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.

Ramotar Singh HUF, Rewari vs. ITO, Ward- 2, Rewari

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is allowed

ITA 3933/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2012-13 Ramotar Singh, Huf, Vs Ito, Rewari Ward-2, C/O Naresh Singh Chauhan, Advocate, Rewari. 1035-P, Sector-3, Part Ii, Near Ganeshi Lal Dharmshala, Rewari, Haryana. Pan: Aashr5279J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate. Revenue By : Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(14)Section 45

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ramotar Singh, HUF, Vs ITO, Rewari Ward-2, C/o Naresh Singh Chauhan, Advocate, Rewari. 1035-P, Sector-3, Part II, Near Ganeshi Lal Dharmshala, Rewari, Haryana. PAN: AASHR5279J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate. Revenue by : Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 16.07.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 21.08.2020 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 13th April,…

Aditya Birla Telecom Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 5(1), Mumbai

ITA 2350/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील िं./ Ita No. 2350/Mum/2013 (निर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2007-08) Vodafone Idea Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of (Successor To Aditya Birla Telecom Income Tax Limited) Aayaker Bhavan, M.K. Road, बिाम/ 10Th Floor, Birla Centurion, Century Churchgate, Mumbai Vs. Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacb2100P अपीलार्थी की ओर े/ Appellant By : Shri Yogesh Thar, Ar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े/ Respondent By : Shri Michael Jerald, Sr.Dr ुिवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2020 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 11.08.2020 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald, SR.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tamount to change of opinion which is not permissible in law. Let’s discuss the case laws relied on by both the sides. 14. We have taken note of the case law relied on by Ld Counsel for assessee in the case the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Delhi), the Hon'ble High Court has observed as under: Vodafone Idea Limited ; AY 07-08 “An order of assessment can be passed either in terms of sub-section (1) of section 143 or sub-section (3) of section 143. When a regular order of assessment is passed in terms of the sub-section (3) of section 143 a presumption can be raised that such an order…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the ld AO on the limited issue that order passed by the ld AO is barred by limitation. Ground No. 1 is dismissed

ITA 6079/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(Ltu), Vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd, Circle-1, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place, Nbcc Plaza Pusp Vihar, Rk Puram, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263

…t. Therefore reopening does not survive on the said issue as well. 4.8 The appellant also relied on a large number of case laws on the issue of reopening some of which are mentioned herein under:- 1. Former France, 264 ITR 567(SC) 2. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) 3. Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd, 220 ITR 194 (Gujrat) document1 4. Jindal Photofilms Ltd. 234 ITR 170 (Delhi) 5. Berger Paints India Ltd. 245 ITR 645(Cal) and Mercury Travels Ltd, 258 ITR 533(Cal) 6. Eicher Ltd. 294 ITR 310 (Del) 7. Voltas Limited. 349 ITR 656 (Bom) 8. Manjusha Estate (P) Ltd, 314 ITR 236(Guj) 9. Jal Ho…

J.K.Trust Bombay, Mumbai vs. DCIT (E) 2 (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1564/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1564/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri NiranjanFor Respondent: Shri Bharti Singh
Section 12ASection 142Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 2(15)

…assessment was completed by AO by using the information which is already in the assessment records of original assessment passed u/s 143(3), it clearly indicates that there is change of opinion. In that proposition, he relied on CIT vrs. Kelvinator India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del). And he also submitted that the reopening was made beyond 4 years without any new tangible material for reopening. For that purpose, he relied on the decision in the case of PCIT vrs. Evelon Synthetics (P) Ltd. (2020) 113 taxman.com 442 (Bom) 10 I.T.A. No. 1564 & 3084/Mum/2019 J. K. Trust Bombay and decision of the Coordinate bench of ITAT i…

DCIT (E) 2 (1), Mumbai vs. J.K.Trust Bombay, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 3084/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1564/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri NiranjanFor Respondent: Shri Bharti Singh
Section 12ASection 142Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 2(15)

…assessment was completed by AO by using the information which is already in the assessment records of original assessment passed u/s 143(3), it clearly indicates that there is change of opinion. In that proposition, he relied on CIT vrs. Kelvinator India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del). And he also submitted that the reopening was made beyond 4 years without any new tangible material for reopening. For that purpose, he relied on the decision in the case of PCIT vrs. Evelon Synthetics (P) Ltd. (2020) 113 taxman.com 442 (Bom) 10 I.T.A. No. 1564 & 3084/Mum/2019 J. K. Trust Bombay and decision of the Coordinate bench of ITAT i…

Jay Precision Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT - 12, Mumbai

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

ITA 2422/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Dharmesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Uodal Raj Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)Section 44A

…bove purchase including the duties, taxes and freight. Finally, the Ld. counsel relies on (i) CIT v. Nirav Modi 390 ITR 292 (Bom.), (ii) CIT v. Nirav Modi 77 taxmann.com 78 (SC), (iii) Moil Ltd. v. CIT 396 ITR 244 (Bom.), (iv) CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del.), (v) CIT v. Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd. 372 ITR 303 (Bom.). 5. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) submits that the details filed by the assessee before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings indicated that the assessee has netted the receipts against the expenses and only the net figures are shown in For…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Soul Space Projects Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 193/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…e on the facts of the case. B. 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. 5. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 6. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 7. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) My Submission on these case laws are as under:- 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 IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change of opinion for the reason to believe escapeme…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Soul Space Projects Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1849/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 193/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 1849/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs Soul Space Projects Ltd., Central Circle-15, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura New Delhi-110055 Road, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F Co No. 271/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Co No. 284/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Soul Space Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, E-23/B-1, Extn. Mcie, Mathura Central Circle-15, Road, New Delhi-110044 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7736F

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…e on the facts of the case. B. 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. 5. CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala: 252ITR 1 (SC) 6. CIT v. Elelvinator of India Ltd.: 256 ITR 1 (Del. HC) (FB) 7. Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT: 252 ITR 123 (Del. HC) My Submission on these case laws are as under:- 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 IT Act. b) Kelvinator of India Ltd:- Issue of change of opinion for the reason to believe escapeme…

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)

…income was processed by the AO under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and on the same date notice was issued to the assessee under s. 148 of the Act requiring it to file its return of income. 3. In CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 174 CTR (Del)(FB) 617 : (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB), a Full Bench of this Court observed that an order of assessment can be passed either in terms of sub-s. (1) of s. 143 or sub-s. (3) of s, 143 of the Act. Insofar as the present case is concerned, it is an admitted position that no assessment order was passed under s. 143(3) of the Act and that the return of the assessee was processed und…

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)

…income was processed by the AO under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and on the same date notice was issued to the assessee under s. 148 of the Act requiring it to file its return of income. 3. In CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 174 CTR (Del)(FB) 617 : (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB), a Full Bench of this Court observed that an order of assessment can be passed either in terms of sub-s. (1) of s. 143 or sub-s. (3) of s, 143 of the Act. Insofar as the present case is concerned, it is an admitted position that no assessment order was passed under s. 143(3) of the Act and that the return of the assessee was processed und…

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)

…income was processed by the AO under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and on the same date notice was issued to the assessee under s. 148 of the Act requiring it to file its return of income. 3. In CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 174 CTR (Del)(FB) 617 : (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB), a Full Bench of this Court observed that an order of assessment can be passed either in terms of sub-s. (1) of s. 143 or sub-s. (3) of s, 143 of the Act. Insofar as the present case is concerned, it is an admitted position that no assessment order was passed under s. 143(3) of the Act and that the return of the assessee was processed und…

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)

…income was processed by the AO under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and on the same date notice was issued to the assessee under s. 148 of the Act requiring it to file its return of income. 3. In CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 174 CTR (Del)(FB) 617 : (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB), a Full Bench of this Court observed that an order of assessment can be passed either in terms of sub-s. (1) of s. 143 or sub-s. (3) of s, 143 of the Act. Insofar as the present case is concerned, it is an admitted position that no assessment order was passed under s. 143(3) of the Act and that the return of the assessee was processed und…

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)

…income was processed by the AO under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and on the same date notice was issued to the assessee under s. 148 of the Act requiring it to file its return of income. 3. In CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 174 CTR (Del)(FB) 617 : (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB), a Full Bench of this Court observed that an order of assessment can be passed either in terms of sub-s. (1) of s. 143 or sub-s. (3) of s, 143 of the Act. Insofar as the present case is concerned, it is an admitted position that no assessment order was passed under s. 143(3) of the Act and that the return of the assessee was processed und…

Price Waterhouse & Co., [Now Known As Price Waterhouse & Co. Chartered Accountants LLP], Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 22, Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1985/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. Dcit, Circle-22, Kolkata Price Waterhouse & Co, Kolkata (Now Versus Known As Price Waterhouse & Co Chartered Accountants Llp)

For Appellant: Shri C.S Agarwal, Sr. Adv., K.M. Gupta, Adv. & Bikash KumarFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 28Section 44A

…income was processed by the AO under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and on the same date notice was issued to the assessee under s. 148 of the Act requiring it to file its return of income. 3. In CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 174 CTR (Del)(FB) 617 : (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB), a Full Bench of this Court observed that an order of assessment can be passed either in terms of sub-s. (1) of s. 143 or sub-s. (3) of s, 143 of the Act. Insofar as the present case is concerned, it is an admitted position that no assessment order was passed under s. 143(3) of the Act and that the return of the assessee was processed und…

Uniworth Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11, Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2554/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri N.M. Bhansali, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ch is not permitted under the Act. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that there is no tangible material to reopen the concluded assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06 7. We note that in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court was considering a case of reopening u/s 147 within 4 years from the end of the assessment year. The Court held that when a regular order of assessment is passed in terms of section 143 (3) of the Act, a presumption can be raised that such an order has been passed on application of mind. It was held that if it…

Uniworth Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 11, Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2553/KOL/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri N.M. Bhansali, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ch is not permitted under the Act. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that there is no tangible material to reopen the concluded assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06 7. We note that in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court was considering a case of reopening u/s 147 within 4 years from the end of the assessment year. The Court held that when a regular order of assessment is passed in terms of section 143 (3) of the Act, a presumption can be raised that such an order has been passed on application of mind. It was held that if it…

Uniworth Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11, Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2552/KOL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri N.M. Bhansali, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ch is not permitted under the Act. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that there is no tangible material to reopen the concluded assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. Assessment Years: 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06 7. We note that in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court was considering a case of reopening u/s 147 within 4 years from the end of the assessment year. The Court held that when a regular order of assessment is passed in terms of section 143 (3) of the Act, a presumption can be raised that such an order has been passed on application of mind. It was held that if it…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Maa Annapurna Transport Agency Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 822/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkery, Jm & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

Section 133(6)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri A.T. Varkery, JM & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM ] I.TA No. 822/Kol/2018 A.Y 2013-14 DCIT, C.C-2(4), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Maa Annapurna Transport Agency Ltd. PAN: AADCM 0917A Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 02-01-2020 Date of Pronouncement 15.01-2020 For the Appellant Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, JCIT, ld.DR For the Respondent Shri S.S. Gupta, FCA & Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate, ld.AR ORDER Shri A.T. Varkery, JM This is an appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [ in short, the ‘Ld. CIT (A)…

ITO, Ward-3, Vellore vs. V M Venkatesa Mudaliar & Sons, Arakkonam

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 922/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.922/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012. The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. V.M. Venkatesa Mudaliar & Sons, Ward 3, 42-A, Melkalathur Village, Vellore Karnam Street, Arakkonam 631 001. [Pan Aaefv 5324J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Karunakaran, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…ot get attracted and it is a case of mere change of opinion of the Assessing Officer. 16. Our view is fortified by the decision of the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in [2002] 256 ITR 1 (Del), wherein, the Delhi High Court held as follows: We also cannot accept the submission of Mr. Jolly to the effect that only because in the assessment order, detailed reasons have not been recorded an analysis of the materials on the record by itself may justify the Assessing Officer to initiate a proceeding under section 147 of the Act. The sa…

Starx Creations Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT-8, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-2010

ITA 2303/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Starx Creations Pvt. Ltd., The Pr. Cit-8, 79/87, D. Lad Path, Kolachowki, Room No. 611, 6Th Floor, Mumbai - 400033 Aayakar Bhavan, Pan:Aaecm3513F Vs. Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah (Ca) Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman/Amit Pratap Singh (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing: 27/09/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/12/2019

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah (CA)For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman/Amit Pratap Singh
Section 133Section 143Section 263

…ed by the Ld. Pr. CIT is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nirav Modi 390 ITR 292, MOIL Ltd. vs. CIT 396 ITR 244, law laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kalvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 and the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Indus Best Hospitality and Realtors vs. Pr. CIT, ITA No. 3125/Mum/2017 dated 19.01.2018, the same is liable to be quashed. 12. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently supporting the order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT submitted that since the assessee has failed…