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.

ACIT (E) 20(3), Mumbai vs. Seema Dilip Vora, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 582/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year:2007-08 Acit-20(3), Ms. Seema Dilip Vora, Room No.622, 71/72, Rajkamal Apartment बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Rajkamal Marg, Rajkamal Vs. Mumbai Studio, Near Gandhi Hospital, Parel, Mumbai-400012 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aabpv0816C

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ITR 11 (SC) (paras 9, 34) CIT v. Chase Bright Steel Ltd. (No. 1) [1989] 177 ITR 124 (Bom) (para 21) CIT v. DLF Power Ltd. [2012] 345 ITR 446 (Delhi) (para 14) CIT v. Eicher Ltd. [2007] 294 ITR 310 (Delhi) (paras 10, 28) CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2002] 256 ITR 1 (Delhi) [FB] (paras 2, 12, 20, 48) CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) (paras 2, 28) CIT v. Khemchand Ramdas [1938] 6 ITR 414 (PC) (para 50) CIT v. P. V. S. Beedies P. Ltd. [1999] 237 ITR 13 (SC) (para 18) CIT (Asst.) v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC) (paras 4, 12) CIT v. Sharma (H. P.) [1980] 122 I…

Shri Ajay Wahi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

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

ITA 336/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Jul 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Dilip Shivpuri (Advocate)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jkWo] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 336/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10. cuke Shri Ajay Wahi, The ACIT, Vs. Dr. Wahi’s Diagnostic Clinic, Circle-1, A-5, Chandpole, Jhotwara Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AABPW 0826 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Dilip Shivpuri (Advocate) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Seema…

M/S. Cygnus Developers (India) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2288/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, A.M & Shri A. T. Varkey, J.M]

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

…opening is tested from the point of view whether or not they are germane to the formation of belief that income escaped assessment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court endorsing the Full Bench decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 held in its order reported in 320 ITR 561, “…..that Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is “tangible material” to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons must have link with the formation of belief.” Therefore, if the fresh tangible material which the AO has in his possession is relevant…

The Dy. CIT, Circle - 2(1), Vijayawada vs. Sri C.D.S.Prakasa Rao, L/H. C.D.V. Subba Rao, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 44/VIZ/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.44/Viz/2013 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2006-07) Dy.Cit, Circle-2(1) Vs. C.D.V. Subba Rao Vijayawada Lr Of Late C.D.S. Prakasa Rao Prop.Prakash Arts, [Pan :Adapc2488D] Museum Road Governorpet Vijayawada [Pan : Adkpc7450P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R.S.Aravindakshan, Dr प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar

For Appellant: Shri R.S.Aravindakshan, DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 436oSection 43B

…आयकर अपीली यअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर ससह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.44/Viz/2013 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2006-07) Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1) Vs. C.D.V. Subba Rao Vijayawada LR of Late C.D.S. Prakasa Rao Prop.Prakash Arts, [PAN :ADAPC2488D] Museum Road Governorpet Vijayawada [PAN : ADKPC7450P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri…

ITO - 18(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Bhavana Metal Company, Mumbai

ITA 5973/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./5973/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income Tax Officer-18(1)(2) M/S. Bhavana Metal Company Room No.204, 2Nd Floor Shop No.7, Nathuram Poddar Marg Earnest House, Nariman Point Vs. 111/119, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 002. Pan:Aaafb 5010 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) C.O. No.70/Mum/2018 (Arising Out Of आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./5973/Mum/2016) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 वष" आयकर आयकर अपील अपील M/S. Bhavana Metal Company Vs. Income Tax Officer-18(1)(2) Mumbai-400 002. Mumbai-400 021. (""या"ेपक /Cross Pbjector) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari-Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Shailesh Parmar-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/06/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 04/07/2018 लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य, राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 28/07/2016 Of The Cit(A)- 29,Mumbai,The Assessing Officer (Ao)Has Filed Present Appeal.The Assessee Has Raised Cross Objection.The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading In Non Ferrous Metals.It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30/10/2007, Declaring Total Income At Rs. Nil.The Assessment Was Completed, U/S. 143(3) (Ii) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act,On 18Th March, 2015, Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.50 Lakhs.

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Parmar-ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “डी” खंडपीठ म" Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“D”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं सी. एन. "साद, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and C. N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./5973/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Income tax Officer-18(1)(2) M/s. Bhavana Metal Company Room No.204, 2nd Floor Shop No.7, Nathuram Poddar Marg Earnest House, Nariman Point Vs. 111/119, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 002. PAN:AAAFB 5010 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the C.O. of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4717/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. G.D. Agrawal & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Respondent: Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…a mere change of opinion and, therefore, the re-assessment was bad in law and had been wrongly upheld by the Ld. CIT (A). Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (Delhi) reported in 256 ITR 1 (Delhi) which was affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court and reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court had held that the AO has the power to reopen a completed assessment provided there is tangible material to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income. Reliance was also placed on another judgment of the Hon’ble Delh…

Mahaveer Babulal Jain, Chennai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle -5, Chennai

In the result, I.T.A. No. 2274/Chny/2017 for AY 2008-09 is dismissed and I

ITA 2275/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)Section 40

…r section 143(3) of the Act, in the absence of any cogent material evidence, reopening of assessment is illegal and it is mere change of opinion, which cannot be the basis for reassessment in view of the decision in the case of CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB) and more so in the case of ACIT v. ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd. [2013] Civil Appeal No. 5960 of 2012 (SC). It was further 3 I.T.A. Nos.2274 & 2275/Chny/17 submission of the ld. Counsel that after passing appellate order against assessment under section 143(3) of Act, reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is ba…

Mahaveer Babulal Jain, Chennai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle -5, Chennai

In the result, I.T.A. No. 2274/Chny/2017 for AY 2008-09 is dismissed and I

ITA 2274/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)Section 40

…r section 143(3) of the Act, in the absence of any cogent material evidence, reopening of assessment is illegal and it is mere change of opinion, which cannot be the basis for reassessment in view of the decision in the case of CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del)(FB) and more so in the case of ACIT v. ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd. [2013] Civil Appeal No. 5960 of 2012 (SC). It was further 3 I.T.A. Nos.2274 & 2275/Chny/17 submission of the ld. Counsel that after passing appellate order against assessment under section 143(3) of Act, reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act is ba…

DCIT 7(1)-1, Mumbai vs. Goldmohur Design & Apparel Park Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 622/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit, M/S Goldmohur Design & Circle-7(1)-1, Apparel Park Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.23, Ground Floor, Goldmohur Textile Mill, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dadasaheb Phalke Road, M.K. Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400014 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aadcg1613M

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…can show tentatively or prima facie on the basis of the reasons recorded and with reference to the documents available on record that income has escaped assessment.” This takes us to the observations of the Delhi High Court in Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2002] 256 ITR 1 (Delhi) [FB] which read as under (page 18): "The Board in exercise of its jurisdiction under the aforementioned provisions had issued the circular on October 31, 1989. The said circular admittedly is binding on the Revenue. The authority, therefore, could not have taken a view, which would run counter to the mandate of the said circular.” From a…

Mohd Rizwan Mohd Kallan Khan, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 26(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1141/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhmd. Rizwan Mohd Kallan Ito 26(3)(4) Room No. 711, 7Th Floor, Khan, Plot No. 603, Flat No.13, Bldg No. 7 D, Bombay Taxi C-11, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Men’S Co-Operative Society, Vs. Bandra (East), Mumbai-51. Lbs Marg, Kurla (West), Mumbai-400070 Pan: Agjpk2270K Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (Ar) Date Of Hearing :25.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2018 Order Per Pawan Singh; 1. The Instant Appeal By Assessee Under Section 253 Of The Income-Tax Act (The Act) Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (AR)
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 253Section 274Section 3

…ation in his possession. The 3 ITA No.1141/M/18- Md. Rizwan Mohd Kallan Khan AO must form the belief and must too in the consequence of information. The reliance was made on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India [256 ITR 1] and the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sfil Stock Broking Ltd. [325 ITR 285]. The ld. AR of the assessee also submits that no proper opportunity was given by AO. No opportunity of cross-examination was given despite making request before the AO. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order of authorities be…

ITO, WD-41(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Epkon Associates, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1425/KOL/2014[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Mrs. Madhumita Roy, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1425/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Ito, Ward 41(2), Kolkata..............................…………………………..............................Appellant 4Th Floor, Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. M/S. Epkon Associates.....................……....................................................................Respondent 10/2, Canal Circular Road, Kolkata – 700 067 [Pan: Aabfe 8374 Q] Appearances By: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 23, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 30 , 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(Appeals) – 19, Kolkata Dated 05.03.2014 & In The Solitary Ground Raised Therein, The Revenue Has Challenged The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Cancelling The Assessment Made By The A.O. Under Section 143(3) / 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Holding The Same To Be Invalid.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH (A), KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, AM and Mrs. Madhumita Roy, JM] I.T.A. No. 1425/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2005-06 ITO, Ward 41(2), Kolkata..............................…………………………..............................Appellant 4th Floor, Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. M/s. Epkon Associates.....................……....................................................................Respondent 10/2, Canal Circular Road, Kolkata – 700 067 [PAN: AABFE 8374 Q] Appearances by: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Shri A.K…

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Airport Developement. Co Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1586/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumard C I T - 3(2)(1) M/S. Maharashtra Airport Room No. 674, 6Th Floor Development Co. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 12Th Floor, World Trade Mumbai 400020 Centre Tower No. 1 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Pan –Aadcm9623M Appellant Respondent Co No. 45/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year:2008-09) M/S. Maharashtra Airport D C I T - 3(2)(1) Development Co. Ltd. Room No. 674, 6Th Floor 12Th Floor, World Trade Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Centre Tower No. 1 Mumbai 400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Pan –Aadcm9623M Cross Objector Appellant In Appeal Revenue By: Shri Abhijit Patankar Assesseeby: Shri Salil Kapoor & Shri Sumit Lal Chandani Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.05.2018 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Jm The Aforesaid Appeal Of The Department & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 11.12.2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai For A.Y. 2008-09. Ita No. 1586/Mum/2016 – A.Y. 2008-09 2. The Basic Grievance Of The Department In This Appeal Is Against The Decision Of The Learned Cit(A) In Holding The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter “The Act”) As Bad In Law & Void.

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor &For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

…. Todi vs. ACIT (2016) 47 ITR (T) 49 (Mum) (iv) Golden Tobacco Ltd. vs. JCIT (2016) 48 ITR (T) 132 (Mum) (v) Indu Lata Rangwala vs. DCIT (2016) 384 ITR 337 (Del) (vi) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India (2010) 320 ITR 546 (SC) (vii) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del) 7. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon. The undisputed facts are that the assessee filed its return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act claiming deduction under Section 80IAB. The return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny and in…

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 737/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.736 & 737/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13) Jcit (Osd), Cir-4(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 10, Camac Street, Industry House, 15Th Floor, Kolkata – Kolkata – 700 069. 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacj 7788 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Chaturvedi, AR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…holds “reasons to believe” and change of opinion does not confer jurisdiction to reassess; - There must be nexus between material and belief; and - Reasons recorded must show application of mind by the AO. 10.We note that in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 the Full Bench of the Hon`ble 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 tha…

JCIT, (OSD), Cir-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 736/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.736 & 737/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13) Jcit (Osd), Cir-4(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 10, Camac Street, Industry House, 15Th Floor, Kolkata – Kolkata – 700 069. 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacj 7788 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Chaturvedi, AR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…holds “reasons to believe” and change of opinion does not confer jurisdiction to reassess; - There must be nexus between material and belief; and - Reasons recorded must show application of mind by the AO. 10.We note that in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 the Full Bench of the Hon`ble 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 tha…

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Vimal Chand Surana HUF, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 437/JPR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 May 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 131Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292C

…is Court has held as under :— ITA 437/JP/2017_ 39 DCIT Vs. Vimal Chand Surana (HUF) '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 are unable to agree with the submission of Mr. Jolly to the effect that the impugned order of reassessment cannot be faulted as the same was based on information derived from the tax audit report. The tax audit report had already been submitted by the assessee. It is one thing to say that th…

M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2521/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…s dismissed on the proposition that the bar which applies to the assessing officer equally applies to the CIT, for the purposes of section 263 of the Act. c) The Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del) observed as under: " ... It is well settled principle of law that what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. If the Income tax Officer does not possess the power of review, he cannot be permitted to achieve the said object by taking recourse to initiating a proceeding of reassessment or by way of rectification of mistake." [Empha…

M/S. Cliff Trexim Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2520/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…s dismissed on the proposition that the bar which applies to the assessing officer equally applies to the CIT, for the purposes of section 263 of the Act. c) The Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del) observed as under: " ... It is well settled principle of law that what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. If the Income tax Officer does not possess the power of review, he cannot be permitted to achieve the said object by taking recourse to initiating a proceeding of reassessment or by way of rectification of mistake." [Empha…

M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2519/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2519/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Garg Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg 9775 F (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2520/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Cliff Treximpvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 3(2), Kolkata 57, Burtolla Street, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Kolkata – 700 007. Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc 0961 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.2521/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Span Foundation Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd. 3(2), Kolkata Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, 57, Burtolla Street, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Kolkata – 700 007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 4605 C (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Bhoomija Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 263

…s dismissed on the proposition that the bar which applies to the assessing officer equally applies to the CIT, for the purposes of section 263 of the Act. c) The Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del) observed as under: " ... It is well settled principle of law that what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. If the Income tax Officer does not possess the power of review, he cannot be permitted to achieve the said object by taking recourse to initiating a proceeding of reassessment or by way of rectification of mistake." [Empha…

Amolika Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -9(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 505/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. R. C. Sharma, Am & Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 505 & 506/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08&2008-09)

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel, ARFor Respondent: Sh. M. C. Omi
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…icer, and in the absence of any new tangible material on record, the order of the Assessing Officer for reopening is bad in law as has been held in the following judgments. i) Kelvinator India Ltd., (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii) Kalvinator of India Ltd., (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del HC) iii) Amitabh Bachchan, (2012) 349 ITR 76 (Bom HC) iv) 11 I.T.A. No. 505 & 506/Mum/2018 Amolika Constructions Pvt. Ltd. CartiniIndia Ltd., (2009) 314 ITR 275 (Bom HC) v) Asian Paints Ltd., (2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom HC). Furthermore, we observe that the reasons recorded by the AO nowhere speaks that there was failure on the part of the assess…

Latha Sundar, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1393/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1393, 1394 & 1395/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Ruby George, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1393, 1394 & 1395/CHNY/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Latha Sundar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 522, 26th Street, Non Corporate Ward 8(4) Asthalakshmi Nagar, Chennai. Alapakkam, Chennai 600 116. [PAN AWHPS 0612H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. M. Karunakaran, Adv. अपीलाथ" क"…