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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.?

439 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (256 ITR 1), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 153A, Section 151.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (256 ITR 1)

D.C.I.T., Circle-11 Kolkata, Kolkata vs. M/S Bishwanath Tea Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2754/KOL/2013[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 1999-2000

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S.Damle, FCA

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 33ASection 72

…has escaped assessment. Reliance was placed by the Assessee on the ratio laid down in the following decisions: (i) Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT (291 ITR 500)(SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Foramers France (264 ITR 566) (SC) (iii) Kelvinators of India Ltd (256 ITR 1) (Del) affirmed in (320 ITR 561) ITA No.2754/Kol/2013 – M/s. Bishwanath Tea Co. Ltd. A.Y.1999-2000 9 (iv) CIT vs Usha International Ltd. (348 ITR 485) (Del) The CIT(A) held that the re-assessment proceedings had been initiated after a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year and since the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act h…

Girish Mulji Furia, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4073/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R P Tolaniassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Vipul ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Beena Santosh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ed that the A.O. was already aware of all the facts and therefore this is a case of merely change of opinion. The appellant has referred to the decisions in the case of Sita World Travels (I) Ltd. vs. CIT 274 ITR 186 (Del) and CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del). 5. Decision: I have gone through the facts of the case and find that the A.O. has initiated the proceedings u/s. 148 on the basis of information available through AIR regarding the deposits in the accounts held by the assessee. The A.O. has in fact disposed off by a speaking order the objections raised by the assessee to the reopening. The r…

M/S. Sahdev Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2798/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2796, 2797 & 2798/Del/2013 Assessment Years: 2002-03, 2004-05 & 2005-06 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Sahdev Jewellers, C/o- S.Kumar Jain & Associates, 2481/9, Tax, Circle-33(1), New Delhi Gurudwara Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi PAN : AALFS0015Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Salil Aggrarwal, Adv. Respondent by Sh. S.K. Jain, Sr.DR Date of hearing 28.11.2016 Date of pronouncement 17.01.2017 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: These three appeals of the assessee a…

M/S. Sahdev Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2797/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2796, 2797 & 2798/Del/2013 Assessment Years: 2002-03, 2004-05 & 2005-06 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Sahdev Jewellers, C/o- S.Kumar Jain & Associates, 2481/9, Tax, Circle-33(1), New Delhi Gurudwara Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi PAN : AALFS0015Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Salil Aggrarwal, Adv. Respondent by Sh. S.K. Jain, Sr.DR Date of hearing 28.11.2016 Date of pronouncement 17.01.2017 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: These three appeals of the assessee a…

M/S. Sahdev Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2796/DEL/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2796, 2797 & 2798/Del/2013 Assessment Years: 2002-03, 2004-05 & 2005-06 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Sahdev Jewellers, C/o- S.Kumar Jain & Associates, 2481/9, Tax, Circle-33(1), New Delhi Gurudwara Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi PAN : AALFS0015Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Salil Aggrarwal, Adv. Respondent by Sh. S.K. Jain, Sr.DR Date of hearing 28.11.2016 Date of pronouncement 17.01.2017 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: These three appeals of the assessee a…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6647/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 80

…Bom) are also on similar lines where proceedings u/s 147 have been held to be invalid because re- opening was based on mere "change of opinion". In these decisions, the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court (Full Bench), in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) (FB) has been followed. The decision of Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd, 114 ITR 404 (AP) also supports the case of the appellant. In the said case, it was held that, once the Assessing Officer examined the claim of "workmen and staff welfare expenses" during original proceedings, he could not re-open t…

DCIT 1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Intelnet Global Services P. Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7428/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-1(2)(1), M/S Intelnet Global Services R. No.535, 5Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Intelnet Towers, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Mindspace, Malad West, Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaaci7387P C.O. No.99/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.7428/Mum/2014) Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Intelnet Global Services Dcit-1(2)(1), Pvt. Ltd. Intelnet Towers, R. No.535, 5Th Floor, बनाम/ Mindspace, Malad West, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400064 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaaci7387P

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

…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…

Watson Wyatt India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2004-05 and 2007-08 are allowed

ITA 4523/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.26/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Tower Watson India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Dy. Cit Range 8(3), (Formerly Watson Wyatt India Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd.) M.K.Road, Solitaire Corporate Park, Mumbai- 400020. Bldg. No. 5, 1St Floor, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400 093. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg2955K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M.SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri. O.P.Meena

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43A

…sue regarding unrealized foreign exchange gain. Specific query in this regard was raised during the assessment proceedings and reply thereto was submitted accordingly. Relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Kelvinator of India Ltd., 256 ITR 1 (Del) the Ld. Counsel submitted that reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated on a mere change of opinion, completed assessment can be reopened only when there is a tangible material available with the AO to form a belief that taxable income has escaped assessment and that the reasons recorded in this case do not indicate application of mind an…

Towers Watson India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. RG. 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2004-05 and 2007-08 are allowed

ITA 26/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.26/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Tower Watson India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Dy. Cit Range 8(3), (Formerly Watson Wyatt India Aayakar Bhavan, Pvt. Ltd.) M.K.Road, Solitaire Corporate Park, Mumbai- 400020. Bldg. No. 5, 1St Floor, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400 093. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacg2955K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M.SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri. O.P.Meena

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(vii)Section 43A

…sue regarding unrealized foreign exchange gain. Specific query in this regard was raised during the assessment proceedings and reply thereto was submitted accordingly. Relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Kelvinator of India Ltd., 256 ITR 1 (Del) the Ld. Counsel submitted that reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated on a mere change of opinion, completed assessment can be reopened only when there is a tangible material available with the AO to form a belief that taxable income has escaped assessment and that the reasons recorded in this case do not indicate application of mind an…

Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai vs. Muimbai Stock Brokers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed”

ITA 6369/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2006-07 Acit-4(3), M/S Mumbai Stock 6Th Floor, R. No.649, बनाम/ Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, R No.10A, 1St Floor, 7/10, Vs. M.K. Road, Botwala Building, Mumbai-4020 Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumbai-400023 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aabcm4133A

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 88E

…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…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-9 vs. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd

ITA/689/2016HC Delhi04 Nov 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 143Section 147Section 148

…$~3 & 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 689/2016 & C.M.36846/2016 THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9 ..... Appellant versus TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LTD. ..... Respondent + ITA 690/2016 & C.M.Nos.36848-36849/2016 THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9 ..... Appellant versus TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LTD. ..... Respondent Present: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr.Standing Counsel and Mr.Puneet Rai, Jr.Standing Counsel for the appellants/revenue. Mr.Mayank Nagi, Advocate for the respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'B…

M/S. Escorts Heart Institute & Research Centre Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed on all the grounds

ITA 874/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiescorts Heart Institute & Research Vs. Acit, Centre Ltd, Central Circle-3, Okhla Road, Okhla, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaace8731F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. M. Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Subhash Verma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 234D

…ing which has to be discovered by elaborate arguments or investigation of facts cannot constitute a mistake apparent from the record. 4. Debatable issues where two views are possible are outside the purview of proceedingts u/s 154. C. Judgement relied upon 1. 256 ITR 1 (FB) (Delhi) paras 23 and 15) affirmed in 320 ITR 561 (HON'BLE SUPREME COURT ) 2. CIT Vs. Vac Met Corporation (P) Ltd (1981) 127 ITR 676 (Guj) 3. Cit Vs. Tirupattur Co-op Sugar Mills Ltd 246 ITR 227 (Mad) 4. Cit Vs. Shiv Narain karmendra narain 280 ITR 355 (all) 5. Cit Vs. MMTC ltd 246 ITR 725 (delhi) 6. ACIt Vs. Indian Farmer Fertilizer Co-op Ltd…

Sh. Devender Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3104/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri Prashant Maharishidevender Kumar Aggarwal, Cit 1533, Ranu Bagh, New Delhi Delhi-Ix, New Delhi Vs. Pan:Aaapa1974F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Satish Khosla, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Mitali Madhusmita, CIT DR

Section 143Section 263Section 54Section 54E

…me Court further held that there must be tangible material to come to the conclusion that there has been an escapement of Income. The Apex Court in fact upheld the Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court in matter of CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2002] 256 ITR 1 / 123 Taxman 433 wherein it has been held that the power to reopen an assessment cannot empower an Officer of the Department to reopen the proceeding on the ground that an earlier order was passed without application of mind. An exercise of power in such a manner would amount to a review of an order which is not permissible under the law. Consequen…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Canon India Private Ltd., Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4040/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4040/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs M/S Canon India Pvt. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Tower A & B, Cyber Income Tax, Circle-3(1), New Delhi Green, Dlf Phase-Iii, Gurgaon , Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc4175D Assessee By : Sh. S. K. Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.07.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.10.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 10.06.2010 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Vi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…sement expenditure had been incurred. Therefore, there was no justification for the reassessment 5 Canon India Pvt. Ltd. proceedings. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Eicher Ltd. 294 ITR 310 (Del) " CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) " KLM Royal Dutch Air Lines Vs ACIT 292 ITR 49 (Del) 6. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the only reason for reopening of the case was that the amount of Rs.53,15,240/- had not be credited in the subsequent year. The ld. CIT(A) categorically stated that once the AO had accepted the accounting entr…