs. Bangur Nagar, Post Box No. 33, Udaipur. Beawar. Pan No.: Aaccs 8796 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Dilip Desai (Ca) Shri Vijay Shah (Ca) Shri Mohit Choudhary (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pcit, Udaipur Dated 03.02.2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The Act) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – Udaipur, (Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Pr. Cit) Was Not Justified In Initiating Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Since The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Desai (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 04/JP/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Cement Limited, cuke Pr.CIT, Vs. Bangur Nagar, Post Box No. 33, Udaipur. Beawar. PAN No.: AACCS 8796 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by: Shri Dilip Desai (CA) Shri Vijay Shah (CA) Shri Mohit Choudhary (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR) lquokbZ d…

Kisan Steel Corporation, Ghaziabad vs. Pr. CIT, Ghaziabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5362/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleasstt. Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri JayMishra, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year 2014-15 Kisan Steel Corporation Vs. Pr.CIT, C/O Raj Kumar 7 FF CGO Complex-1, Associates L-7A, LGF, Hapur Road, South Extn. Part-II, Kamla Nehru Nagar, New Delhi 110 049 Ghaziabad, PAN AACFK6201D Uttar Pradesh Pin 201 001. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA Shri Sumit Goel, CA Department by : Shri JayMishra, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 08/10/2020 Date of 29/10/2020 pronouncement O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, A…

Technip Uk Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4284/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillai[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Technip Uk Limited Vs. The D.I.T. C/O Bmr & Associates Llp International - Ii 22Nd Floor, Building No. 5 New Delhi Tower ‘A’, Dlf Cyber City, Dlf Phase Iii, Gurgaon Haryana Pan : Aacct 8268 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Arora, Sr- DR
Section 263Section 4Section 44BSection 44D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI “D” BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2008-09] Technip UK Limited Vs. The D.I.T. C/o BMR & Associates LLP International - II 22nd Floor, Building No. 5 New Delhi Tower ‘A’, DLF Cyber City, DLF Phase III, Gurgaon Haryana PAN : AACCT 8268 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Ajay Vohra, Adv Shri Anshul Sachar, Adv Shri Anuj Agarwal Revenue by: Shri Anuj Arora, Sr- DR Date of hearing : 24.01.2017 Date of pronouncement : 24.04.2017 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- T…