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

1,673 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), 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 147, Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 151, Section 143(2).

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

320 ITR 561Supreme Court of India2010#18 most cited

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

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

1,673

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 of India · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment proceedings · mere change of opinion · fresh tangible material · escapement of income · reason to believe · validity of reassessment

Also reported as

187 Taxmann 3122 SCC 723187 Taxmann.com 312

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 151 Section 143(2)Section 68 Section 139

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

kelvinator fresh tangible material mere change of opinion first proviso to section 147 material facts necessary for assessment full and true disclosure change of opinion beyond four years live link tangible material escapement of income reason to believe

Judgments citing CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

Bhartiya Samruddhi Investments and Consulting Services Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 4(2), Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1637/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Yr. : 2012-13 Bhartiya Samruddhi Vs. Acit, Circle 4(2), Investments & Consulting New Delhi Services Limited, F-5, Ground Floor, Greater Kailash, Kailash Colony, Part-I, New Delhi – 110 048 (Pan: Aaacb5336R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 37

…r refers to following case laws – Karam Chand Appliances Pvt. Ltd. & Another vs. DC IT (2017) 399 ITR 323(Delhi) Donald Son India Filters System Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 371 ITR 87 Madhukar Khosla vs. ACIT (2014)367 ITR 165 (Delhi) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India 320 ITR 561 ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) In view of the above submission, legally as well as factually, 148 action of the AO deserve to be cancelled and filed, as there is no jurisdiction for taking action u/s. 148/147 as explained above. The reasons recorded are not germane to the reassessment proceedings and does not assist the AO in…

The Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Kwality Biscuits Pvt Ltd

The appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned

ITA/155/2023HC Karnataka30 Sept 2024

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

Section 147Section 260

…r with due diligence required for reopening of the assessment? 3. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in quashing the reassessment order relying on the decision of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) which is easily distinguishable as in the instant case, the reopening of assessment is not the change of opinion of the Assessing Officer? 4. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:41199-DB ITA No. 155 of 2023 case, the Tribunal was right in not considering that the Assessing Officer's…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2892/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Small Industries Income Tax Circle- Development Bank Of 3(3)(1) India Room No. 609, Sme Development Centre, Aaykar Bhavan, C-11, G- Block, Vs. M. K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Churchgate, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400020. Pan: Aabcs3480N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule- CIT D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…that income has escaped the assessment. ii. It is a clear case of change of opinion. iii. The AO has no power to review, he has the power to reassess The assessee relied upon following case laws in support of his contention:  CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561  CIT vs. Kapil Dev (2009) 177 Taxman 6 (Del) M/s. Small Industries Development Bank Of India.; A. Y.2016-17  G.N. Shavo (Wine) (P) Ltd. vs. ITO & Anr (2003) 206 ITR 513 (Cal)  Sita World Travels (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (2005) 274 ITR 186 (Del)  Gujarat Fluoro chemicals Ltd. vs. DCIT (2008) 15 DTR (Guj)  Universal Subscription Agency (P) Ltd. v…

Paris Elysees India Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-7, Jaipur

ITA 681/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Him Against The Order Dated 05.12.2019 Passed Under Section 147/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, [ For Short “Act” ] By Acit, Circle-07, Jaipur.

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 253(5)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 681/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2012-13 cuke Paris Elysees India Pvt. Ltd., DCIT, Circle-07 Vs. A 135 Parfume Factory, Jaipur Heerawala RIICO, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCP 4088 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Rohan Sogani, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Reve…

ACIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Sml Isuzu Ltd., Chandigarh

ITA 644/CHANDI/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate and Ms. Somya Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 3

…ssessment. The Ld. DR has stated that the assessee has mainly relied upon the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kelvinator India Ltd. reported in (2002) 256 ITR (Del) (FB) which was subsequently upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC). The said judgement be read in holistic manner. Basis that he contents that there should not be review of its own order by the AO as the AO power is limited to rectification under section 154. Statue must be read as a whole. It is contended that when there is no discussion on the issues in the assessment order and no details were called for…

Aadhunik Infrastructure Development Private Limited, Jalgaon vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jalgaon

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

ITA 439/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2012-13 Aadhunik Infrastructure Development DCIT, Circle – 1, Jalgaon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Old Dhulia Road, Nimkhedi Khurd, Jalgaon – 425001 PAN: AAACJ4463B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 04-09-2024 Date of pronouncement : 19-09-2024 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31.07.2021 of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi rela…

Satya Kinkar Roy, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-23(1).Hg, Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 865/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.865/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Satya Kinkar Roy……………….………………… ........................……Appellant C/O S. N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street, Kol-1. [Pan: Ahapr7203H] Vs. Acit, Circle-23(1), Hooghly.................…................…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 13, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 11, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.06.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee Through His Grounds Of Appeal Has Agitated Against The Validity Of Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act As Well As The Validity Of The Impugned Addition Of Rs.48,76,881/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Failure Of The Assessee To Reconcile The Figures In Respect Of Amount Received As Incentives & Discounts. 3. Initially, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Act. The Basic Reason For

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…reopened. The impugned additions have been made only on the basis of reappreciation of records, which is nothing but a change of opinion. The ratio of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Kelvinator India Ltd.’ reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) is squarely applicable to the case in hand and therefore, the reopening is held bad in law. 6. Even, on merits, the assessee has duly reconciled the difference relating to incentives and discounts received and given. The Assessing Officer has made the additions that the aforesaid entries were not booked in the Profit & Loss A/c and that only…

Smt. Lakshmi Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-4(5), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with no orders as to costs

ITA 286/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: recording satisfaction for issuance of notice since the information is specific. Thus the reasons recorded for re-opening is on borrowed satisfaction and not on any satisfaction by the AO. The

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…r to reopen concluded assessment can validly be exercised. The consideration which ought to weigh with the Revenue and are considered valid are the existence of tangible maternal or information in the light of the judgment in CIT v. Kelvinator of India (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) 9. Having regard to the contents of the notice for AY 2003-04, the court a unable to agree with the findings of the ITAT it constitutes reference to tangible material "outside the record, i.e. information based upon the investigation of the Commissioner of Central Excise with respect to the purchases made by the assesses. However, as far as…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai, DCIT Circle, Aaykar Bhavan vs. Svc Co-Operative Bank Limited

ITA 691/MUM/2024[2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2024

Bench: Smt. Kavitha Rajgopal & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Ld. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…se the primary facts necessary for his assessment fully and truly can neither be ignored nor watered down. All the requirements stipulated by section 147 must be given due and equal weight. 35. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd., (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC); (2010) 2 SCC 723.] is a case where this court examined the question as to whether the concept of “change of opinion” stands obliterated with effect from April 1, 1989, i.e., after substitution of section 147 of the Act by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987. This court considered the changes made in section 147 and found that prior to…

Shilpa Manish Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 27(3)(3), Navi Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3089/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Neha ParanjpeFor Respondent: Shri P. Sudhakar Naik, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…or reopening the assessment starts with “on verification of the records” shows that there is no new tangible material available with the AO and his reopening is based on the facts on record. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd 320 ITR 561 had the occasion to consider a similar issue and held that the AO has power to reopen provided there is tangible material to come to conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment reasons must have a live link with formation of belief. 7. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of India Finance and Construction Company Pvt. Ltd…

Kapil Infra Avenues Private Limited, Vijayawada vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 686/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…rs for the assessment year 2016-17, though there is no material with the AO pertaining to the assessee for AY 2013-14. This legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment and further reasons must have a live link for formation of belief. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT Vs…

Kasusalya Shelters Private Limited, Karimnagar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 680/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 153CSection 36(1)(iii)

…td for the assessment year 2016-17, though there is no material with the AO pertaining to the assessee for AY 2013-14. This legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment and further 6 reasons must have a live link for formation of belief. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT…

Kasusalya Shelters Private Limited, Karimnagar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 679/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 153CSection 36(1)(iii)

Kausalya Agro Forms & Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 676/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…td for the assessment year 2016-17, though there is no material with the AO pertaining to the assessee for AY 2013-14. This legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to conclusion 6 that there is escapement of income from assessment and further reasons must have a live link for formation of belief. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT…

Kausalya Agro Forms & Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 675/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…td for the assessment year 2016-17, though there is no material with the AO pertaining to the assessee for AY 2013-14. This legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to conclusion 6 that there is escapement of income from assessment and further reasons must have a live link for formation of belief. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT…

Indur Developers and Agencies Private Limited, Vijayawada vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 672/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…rs for the assessment year 2016-17, though there is no material with the AO pertaining to the assessee for AY 2013-14. This legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to conclusion that there is 13 escapement of income from assessment and further reasons must have a live link for formation of belief. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCI…

Indur Avenues and Foods Private Limited, Nizamabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 667/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…rs for the assessment year 2016-17, though there is no material with the AO pertaining to the assessee for AY 2013-14. This legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to conclusion that there is 13 escapement of income from assessment and further reasons must have a live link for formation of belief. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCI…

Indur Avenues and Foods Private Limited, Nizamabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 666/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…rs for the assessment year 2016-17, though there is no material with the AO pertaining to the assessee for AY 2013-14. This legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to conclusion that there is 13 escapement of income from assessment and further reasons must have a live link for formation of belief. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCI…

Ujwala Publications and Developers Private Limited, Warangal vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 658/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2012-13 Ujwala Publications & Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Developers Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Warangal. Central Circle – 2(3), Hyderabad. Pan – Aaacu6544J (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. Ramarao, Advocate Revenue By: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 31.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.09.2024

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

Nalgonda Realtors Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 657/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr.AR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…rs for the assessment year 2016-17, though there is no material with the AO pertaining to the assessee for AY 2013-14. This legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) wherein it has been clearly held that the Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment and further reasons must 6 have a live link for formation of belief. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DCIT…