CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd.

263 ITR 221High Court2003#4166 most cited

What is CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd. authority for?

The scope of adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) is limited and has been well-settled by judicial pronouncements.

28

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd. · CIT v. Shikarchand Jain · section 143(1)(a) · adjustment · scope of adjustment · audit report · Finance Bill 2021

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154

Issues it is cited on

section 186section 243esection 234fsection 116section 155section 200a(1)section 18mistake apparent from recordmistake apparent on recordsection 200asection 234esection 200

Judgments citing CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd.

Gujral Hotels Private Limited, Jabalpur vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1) Jabalpur, Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 18/JAB/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Gujral Hotels Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Circle-2(1), Vs. Jabalpur, (M.P.) Jabalpur (M.P.)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…audit report u/s. 44AB of the Act for both the years (at PB pgs. 12-13 / PB pgs.27-28). The addition, being debatable, could not have been made under section 143(1), even as clarified by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Shikarchand Jain [2003] 263 ITR 221 (MP); CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 112 (MP), as indeed by the Tribunal in Nikhil Mohine v. Dy. CIT (in ITA Nos. 37 & 38/Jab/2021, dated 18.11.2021/PB pg. 17), a decision which is squarely on the point, and on which the assessee places total reliance. He, on being inquired by the Bench, stated of there being no decision by the Hon'bl…

Jasuja Enterprises Pvt.Ltd, Jabalpur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 62/JAB/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble & Sh. Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Gujral Hotels Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Circle-2(1), Vs. Jabalpur, (M.P.) Jabalpur (M.P.)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…audit report u/s. 44AB of the Act for both the years (at PB pgs. 12-13 / PB pgs.27-28). The addition, being debatable, could not have been made under section 143(1), even as clarified by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Shikarchand Jain [2003] 263 ITR 221 (MP); CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 112 (MP), as indeed by the Tribunal in Nikhil Mohine v. Dy. CIT (in ITA Nos. 37 & 38/Jab/2021, dated 18.11.2021/PB pg. 17), a decision which is squarely on the point, and on which the assessee places total reliance. He, on being inquired by the Bench, stated of there being no decision by the Hon'bl…

Waidhan Engineering &Industries Pvt . Ltd Waidhan, Singrauli vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC Bangaluru, Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 41/JAB/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble Accountnt Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sukesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Halder, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…, take us to the audit report u/s. 44AB of the Ac for both the years (at PB pgs. 12-14). The addition, being debatable, could not have been made under section 143(1), even as clarified by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Shikarchand Jain [2003] 263 ITR 221 (MP); CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 112 (MP), as indeed by the Tribunal in Nikhil Mohine v. Dy. CIT (in ITA Nos. 37 & 38/Jab/2021, dated 18.11.2021/PB pg. 17), a decision which is squarely on the point, and on which the assessee places total reliance. He, on being inquired by the Bench, stated of there being no decision by the Hon'bl…

Waidhan Engineering &Industries, Singrauli vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC Bengaluru, Bengaluru

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 40/JAB/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble Accountnt Member & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sukesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Halder, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…, take us to the audit report u/s. 44AB of the Ac for both the years (at PB pgs. 12-14). The addition, being debatable, could not have been made under section 143(1), even as clarified by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Shikarchand Jain [2003] 263 ITR 221 (MP); CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 112 (MP), as indeed by the Tribunal in Nikhil Mohine v. Dy. CIT (in ITA Nos. 37 & 38/Jab/2021, dated 18.11.2021/PB pg. 17), a decision which is squarely on the point, and on which the assessee places total reliance. He, on being inquired by the Bench, stated of there being no decision by the Hon'bl…

M/S National Hospital, Jabalpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 47/JAB/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…in Nikhil Mohine (supra)(see para 3.1 of this order), is of little consequence in view of the limited scope of an adjustment u/s. 143(1)(a), law on which is well-settled (see: CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 112 (MP); CIT v. Shikarchand Jain [2003] 263 ITR 221 (MP)), with the Explanatory Notes to the Provisions of the Finance Bill, 2021 itself admitting of a conflict of judicial opinion, explaining that to be the reason for effecting the amendments per the said Explanations. The only circumstance justifying the impugned additions is a decision/s by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (also see para 4…

M\S National Hospital, Jabalpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 46/JAB/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Dec 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Ble

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…in Nikhil Mohine (supra)(see para 3.1 of this order), is of little consequence in view of the limited scope of an adjustment u/s. 143(1)(a), law on which is well-settled (see: CIT v. GEI Engineering Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 112 (MP); CIT v. Shikarchand Jain [2003] 263 ITR 221 (MP)), with the Explanatory Notes to the Provisions of the Finance Bill, 2021 itself admitting of a conflict of judicial opinion, explaining that to be the reason for effecting the amendments per the said Explanations. The only circumstance justifying the impugned additions is a decision/s by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (also see para 4…

Omega Hospital and Blood Bank, Jabalpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CPC, Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 36/JAB/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora, Hon'Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Omega Hospital & Blood Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Bank, Cpc, Jabalpur (M.P.) Bangalore [Pan: Aabfo 8142Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Manoj Kumar Jain & Sh. Kailash Chandra Agrawal (Cas) Respondent By Sh. S.K. Halder, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20/12/2021

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

…ITA No. 36/Jab/2021(AY 2018-19) Omega Hospital & Blood Bank v. Dy. CIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR (SMC) BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Omega Hospital and Blood Deputy Commissioner of vs. Income Tax, Bank, CPC, Jabalpur (M.P.) Bangalore [PAN: AABFO 8142Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Manoj Kumar Jain & Sh. Kailash Chandra Agrawal (CAs) Respondent by Sh. S.K. Halder, Sr. DR Date of hearing 13/12/2021 Date of pronouncement 20/12/2021 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM This is an Appeal by the Assessee directed against the Order…

Navodaya Education Trust, Raichur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bellary

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 49/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Kaul, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Devarathna Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 154

…ing it (Khatau Junker v Pathania 196 ITR 55, CIT v Sitaram Textiles 248 ITR 139). A debatable issue cannot be decided by the assessing officer under the guise of making an adjustment under section 143(1)(a) (Coates v DCIT 214 ITR 498, CIT v Shikhar Chand Jain 263 ITR 221, CIT v Manubhai M Patel 296 ITR 143). 20. Thus, the scope of section 143(1) is restricted to adjustment of prima facie mistakes and omissions, which are apparent from what is available on record. In such case record would be constituted by the return of income as well as other data such as brought forward losses etc. The assessing officer carryi…