CIT v. India Cements Ltd.

424 ITR 410High Court2020#3875 most cited

What is CIT v. India Cements Ltd. authority for?

Reassessment proceedings are invalid if based solely on a change of opinion without fresh tangible material, especially after the first proviso to Section 147 is invoked.

31

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. India Cements Ltd. · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment · valid reassessment · fresh tangible material · first proviso to section 147 · beyond four years · material facts necessary for assessment · kelvinator · mere change of opinion · change of opinion · tangible material

Also reported as

181 DTR 105

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(1)

Issues it is cited on

fresh tangible materialfirst proviso to section 147beyond four yearsmaterial facts necessary for assessmentkelvinatormere change of opinionshort term capital gainslive linkshort term capital gainchange of opiniontangible materialregular assessment

Judgments citing CIT v. India Cements Ltd.

WHEATONS DESIGN PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT / DCIT, CIRCLE -6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 781/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: The Due Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita rinesh, JCIT-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

…is clearly a case of change of opinion. AO’s reason to believe must be based on some new tangible material which was not available at the time of passing the original assessment order. Reopening was not therefore sustainable. CIT Vs. India Cements Ltd. (2019) 181 DTR 105 (Mad.) (HC) All material being present with the AO while making original assessment under sec. 143(3), in the absence of any fresh material, reopening of assessment beyond four years was based on change of opinion, hence bad in law. There is no case that assessee had failed to disclose any material for purpose of assessment. State Bank of India V…

M. NATESAN,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2765/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

R.EASWARAMOORTHY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2697/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

S. EASWARAMOORTHY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

ITA 2696/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14
Section 133A

…n5. For the aforestated reasons, we see no merit in these civil appeals\nfiled by the Department, hence, dismissed with no order as to costs.'\n\n24.\nFollowing the above, the Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in\nthe case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as\nfollows:\n\n\"30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the\nreassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the\nassessee stating that the reassessment was bad in law. To decide this\nissue, we may straightaway refer to the decision in the case\nof Kelvinator of India Ltd. (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supr…

S. EASWARAMOORTHY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2695/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

K. PARAMASIVAM,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

ITA 2694/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 133A

…me." 5. For the aforestated reasons, we see no merit in these civil appeals filed by the Department, hence, dismissed with no order as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as follows: "30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the assessee stating that the reassessment was bad in law. To decide this issue, we may straightaway refer to the decision in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Cour…

K. PARAMASIVAM,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2693/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

K. BASKAR,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2692/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

K. BASKAR,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2691/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

K. SADASIVAM,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2690/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

P. NALLUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2687/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

K. KATHIRVEL,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2686/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

P. KARUNANITHI,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2685/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

RAMASAMY PALANISAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2591/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

RAMASAMY PALANISAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2590/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

PALANISAMY GOUNDER LOGANATHAN,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

ITA 2589/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…same." 5. For the aforestated reasons, we see no merit in these civil appeals filed by the Department, hence, dismissed with no order as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as follows: "30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the assessee stating that the reassessment was bad in law. To decide this issue, we may straightaway refer to the decision in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court…

M. VELUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2587/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

M. VELUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2586/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

S. ARAVIND,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals t, all the appeals stand allowed

ITA 2584/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

…as to costs.' 24. Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court Following the above, the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) has held as India Cements Ltd. (424 ITR 410) follows: “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the “30. Having held so, we need to consider as to whether the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held in favour of the reassessment was validly done. The Tribunal held…

ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. INCREDIBLE INDIA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19 are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 604/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.604 & 605/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Acit Vs. Incredible India Projects Central Circle-2(4) Private Limited Hyderabad Secunderabad [Pan : Aabci9355A] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Sandeep Goel, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 19/09/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024 आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)]-12, Hyderabad, Both Dated 30/08/2022, Pertaining To A.Y.2017-18 & 2018-19. Since The Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Goel, ARFor Respondent: : Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(9)(d)Section 271ASection 274

…le 27 of ITAT Rules 1963 as laid down in number of decisions including in Sanjay Sawhney Vs PCIT in ITA No.834/2019 (Del.HC). Learned counsel for the assessee further referred the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. India Cement Ltd. (424 ITR 410) and other judicial precedents and submitted that, it was open to a respondent in appeal, who had not filed a cross objection with regard to the portion of the decree or order which had gone against him to urge in opposition to the appellant. Since the assessee has raised the issue of vague notice before the Ld.CIT(A) by way of written submission…

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2