CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

256 ITR 1High Court2002#163 most cited

What is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. authority for?

An Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment under Section 147 based on a mere change of opinion regarding the same material available during the original assessment. Reopening requires fresh, tangible material or information that leads to a reason to believe income has escaped assessment.

439

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. · Kelvinator principle · section 147 · section 148 · reopening assessment · mere change of opinion · tangible material · income escaping assessment · sanction under section 151 · full and true disclosure

Also reported as

123 Taxmann 433108 Taxmann.com 176174 CTR 617

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 151Section 153DSection 250

Issues it is cited on

kelvinatorsection 114sanction under section 151mere change of opinionfirst proviso to section 147material facts necessary for assessmentfull and true disclosurewithin four yearssection 144achange of opinionlive linktangible material

Judgments citing CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

ITO 15 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Limbo Engineering P Ltd., Mumbai

In the result the all the three appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 7276/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Neel Khandelwal &For Respondent: Dr Rajeev Harit&Shri J. Micheal, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…he AO as per the reasons recorded, is not even aware that a scrutiny assessment has been made on an earlier occasion in the case of the assessee. The ld AR relied on the following decisions: Kelvinator of India Ltd – 320 ITR 561 (SC) Kelvinator of India Ltd – 256 ITR 1 (Del) TechSpan India P Ltd – 404 ITR 10 (SC) Century Textile & Industries Ltd – 99 taxmann.com 206 (SC) dismissing SLP against 99 taxmann.com 205 (Bom) Orient News Prints Ltd – 100 taxmann.com 69 (SC) dismissing SLP against 78 taxmann.com 108 (Guj) / 393 ITR 527 (Guj) ICICI Home Finance Co Ltd – 210 Taxman 67 (Bom),Usha International Ltd – 348 ITR…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5546/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5542/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5540/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4903/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4901/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5545/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5544/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5543/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5541/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4902/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4898/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

M/S. B.L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4897/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Sh. Anil Chaturvedi, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.4897 To 4903/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, .............अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F Vs Dcit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi-110055 …………. ""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.5540 To 5546/Del/2014 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2008-09 वष" Acit, Central Circle-17, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn. ...........अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi-110055 Vs M/S. B. L. Kashyap & Sons Ltd. B-1, /A-21, Mice, Mathura Road, New Delhi Pan-Aaacb0205F …………. ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153B(1)

…g in Soul Space Projects Ltd., Ld. AR relied on the following decisions on the argument that power vested in an authority by statute to be exercised strictly by such authority. 1. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 2. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 3. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) MY SUBMISSION ON THE ABOVE In this regard, following submissions may be considered showing that all these case laws are distinguishable on facts. a) Anjuman M.H. Ghaswala:- This case related to Power of Settlement Commission Vs. CBDT for waiver of interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of…

Tata Advanced Materials Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(4), Bangalore

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2182/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ett Packard Digital Global Soft Ltd. in ITA 406 & 407 of 2007 dt.19.09.2011 (Karnataka H.C.) (iii) CIT Vs. Hewlett Packard Digital Global Soft Ltd. 380 ITR 386 (Kar). (iv) CIT Vs. ;Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC( (v) CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) (vi) CIT Vs. Modipon Ltd. in ITA No.533 of 2011 Dt.21.03.2011 (Delhi H C) (vii) Madhukar Khosla Vs. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (Del) (viii) CIT Vs. Foramer France 264 ITR 566 (SC) (ix) CIT Vs. Tarajan Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. 236 ITR 477 (SC) (x) Fibres & Fabrics International (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 48 ITR (T)46 (Bangalore – Trib.) 4. According to the ld.AR that…

M/S Tata Advanced Materials Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(4), Bangalore

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2181/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ett Packard Digital Global Soft Ltd. in ITA 406 & 407 of 2007 dt.19.09.2011 (Karnataka H.C.) (iii) CIT Vs. Hewlett Packard Digital Global Soft Ltd. 380 ITR 386 (Kar). (iv) CIT Vs. ;Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC( (v) CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) (vi) CIT Vs. Modipon Ltd. in ITA No.533 of 2011 Dt.21.03.2011 (Delhi H C) (vii) Madhukar Khosla Vs. ACIT 367 ITR 165 (Del) (viii) CIT Vs. Foramer France 264 ITR 566 (SC) (ix) CIT Vs. Tarajan Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. 236 ITR 477 (SC) (x) Fibres & Fabrics International (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT 48 ITR (T)46 (Bangalore – Trib.) 4. According to the ld.AR that…

Nava Bharat Ventures Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 384/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhassessment Year:2009-10

For Appellant: Sri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 50C

…sessment is only due to mere change of opinion and that too beyond the time limit as specified in the proviso to sec. 147 of the Act which is bad in law. We rely on the following cases. CIT vs. Bhaviji Lavji (79 ITR 582(SC)) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (256 ITR 1 (Delhi)(FB)) JCIT vs. George Williamson(Assam) Ltd. (258 ITR 126(Gauhati)), etc. Page 5 of 7 ITA No 384 of 2018 Nav Bharat Ventures Ltd We therefore submit that since all details are available on record to the then Assessing Officer, there is no occasion for reopening our assessment for the A. Y. 2009- 10 beyond four years from end of such asse…

M/S. Bose Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5705/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Bose Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit 3Rd Floor, Plot No.4, Circle – 5(1), Salcon Aurum, Jasola District New Delhi Centre, New Delhi – 110 025 Pan No. Aaacb 3260 A [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…validly ordered should necessarily be based on “tangible material” which an AO comes by after original assessment. 24. It would also be profitable to refer to the decision of Central Warehousing Corporation (supra) and CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd., (2002) 256 ITR 1and CIT vs. Usha International Ltd., 348 ITR 485 (Del.) and several 16 other decisions wherein it has been repeatedly held that reopening initiated without any failure on the part of the Assessee in fully and truly disclosing all material facts without any fresh tangible material deserves to be quashed. In view of the aforesaid test laid down by th…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ifci Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2953/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 35D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C ”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No Assessment Year 2953/Del /2014 2003-04 U/s 143(3) 2817/Del/2011 2003-04 u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Act The Deputy Commissioner of IFCI LIMITED Vs. Income Tax IFCI Towers Circle – 11(1) 61 Nehru Place C R Building New Delhi I P Estate PAN: AAACT0668G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA/ Co No Assessment Year 2659/Del/2011 2003-04 u/s 143(3) IFCI LIMITED The Deputy Commissioner Vs. IFCI Towers of Income Tax 61 Nehru Place Circle – 11(1) New Delhi C R B…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ifci Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2817/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 35D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C ”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No Assessment Year 2953/Del /2014 2003-04 U/s 143(3) 2817/Del/2011 2003-04 u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Act The Deputy Commissioner of IFCI LIMITED Vs. Income Tax IFCI Towers Circle – 11(1) 61 Nehru Place C R Building New Delhi I P Estate PAN: AAACT0668G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA/ Co No Assessment Year 2659/Del/2011 2003-04 u/s 143(3) IFCI LIMITED The Deputy Commissioner Vs. IFCI Towers of Income Tax 61 Nehru Place Circle – 11(1) New Delhi C R B…

M/S Ifci Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2659/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 10Section 143Section 143(3)Section 35D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C ”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No Assessment Year 2953/Del /2014 2003-04 U/s 143(3) 2817/Del/2011 2003-04 u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Act The Deputy Commissioner of IFCI LIMITED Vs. Income Tax IFCI Towers Circle – 11(1) 61 Nehru Place C R Building New Delhi I P Estate PAN: AAACT0668G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA/ Co No Assessment Year 2659/Del/2011 2003-04 u/s 143(3) IFCI LIMITED The Deputy Commissioner Vs. IFCI Towers of Income Tax 61 Nehru Place Circle – 11(1) New Delhi C R B…