CIT v. Kanda Rice Mills

178 ITR 446High Court1989#2179 most cited

What is CIT v. Kanda Rice Mills authority for?

The Principal Commissioner cannot exercise revisionary powers under Section 263 by merely stating that further enquiry is required or by simply setting aside the assessment order. To revise an assessment, the Principal Commissioner must establish how the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.

53

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kanda Rice Mills · 178 ITR 446 · Section 263 · revisionary powers PCIT · assessment order erroneous · prejudicial to interest of revenue · inadequate enquiry · mere call for further enquiry · setting aside order

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)

Issues it is cited on

inadequate enquiryprejudicial to interest of revenuelack of enquiryassessment order erroneousmalabar industrialmere change of opinionerroneous and prejudicialchildchange of opinionlimited scrutinysection 115bbsection 115b

Judgments citing CIT v. Kanda Rice Mills

AMAZON SMART COMMERCE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1, DELHI

ITA 3533/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)

…199 ITR 424 (Del) CIT v. O. P. Seth: 201 ITR 635 (Del) CIT, Mysore v. T. Narayana Pai : 98 ITR 422 (Kar) J.P.Srivastava And Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. v. CIT, UP: 111 ITR 326 (All) S.B.Sankar v. State of Kerala and Another: 171 ITR 689 (All) CIT v. Kanda Rice Mills: 178 ITR 446 (P&H) CIT, Patiala v. Chawla Trunk House: 139 ITR 182 (P&H) 158 In the facts of the present case, the Pr. CIT, in respect of all the issues, have merely held that further enquiry and examination is required, without even recording as to how the assessment order sought to be revised is erroneous on such issues; no error whatsoever has been pointed…

VENETIAN LDF PROJECTS LLP,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3533/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)

…24 (Del)  CIT v. O. P. Seth: 201 ITR 635 (Del)  CIT, Mysore v. T. Narayana Pai : 98 ITR 422 (Kar)  J.P.Srivastava And Sons (Kanpur) Ltd. v. CIT, UP: 111 ITR 326 (All)  S.B.Sankar v. State of Kerala and Another: 171 ITR 689 (All)  CIT v. Kanda Rice Mills: 178 ITR 446 (P&H)  CIT, Patiala v. Chawla Trunk House: 139 ITR 182 (P&H) 158 In the facts of the present case, the Pr. CIT, in respect of all the issues, have merely held that further enquiry and examination is required, without even recording as to how the assessment order sought to be revised is erroneous on such issues; no error whatsoever has been point…

SH. KARAM CHAND,MANSA vs. PR.CIT (CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 341/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69B

…firmed view and has merely set aside the order as passed by the Ld. AO and which proves that he is not of the confirmed view and which is against the principles laid down in the case of M/s. Kanda Rice Mills vs. CIT of jurisdictional High Court as reported in 178 ITR 446 in which it has been held that merely setting aside of the order by the Ld. PCIT would not be in order. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, delete, any other ground or grounds of appeal during the course of hearing.” 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 29/09/2018 declaring to…

SHRI MANMOHAN SINGH KAPUR,HOSHIARPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 68/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T. A. No. 66/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Smt. Harneet Kaur Juneja V. Pr. Commissioner of Income R/o 216 Lajpat Nagar, Tax-1, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Punjab) [PAN: AJBPJ 4673Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T. A. No. 67/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sh. Sukhjit Singh V. Pr. Commissioner of Income Village & P.O. Manik Dheri, Tax-1, Jalandhar Hoshiarpur (Punjab) [PAN: BHAPS 9843P] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T. A. No. 68/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2017…

SHRI SUKHJIT SINGH,HOSHIARPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 67/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T. A. No. 66/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Smt. Harneet Kaur Juneja V. Pr. Commissioner of Income R/o 216 Lajpat Nagar, Tax-1, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Punjab) [PAN: AJBPJ 4673Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T. A. No. 67/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sh. Sukhjit Singh V. Pr. Commissioner of Income Village & P.O. Manik Dheri, Tax-1, Jalandhar Hoshiarpur (Punjab) [PAN: BHAPS 9843P] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T. A. No. 68/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2017…

SMT HARNEET KAUR JUNEJA,JALANDHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 66/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T. A. No. 66/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Smt. Harneet Kaur Juneja V. Pr. Commissioner of Income R/o 216 Lajpat Nagar, Tax-1, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Punjab) [PAN: AJBPJ 4673Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T. A. No. 67/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sh. Sukhjit Singh V. Pr. Commissioner of Income Village & P.O. Manik Dheri, Tax-1, Jalandhar Hoshiarpur (Punjab) [PAN: BHAPS 9843P] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T. A. No. 68/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2017…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL KOLKATA vs. RAJESH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/26/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR PERIWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/136/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI vs. SRI SATYA NARAYAN SARIA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/168/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. JEMISH SHAH

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/57/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MUKESH SARAOGI (HUF)

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/76/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12, KOLKATA vs. MUKTA AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/44/2020HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,BURDWAN vs. BIJAYA TAH

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/122/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SILIGURI vs. PRAKASHO DEVI SARIA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/138/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, KOLKATA vs. KRISHNA KUMAR PARSURAMKA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/130/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASANSOL KOLKATA vs. RAKESH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/27/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. AAYUSH JHUNJHUNWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/88/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1, KOLKATA vs. SURAJ SAHANA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/41/2020HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-15, KOLKATA vs. SMT. BABITA AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/64/2020HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-18, KOLKATA vs. SRI VIKASH GOEL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/85/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…the learned Senior Counsel reiterated that suspicion can never take the place of proof. To support such argument, reliance was placed on the decision of CIT, Central-II, Calcutta Versus 66 1989 178 ITR 446 (P&H) 67 37 ITR 271 SC ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 63 of 150 Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.68 dated 7th October, 2017. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT Versus Smt. Jamna Devi Agarwala69, wherein the Court had distinguished the decision in Sumati Dayal. In support of his contention that the transactions wer…

Showing 1–20 of 53 · Page 1 of 3