How many judgments cite CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd.?

76 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. (333 ITR 547), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 263, Section 143(3), Section 10(37), Section 145A(b), Section 56(2)(viii), Section 57(iv).

CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd.

333 ITR 547High Court2011#1502 most cited

What is CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner cannot exercise revisional power under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer (AO) has adopted one of the courses permissible in law or where two views are possible and the AO has adopted one of them. A regular assessment made under Section 143(3) carries a presumption of application of mind, and the CIT must demonstrate how the AO's order is unsustainable in law and prejudicial to revenue, not merely disagree with the view.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. · 333 ITR 547 · Section 263 · revisional power · Assessing Officer permissible view · application of mind · Section 143(3) assessment · erroneous and prejudicial · Commissioner of Income Tax

Also reported as

194 Taxmann 17594 TTJ 108

Sections most often in play

Section 263 Section 143(3)Section 10(37)Section 145A(b)Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57(iv)Section 147 Section 148

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 8d(2)(ii)section 141 section 282a(1)ready for use section 194la section 35(1)(i)section 35(1)(iv)section 2(13)section 35(1)(ii)section 145a(b)section 145b section 45(5)

Judgments citing CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd.

Tata Steel Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 2, Mumbai

In the result , appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3658/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 48

…y event, since a regular assessment had been made under Section 143(3) and that, too, in pursuance of the directions of the DRP, a presumption arises that the assessment order has been made upon application of mind [ CIT v Honda Siel Power Products Ltd [20111 333 ITR 547 (Del) ]. Accordingly, the Ld AO having, after application of mind, taken one of two views available to him, his assessment order cannot be said to be erroneous and much less prejudicial to the interests of the revenue within the meaning of Section I.T.A. No.3658/Mum/2016 263, and any attempt by the Commissioner to revise such an order under Sect…

Reliance Money Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3259/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh

Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 263Section 50

…3 cannot be invoked. For the above proposition, the appellant relies upon the following decisions:- i. CIT v Max India Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 282 (SC) ii. CIT v Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd. [2015] 372 ITR 303 (Bom) iii. CIT v Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. [2011] 333 ITR 547 (Del) 30 I . T . A . N o . 3 2 5 9 / M u m / 2 0 1 7 12. The ld.AR therefore submits that the order of the Assessing Officer allowing the mark to market loss is not erroneous. (e) Purchase of equity share capital of Reliance Infrastructure Finance Pvt. Ltd. (RIFPL) 13. The ld. AR submits that during the year the appellant had purchased 52,50,00…

F Harley & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The CIT, 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 864/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Avinash Mishra, CIT

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(va)

…e ground that enquiry was not conducted when the assessment order was passed after considering all details called for and furnished by the assessee. We also find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Honda Siel Power Products Ltd reported in 333 ITR 547 (Del) had held that the revision order was not correct as there was no material to indicate that the ld AO had not applied his mind to the provisions of the Act and there would be presumption that the assessment order had been passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the ld AO after proper application of mind. We find that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in…

Small Wonder Industries, Mumbai vs. CIT 24, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2464/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Small Wonder Industries, Cit-24, 78, Virwani Indl. Estate, Mumbai बनाम/ Western Express Highway, Vs. Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400063 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aalfs6318Q "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Prakash Jotwani Shri Debasis Chandra Cit-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 23/02/2017 24/02/2017 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ई, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी रिमत कोचर, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ramit Kochar, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 Small Wonder Industries, CIT-24, 78, Virwani Indl. Estate, Mumbai बनाम/ Western Express Highway, Vs. Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400063 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. AALFS6318Q "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Prakash Jotwani Shri Debasis Chandra CIT-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing…

Krishi Rasayan Export Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT, 4, Kolkata

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

ITA 1504/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M. &Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri SanjeevKadel, FCAFor Respondent: Shri RajatSubhra Biswas, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…has relied on the following judgments: i) In the case of E I H Limited-vs- CIT in ITA No.529/Kol/2013 dated 19.02.2016 of the ITAT, “C” bench, Kolkata wherein the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Honda Siel power Products Ltd. (2010) 333 ITR 547(Del) was relied on wherein it was held that mere absence of discussion of the provisions of section 80IB(13) read with section 80IA(9) of the Act would not mean that the AO has not applied his mind to the said provisions and there is no material to indicate that the AO has not applied his mind to the provisions of section 80IB(13) read with secti…

Schneider Electric It Business India Pvt Ltd vs. CIT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-company is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 833/BANG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)

Section 10ASection 263Section 92A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.833/Bang/2013 (Assessment year: 2006-07) M/s.Schneider Electric IT Business India Pvt. Ltd., [Formerly known as American Power Conversion (India) Pvt. Ltd.] 187/3 and 188/3, Jigani, Bangalore-562106. … Appellant PAN: AACCA 6398 Q Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) Bangalore. … Respondent Appellant by : Shri K.R.Vasudevan, Advocate. Respondent by : Mrs. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 31/03/2016 Date of pronouncement : 11/05/2016 O R D E R…

M/S Southern Ferro Steels Ltd., Dharwad vs. ITO, Hubli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 429/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Raom/S.Southern Ferro Steels Ltd. No.172, Kiadb, Belur Industrial Estate, Belur, Dharwad. … Appellant Pan:Aalcs 7704 H Vs.

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devadas, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43(1)

…ixed assets and relevant records to satisfy himself it is not necessary to pass a detailed order on the issue. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. (333 ITR 547). Learned AR of the assessee further submitted that in the proceedings pursuant to revision order, valuation was referred to the valuation cell which has valued the fixed assets at Rs.3.9 crore as against Rs.4.50 crores valued by the assessee. Therefore, difference in the value of the fixed assets is only about 13% which cannot be considered as e…

Apeejay Shipping Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT, Kolkata-3, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 781/KOL/2015[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263

…I.T.A. Nos. 781 to 784/KOL./2015 Assessment years: 2007-2008 to 2010-2011 Page 1 of 11 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A. Nos. 781, 782, 783 & 784/KOL/ 2015 Assessment Years: 2007-2008, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-2011 Apeejay Shipping Limited,......................................................Appellant 15, Park Street, Kolkata-700 016 [PAN: AADCS 7605 P] -Vs.- Commissioner of Income Tax,...............................................Respondent Kolkata-3, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7…

Eih Limited., Kolkata vs. C.I.T Kol - III, Kolkata

In the result, the order passed by the Learned CIT u/s 263 of the Act is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 529/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R.N Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: G. Mallikarjun, CIT, ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 38Section 38(2)

…the same. Evidences in this regard are enclosed in page 72 , 77, 78 & 79 of the paper book of the assessee. We place reliance in this regard on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Honda Siel Power Products Ltd reported in (2010) 333 ITR 547 (Del) , wherein it was held that mere absence of discussion of the provisions of section 80IB(13) read with section 80IA(9) of the Act would not mean that the AO has not applied his mind to the said provisions and there is no material to indicate that the AO has not applied his mind to the provisions of section 80IB(13) read with section 80IA(9)…

M/S. Sicgil India Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 877/CHNY/2011[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2015AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pathlavath Peerya, CIT

Section 80

…lso on the judgments of Delhi High Court in CIT v Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 167 and CIT v. Anil Kuma Sharma (2011) 335 ITR 83. The Ld.counsel has also placed reliance on the judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 547. 4. On the contrary, Sh. Pathlavath Peerya, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the Assessing Officer has not considered whether the rental charges, cylinder service charges and cylinder transport charges are derived from industrial undertaking. Referring to Section 80-IB of the Act, the Ld. D.R. pointed out that the assessee…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Art Beauty Exports, New Delhi

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 924/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Sumangla Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR

Section 10BSection 10B(2)(i)Section 143(3)Section 263

…interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the ITO is unsustainable in law.” 13. It is submitted that same view has been taken in following judicial pronouncements: CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (2007) 295 ITR 282 (SC) i. CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. 333 ITR 547 HC ) ii. Delhi iii. CIT vs Saluja Exim Ltd. 329 ITR 603 HC (Punjab and Haryana) 18 I.T.A.Nos.2531, 5702, 5703 & 924/D/2014 AYs: 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 iv. Grasim Industries Ltd. vs CIT 321 ITR 92 HC (Bombay) v. CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd. 227 CTR 133 HC (Delhi) vi. CIT vs DLF Power Ltd. 229 CTR 27 HC (Delhi) vii. CIT vs. Ashish Rajpal […

M/S. Arts Beauty Exports, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5703/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Sumangla Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR

Section 10BSection 10B(2)(i)Section 143(3)Section 263

M/S. Arts Beauty Exports, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5702/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Sumangla Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR

Section 10BSection 10B(2)(i)Section 143(3)Section 263

M/S. Art Beauty Export, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2531/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Sumangla Saxena, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR

Section 10BSection 10B(2)(i)Section 143(3)Section 263

A2Z Maintenance and Engineering Services Ltd., Gurgaon vs. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2438/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 211Section 263

…Income Tax Act, 1961 No.,2438/Del/2012 Assessment Year: 2007-08 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.2438/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2007-08 A2Z Maintenance and Engineering vs CIT Services Ltd., O-116, Delhi-I, DLIF Shopping Mall, New Delhi. Arjun Nagar, DLF Phase-I, Gurgaon. (PAN: AAECA1203A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri R.M. Mehta, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR Date of hearing: 3.9.2015 Date of pronouncement: 21.10.2015 O R D E R PER C.M. GARG, J.M.…

Andhra Pradesh Fibres Limited vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/312/2011HC Telangana03 Dec 2011

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 80Section 80HSection 80ISection 9

…taken by AO was one of the possible views, the revisional powers could not be invoked by CIT. To support his contention, reliance is placed upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd., (2011) 333 ITR 547, which is directly relating to the issue in hand. In that case also the Commissioner took up the case in exercise of his powers under Section 263 of IT Act on the application of the provisions of Sections 80HHC, 80-IB(13) read with Section 80-IA(9) of IT Act. The Delhi High Court held as under:- “18. From the aforesaid discussion, it is appare…