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 367,368 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.

Ramdoss Ramvijay Kumar, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 14(5), Chennai

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

ITA 3096/CHNY/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3096/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3096/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07 Ramdoss Ramvijay Kumar, Income Tax Officer, No. 3/227, Balram Reddy Colony, v. Non-Corporate Ward -14(5), Parthasarathy Nagar, Chennai. Manapakkam, Chennai – 600 016. [PAN:AAEPV-5363-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. K. Vishva Padmanabhan, CA अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

DCIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi vs. Canon India Pvt. Ltd, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is otios

ITA 6367/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2009-10 Canon India Pvt. Ltd. 7Th Dcit Circle – 5 (2) Vs Floor, Tower-B, Building New Delhi No.5, Dlf Epitome, Dlf Phase-3, Gurgaon Pan No.Aaacc4275D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10Section 10ASection 143Section 148

…sessment by the issue of notice u/s.148 of the Act is nothing but change of opinion as no new fact have been brought on record to justify the reopening and, therefore, the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Limited 320 ITR 561 squarely apply. 18. We are of the considered view that the assessee has disclosed truly and fully all the facts relevant for the completion of the assessment on the basis of which the AO framed the original assessment order dated 10.02.2014, therefore, the assumption jurisdiction u/s. 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act is bad i…

DCIT, CC-2(1), Chennai vs. M/S, Jan De Nul Dredging (I)(P)Ltd, Chennai

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

ITA 870/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.870/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Jan De Nul Dredging (I)(P) Ltd., “Capital”, 10Th Floor, No. 554/555, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Room No. 511, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Mount Road, Chennai 600 018. Block, No. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaacj6482G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ashik Shah, C.A. & Ms. C. Sowndarya, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 6, Chennai, Dated 26.08.2020 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Dredging Services & Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12 On 30.11.2011 Admitting Total Income Of ₹.3,86,20,850/-. The Return Filed By The Assessee Was Initially Processed Under Section 143(1)

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Ashik Shah, C.A. &

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

…on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all facts necessary for assessment. The existence of tangible material is essential to safeguard against an arbitrary exercise of this power. [Foramer France 264 ITR 566 (SC) Kelvinator India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) H.K. Buildcon Ltd. v. ITO 339 ITR 535 (Guj) Aentis Pharma Ltd. v. ACIT 323 IT 570 (Bom) Respectfully following the above decisions, I am of the considered view that inasmuch as there was no failure on the part of the appellant to disclose fully and truly all facts necessary for assessment, the invocation of section 147 is bad in law and the…

Bharti Telemedia Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 9622/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Meena, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 147

…herein no new facts have come to the knowledge of the Assessing Officer. 3) That the Assessing Officer/ CIT(A) have erred both on facts and in law in disregarding the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) and in ITO vs Techspan India Private Ltd. & Anr. (2018) 404 ITR 101 302 CTR 74 (SC). 4) That the Assessing Officer/ CIT(A) have erred both on facts and in law in not appreciating that a detailed factual and legal submission was submitted by the Appellant before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings on January 31,…

DCIT CC-2(1), Chennai vs. M/S Green Star Fertilizers Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 868/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 868/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Green Star Fertilizers Income-Tax, V. Limited, No. 88, Spic House, 7Th Floor, Corporate Circle-2(1), Chennai. Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aadcg-9451-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. D. Hem Bhupal, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Appellant: Shri. D. Hem Bhupal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 43A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 868/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Green Star Fertilizers Income-tax, v. Limited, No. 88, SPIC House, 7th Floor, Corporate Circle-2(1), Chennai. Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 018. [PAN: AADCG-9451-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri.…

Prince Property Management Services, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Circle 10(2), Chennai

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

ITA 328/CHNY/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.328/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Prince Property Management Services, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, New No. 61, Old No. 17, Ormes Road, Non Corporate Ward 10(2), Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010. Chennai. [Pan:Aaifp9177F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri I. Dinesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 11.03.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2014-15 On 30.11.2014 Declaring Total Income Of ₹.1,87,99,770/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices

For Appellant: Shri I. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

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

…y the Assessing Officer. Again for the same reasons, the assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Act is a mere change of opinion, which is not permissible in law as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC) and prayed for quashing the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR has filed detailed written submissions, which reads as under: 4 I.T.A. No.328/Chny/22 “During the hearing, the assessee's counsel stated that the reason for reopening is on account of change in opinion of the Asses…

ACIT 6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Charak Pharma P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5544/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5544/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11) Acit-6(2)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Charak Pharma Pvt. R. No. 504, 5Th Floor, Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 21, 2Nd Floor, Evergreen Road, Mumbai-400020. Indl. Estate, Shakti Mills Lane, Dr. Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400011. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcc4014A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Krupa Gandhi Revenue By: Shri Hiren Bhatt (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai Dated 16.06.2017 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Holding The Ao’S Action Of Re-Opening The Assessment For Ay 2010-11 Was Bad In Law, Since It Was Based On Change Of Opinion.

For Appellant: Shri Krupa GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Hiren Bhatt (DR)

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5544/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11) ACIT-6(2)(1) बिधम/ M/s. Charak Pharma Pvt. R. No. 504, 5th Floor, Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 21, 2nd Floor, Evergreen Road, Mumbai-400020. Indl. Estate, Shakti Mills Lane, Dr. Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400011. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCC4014A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Krupa Gandhi Revenue by: Shri Hiren Bhatt (DR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing…

The Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1), Raipur vs. M/S Sankalp Realities, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 47/RPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur13 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.47/Rpr/2018 Co. No.01/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sankalp Realities, 28/620 Anand Niwas, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Abcsf6391P ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ilable before his predecessor at the time of framing of the original assessment, which, is not permissible in the eyes of law. Our aforesaid conviction is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court in its aforesaid order, had held, that the case of an assessee cannot be reopened on the basis of a mere “change of opinion” by observing as under:- "On going through the changes, quoted above, made to s. 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, reopening could be done under above…

ITO 8(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Sentia Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2661/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, Adv./Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 28

…TD 98 (Mumbai) (TM ) (Trib) ' Asst CIT v Rolta India Ltd. (2011)132 ITD 98 (Mumbai) (TM ) (Trib) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del) (FB) • CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del) (FB) 1998)Approved by Supreme Court in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) • (Asst yr 1997-1998)Approved by Supreme Court in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) 1998)Approved by Supreme Court in (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) • D. T. & T. D. C. Ltd. vs. CIT (2010) 324 ITR 234 (Del.). D. T. & T. D. C. Ltd. vs. CIT (2010) 324 ITR 234 (Del.). M.J. Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs. CIT • M.J. Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs. CIT (2008) 297 ITR 119 (Bom) (A…

Shri Pritam Singh Gabel, Janjgir-Champa vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Janjgir Champa, Janjgir Champa

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 154/RPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.154/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Preetam Singh Gabel, M/S. Preetam Tractors, Baradwar Road, P.O. Sakti, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Pan : Agipg1118M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(2)(b)

…ccessor A.O could have not reopened the concluded assessment of the assessee u/s. 147 of the Act. In support of his aforesaid contention, the Ld. AR had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) and the order of the ITAT, Mumbai, “D” Bench in the case of Medley Pharmaceutical Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2020) 118 Taxman.com. 44. On a specific query by the Bench that on what basis it was being claimed that the assessee’s claim for deduction of commission expenditure had been looked into by the A.O while framing original assessment u/s.143(3) date…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. Nsl Properties Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 22/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 22/Hyd/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Nsl Properties Private Income Tax, Vs. Limited, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan No. Aaccn7387G] (अपीलधर्थी / Appellant) (प्रत् यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 22/Hyd/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner of M/s. NSL Properties Private Income Tax, Vs. Limited, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN No. AACCN7387G] (अपीलधर्थी / Appellant) (प्रत् यर्थी / Respondent) सी.ओ./ C.O. No. 14/Hyd/2022 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 22/Hyd/2020) निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 M/s. NSL Properties Private Deputy Commissioner of Limited…

M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DDIT It-3(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 1510/MUM/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2003-2004

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…should postulate a bona fide belief that income has escaped assessment. In order to support the aforesaid contentions reliance was placed of the judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. : 320 ITR 561 and the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Assistant Director of Income-tax (International Taxation)-1 (1), Mumbai vs. Delta Airline Inc. : (2008) 26 SOT 514 (Mumbai) 10.4. The Ld. Senior Counsel for GCC submitted that in the present case, the learned Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment proceedings based on the…

M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ADIT (Int. Taxation) - 3(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 3135/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2002-2003

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

ADIT (It)-3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Global Cricket Corporation Pte. Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and cross-objection by the Assessee are disposed off as infructuous

ITA 3130/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2022AY 2002-2003

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

ITO Wa, Tiruchengode vs. C.Gopalan, Namakkal

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

ITA 941/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, CITFor Respondent: Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate for Shri G. Baskar, Advocate

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…urisdiction of the AO to re- open the assessment for this A.Y beyond 4 years in the absence of any allegation of non-disclosure as required in the 1st Proviso to Sec. 147 of the Act. Reliance is placed on the decision of the SC in CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India (320 ITR 561). For a fact the CIT(A) himself specifically records in para 8, page 8 of his order: "8.........In the instant case, there was no failure on part of the appellant to disclose truly and fully the material facts. .........." 2. In fact, this very issue was considered by the AO in the original scrutiny proceedings itself and no disallowance was re…

M/S. Global Arkitekts Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Circle - 2 (2), Chennai

ITA 708/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) &For Respondent: Shri S. Chandrasekaran (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…the part of the appellant to disclose fully and truly material facts and ought to have appreciate that re- appraisal of existing details provided by the Appellant right from the assessment year 2007-08 defying the law declared by the Supreme Court reported in 320 ITR 561 would vitiate the entire re-assessment proceedings under consideration. 6. The CIT (Appeals) erred in sustaining the treatment of the surplus from sale of exempted category of agricultural lands to the tune of Rs.17,86,27,910/- as income under the business while computing taxable total income without assigning reasons and justification. 7. The CI…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Raipur vs. M/S Varsha Construction, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 111/RPR/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.111/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Varsha Construction 2Nd Floor, 25-26, Millennium Plaza, Raipur (C.G.) Pan :Aaefv8399M ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194C

…earlier framed by the A.O u/s.143(3), dated 26.12.2009 on the basis of a change of opinion can by no means be held to be justified. The aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC). The Hon’ble Apex Court in its aforesaid order, had held, that the case of an assessee cannot be reopened on the basis of a mere “change of opinion” by observing as under:- "On going through the changes, quoted above, made to s. 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, reopening could be done under above…

The ACIT, Central-1, Indore vs. M/S Surya Infra Venture Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 232/IND/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)Section 40a

…e action of the Ld Assessing Officer in reopening the completed case of the respondent based on similar set of facts which tantamounted to change of opinion as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT Vs Kelvinator of India as reported in 320 ITR 561. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the Ld Assessing Officer in reopening the case of the respondent after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year more so when assessment had already been completed under section 143(3) of the Act and th…

The Ait, Entral-1, Indore vs. Surya Infraventure P Ltd, Indore

ITA 217/IND/2021[201-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)Section 40a

The ACIT, Circle 2(1), Indore vs. M/S Surya Infra Venture Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 216/IND/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)Section 40a