CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.

331 ITR 236High Court2011#78 most cited

What is CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

694

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 383,853 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Jet Airways · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment jurisdiction · income escaping assessment · reason to believe · Explanation 3 · scope of reassessment · additions beyond initial reasons · invalid reassessment · 331 ITR 236

Also reported as

30 Taxmann.com 1239 CTR 183

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 234BSection 151Section 271(1)(c)Section 145(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(40)section 148(2)reason to believeincome escaping assessmentescapement of incomelive linktangible materialrejection of books of accountreopening of assessmentinterest under section 234bsection 254(1)change of opinion

Judgments citing CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.

M/S K R Construction, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Central-3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7615/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathak.R.Construction Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Basement, Hinal Residency Income Tax-Central-3 19Th Floor Datta Mandir Road Dahanukar Wadi Air India Building Kandivali(W) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 021

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER K.R.Construction Vs. Principal Commissioner of Basement, Hinal Residency Income Tax-Central-3 19th Floor Datta Mandir Road Dahanukar Wadi Air India Building Kandivali(W) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 021 PAN/GIR No.AANFK0144N Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue by Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri Naresh Jain, AR Date of Hearing 11/02/2020 Date of Pronouncement 28/02/2020 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER G.MANJUNATHA (A.M): This appeal filed by the…

Rupinder Singh Kohli (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward -45(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2765/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2765/Del/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR
Section 115ASection 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69Section 69A

…dition made in the hands of 3 Assessment Year 2010-11 the assessee is on a ground other than the ground on which reasons were recorded for re-opening the assessment u/s 147 of the Act. 10. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs Jet Airways (I) Ltd. [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) have laid down the principle that in case no addition is made on account of the reasons recorded for re-opening the assessment then the addition made on any other account is not sustainable. 11. In the facts of the present case admittedly the Assessing Officer had recorded reasons for re-opening the assessment, copy of which is placed at…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1732/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income, for that ld Counsel relies on the judgment of Hon`ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Airways (I) limited 331 ITR 236 (Bom), wherein it was held as follows: “21. Explanation 3 lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of an assessment or reassessment on grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under s. 148 setting out the reasons for the belief that income had escaped assessment. Those judicial dec…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1731/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income, for that ld Counsel relies on the judgment of Hon`ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Airways (I) limited 331 ITR 236 (Bom), wherein it was held as follows: “21. Explanation 3 lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of an assessment or reassessment on grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under s. 148 setting out the reasons for the belief that income had escaped assessment. Those judicial dec…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1730/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income, for that ld Counsel relies on the judgment of Hon`ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Airways (I) limited 331 ITR 236 (Bom), wherein it was held as follows: “21. Explanation 3 lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of an assessment or reassessment on grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under s. 148 setting out the reasons for the belief that income had escaped assessment. Those judicial dec…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1729/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income, for that ld Counsel relies on the judgment of Hon`ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Airways (I) limited 331 ITR 236 (Bom), wherein it was held as follows: “21. Explanation 3 lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of an assessment or reassessment on grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under s. 148 setting out the reasons for the belief that income had escaped assessment. Those judicial dec…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1728/KOL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income, for that ld Counsel relies on the judgment of Hon`ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Airways (I) limited 331 ITR 236 (Bom), wherein it was held as follows: “21. Explanation 3 lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of an assessment or reassessment on grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under s. 148 setting out the reasons for the belief that income had escaped assessment. Those judicial dec…

Amit Kanhayalal Gidwani, Sangli vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Sangli

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 329/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Pun/2017 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Amit Kanhayalal Gidwani, C.S.No.34, Laxmi Bunglow, Revenue Colony, South Shivaji Nagar, Sangli – 416416 .......अपीलाथी / Appellant Pan : Aefpg7955P बनाम / V/S. Acit, ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Circle 1, Sangli

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 288A

…Tribunal. 5. Before us, at the very outset the ld. Counsel submitted the case under consideration is covered on the legal aspects of the litigation. Relying on the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) and Co-ordinate Bench of Pune Tribunal in the case of Mr. Kailash Kanhaiyalal Gidwani & Ors. Vs. ACIT (group case) in ITA No.769/PUN/2014 for A.Y. 2009-10, order dated 11.09.2019, the ld. Counsel submitted that this is a case where the AO had not made any addition for which reasons were recorded for reopening of the assessment. In this rega…

P Rahim Abdulla, Raigad vs. Income Tax Officer

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

ITA 2757/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2757/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 P. Rahim Abdulla, Mumbai – Pune Highway, Taluka, Kolhapur-410203. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Ajlpk6873B बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-4, ……""यथ" / Respondent Panvel. Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan Revenue By : Shri Abdhesh Kumar Jha सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2020 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2020 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-2, Thane Dated 30.09.2016 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Before Us, Deviating From The Original Grounds & Not Pressing The Additional Ground No.1, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Mentioned That The Additional Ground No.2 Is The Relevant Ground & The Same Should Be Adjudicated First In View Of The Applicability Of The Judgement Of The Hon’Ble Bombay High Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd., 331 Itr 236 (Bom.-Hc). The Said Additional Ground No.2 Is Extracted Hereunder :- “The Additions Of Rs.6,85,720/- Made To The Income Of The Assessee On Account Of Unsecured Loan From M/S. C.K. Traders & Rs.621/- On Account Of Bank

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Abdhesh Kumar Jha
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…ld. Counsel for the assessee mentioned that the additional ground no.2 is the relevant ground and the same should be adjudicated first in view of the applicability of the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd., 331 ITR 236 (Bom.-HC). The said additional ground no.2 is extracted hereunder :- “The additions of Rs.6,85,720/- made to the income of the assessee on account of unsecured loan from M/s. C.K. Traders and Rs.621/- on account of bank 2 interest received by the assessee and confirmed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) are unsustainable in law, as…

Sanjay Chamanlal Munshi, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 5(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2982/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Trashwala, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 24

…s the income on the basis of which the case of the assessee was reopened, a fresh notice under Sec. 148 would be necessary. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd., (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom). In the aforesaid case, the Hon‟ble High Court had observed as under : “21. Explanation 3 lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of an assessment or reassessment on grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under s. 148 setting out the reasons for the belief that income had…

Shri Jasbir Singh, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-I (2), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/ASR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.426/Asr/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB”, BENCH AMRITSAR BEFORE SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.426/ASR/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Jasbir Singh Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/o Surinder Mahajan & Ward-1(2), Associates, Jalandhar (Punjab). Chartered Accountants, 74, Vijay Nagar, Jalandhar-144 001 (Punjab). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACAPS 8461 R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA. Respondent by : Sh. Charan Dass, DR. सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 28/11/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 16/01/2020 आदेश / O R…

Ashwani Atrish, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Ghaziabad

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 563/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyashwani Atrish, Vs. Ito, Ch. No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Ward-1(1), Rdc, Rajnagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan: Aeopa9658J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ekta Vishnoi, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143Section 148Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…oes not result into any addition on that account, the AO cannot make any addition on any other issue in reopened the assessment proceedings. This issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom)COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v.JET AIRWAYS (I.) LTD. Where in it has been held that explanation 3 to section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 2009, with effect from April 1, 1989. The effect of the Explanation is that even though the notice that has been issued under section 148 containing the reasons…

Sunil Kanhaiyalal Gidwani, Sangli vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Sangli

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 324/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…ntial assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act and also the impugned order. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.” 5. The ld. AR of the assessee also relied on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I.) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom), wherein the scope of re-assessment u/s 147 / 148 of the Act has been analyzed by the jurisdictional High Court and it has been categorically held that the effect of section 147 of the Act is that (i) The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year; (ii) upon…

Kailash Kanhaiyalal Gidwani, Sangli vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Sangli

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 320/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…ntial assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act and also the impugned order. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed.” 5. The ld. AR of the assessee also relied on the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I.) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom), wherein the scope of re-assessment u/s 147 / 148 of the Act has been analyzed by the jurisdictional High Court and it has been categorically held that the effect of section 147 of the Act is that (i) The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year; (ii) upon…

Vsl Steels Ltd., Bangalore vs. Pr. Ci.T., Bangalore

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 735/BANG/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Assessment Year : 2005 – 06 M/S Vsl Steels Limited, No. 539, Ashwini Complex, 4Th Floor, Cmh Road, Indiranagar, Hal 2Nd Vs. Dcit, Circle – 2 (3), Stage, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560038 Pan: Aaics1510N Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2005 – 06 M/S Vsl Steels Limited, No. 539, Ashwini Complex, 4Th Floor, Cmh Road, Indiranagar, Hal 2Nd Vs. Pcit – 7, Stage, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560038 Pan: Aaics1510N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C. A. Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2019

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT DR
Section 147Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, AM AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM Assessment Year : 2005 – 06 M/s VSL Steels Limited, No. 539, Ashwini Complex, 4th Floor, CMH Road, Indiranagar, HAL 2nd vs. DCIT, Circle – 2 (3), Stage, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560038 PAN: AAICS1510N APPELLANT RESPONDENT & Assessment Year : 2005 – 06 M/s VSL Steels Limited, No. 539, Ashwini Complex, 4th Floor, CMH Road, Indiranagar, HAL 2nd vs. PCIT – 7, Stage, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560038 PAN: AAICS1510N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C. A. Revenue by : Shri P…

Vsl Steels Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1492/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Assessment Year : 2005 – 06 M/S Vsl Steels Limited, No. 539, Ashwini Complex, 4Th Floor, Cmh Road, Indiranagar, Hal 2Nd Vs. Dcit, Circle – 2 (3), Stage, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560038 Pan: Aaics1510N Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2005 – 06 M/S Vsl Steels Limited, No. 539, Ashwini Complex, 4Th Floor, Cmh Road, Indiranagar, Hal 2Nd Vs. Pcit – 7, Stage, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560038 Pan: Aaics1510N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C. A. Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2019

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C. AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT DR
Section 147Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, AM AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM Assessment Year : 2005 – 06 M/s VSL Steels Limited, No. 539, Ashwini Complex, 4th Floor, CMH Road, Indiranagar, HAL 2nd vs. DCIT, Circle – 2 (3), Stage, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560038 PAN: AAICS1510N APPELLANT RESPONDENT & Assessment Year : 2005 – 06 M/s VSL Steels Limited, No. 539, Ashwini Complex, 4th Floor, CMH Road, Indiranagar, HAL 2nd vs. PCIT – 7, Stage, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560038 PAN: AAICS1510N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C. A. Revenue by : Shri P…

Devki Nandan Bindal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 4271/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 144Section 147Section 148

…l.) in which in para 18 it was held as under : 44 ITA.No.4271/Del./2019 Shri Devki Nandan Bindal, Delhi. “We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs., Jet Airways (I) Limited [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom.). We may also note that the heading of section 147 is "income escaping assessment" and that of section 148 "issue of notice where income escaped assessment". Sections 148 is supplementary and complimentary to section 147. Sub-section (2) of section 148 mandates reasons for issuance of notice by the Assessing Officer and sub-section (1) t…

Prakash Ramji Gavali, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(2), Thane

In the result, the appeal is allowed, in the terms indicated above

ITA 1087/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2019AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…ion can at all be made in the reassessment proceedings whether are not additions on account of the reasons for which reopening is done, stands concluded, in favour of the assessee, by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Jet Airways [(2010) 331 ITR 236 (Bom)] 11. The rival submissions which have been urged on behalf of the revenue and the assessee can be dealt with, both as a matter of first principle, interpreting the section as it stands and on the basis of precedents on the subject. Interpreting the provision as it stands and without adding or deducting from the words used by Parliament, i…

Fincity Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

ITA 627/HYD/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Arvindakshan
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…O is beyond four years, therefore, unless there is a violation on the part of the assessee to disclose all the facts truly and fully, assessment cannot be reopened. For this proposition, he relied on the following cases: 1. CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) 2. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2011] 336 ITR 136 (Del.) 3. ACIT Vs. Major Deepak Mehta, [2012] 344 ITR 641 (Chattisgarh) 4. CIT Vs. Mohmed Juned Dadani, [2013] 355 ITR 172. 8. The ld. DR, on the other hand relied on the orders of revenue authorities. He also relied on the following cases: 1. Greater Mohali Area Development Authorit…

Fincity Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

ITA 626/HYD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Arvindakshan
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…O is beyond four years, therefore, unless there is a violation on the part of the assessee to disclose all the facts truly and fully, assessment cannot be reopened. For this proposition, he relied on the following cases: 1. CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) 2. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2011] 336 ITR 136 (Del.) 3. ACIT Vs. Major Deepak Mehta, [2012] 344 ITR 641 (Chattisgarh) 4. CIT Vs. Mohmed Juned Dadani, [2013] 355 ITR 172. 8. The ld. DR, on the other hand relied on the orders of revenue authorities. He also relied on the following cases: 1. Greater Mohali Area Development Authorit…