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 367,515 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.

DCIT -5(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Morries Energy Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5227/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5227/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-5(2)(2) M/S Morries Energy Limited बनाम/ 5Th Floor, 571, Aaykar Bhawan 11-A, Embassy Apartments Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 46, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai-36 Pan No. : Aabcg-4831-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Ms. Poonam Agnihotri – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Joshi– Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 25/05/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 01/06/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Poonam Agnihotri – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Joshi– Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “डी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा"" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5227/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) DCIT-5(2)(2) M/s Morries Energy Limited बनाम/ 5th Floor, 571, Aaykar Bhawan 11-A, Embassy Apartments Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 46, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai-36 PAN No. : AABCG-4831-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee by :…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 30/CHANDI/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR

…wing latest judgments.- a). Commissioner of Income Tax V /s Hindustan Zinc Ltd [2007] 393 ITR 264 -RAJ- HC. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has relied on the following celebrated judgments:- i). CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii). Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR

…wing latest judgments.- a). Commissioner of Income Tax V /s Hindustan Zinc Ltd [2007] 393 ITR 264 -RAJ- HC. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has relied on the following celebrated judgments:- i). CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii). Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 29/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR

…wing latest judgments.- a). Commissioner of Income Tax V /s Hindustan Zinc Ltd [2007] 393 ITR 264 -RAJ- HC. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has relied on the following celebrated judgments:- i). CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii). Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 28/CHANDI/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR

…wing latest judgments.- a). Commissioner of Income Tax V /s Hindustan Zinc Ltd [2007] 393 ITR 264 -RAJ- HC. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has relied on the following celebrated judgments:- i). CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii). Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

DCIT, Circle-1(Exemption), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal School( Manav Mangal Society), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 27/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR

…wing latest judgments.- a). Commissioner of Income Tax V /s Hindustan Zinc Ltd [2007] 393 ITR 264 -RAJ- HC. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has relied on the following celebrated judgments:- i). CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii). Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 2/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR

…wing latest judgments.- a). Commissioner of Income Tax V /s Hindustan Zinc Ltd [2007] 393 ITR 264 -RAJ- HC. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has relied on the following celebrated judgments:- i). CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii). Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR

…wing latest judgments.- a). Commissioner of Income Tax V /s Hindustan Zinc Ltd [2007] 393 ITR 264 -RAJ- HC. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has relied on the following celebrated judgments:- i). CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii). Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 136/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR

…wing latest judgments.- a). Commissioner of Income Tax V /s Hindustan Zinc Ltd [2007] 393 ITR 264 -RAJ- HC. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has relied on the following celebrated judgments:- i). CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii). Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case o…

The ACIT, Circle, Ratlam vs. M/S. Mahalaxmi Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd., Ratlam

ITA 956/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Miss Madhumita Roy

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…from VAT Department notice was issued. It has been consistently held that mere change of opinion cannot be a basis to issue a notice u/s 148 of the Act. We find support from in the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC). 15. Under these given facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere in the finding of Ld. CIT(A) quashing reassessment proceedings. Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 16. Now we take second issue raised in ground nos. 2 to 6 with regard to claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act. We find that Ld. CIT(A) a…

The ACIT Circle, Ratlam vs. M/S. Mahalaxmi Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd., Ratlam

ITA 955/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Miss Madhumita Roy

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…from VAT Department notice was issued. It has been consistently held that mere change of opinion cannot be a basis to issue a notice u/s 148 of the Act. We find support from in the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC). 15. Under these given facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere in the finding of Ld. CIT(A) quashing reassessment proceedings. Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 16. Now we take second issue raised in ground nos. 2 to 6 with regard to claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act. We find that Ld. CIT(A) a…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Andhra Bank, Hyderabad

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 315/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Union Bank Of India, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Erstwhile Andhra Income-Tax, Bank), Hyderabad. Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aabca 7375C (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Union Bank Of India, Income-Tax, (Erstwhile Andhra Circle – 1(1), Bank), Hyderabad. Hyderabad Pan – Aabca 7375C

For Appellant: Shri S. AnanthamFor Respondent: Smt. Amisha S. Gupt

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36

…im a ground to conclude that income had escaped assessment and, therefore, the assessment needed to be reopened. The assessee had no control over the way an assessment order is drafted. (6) In Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kelvinator of India Limited, (2010) 320 ITR 561, the Supreme Court observed that post 01-04- 1989, the power to reopen is much wider. However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words ‘reason to believe’ failing which, Section 147 would give arbitrary powers to the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessments on the basis of ‘mere change of opinion’ which cannot be per se reaso…

Union Bank of India (Erstwhile-Andhra Bank), Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 192/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Union Bank Of India, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Erstwhile Andhra Income-Tax, Bank), Hyderabad. Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aabca 7375C (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Union Bank Of India, Income-Tax, (Erstwhile Andhra Circle – 1(1), Bank), Hyderabad. Hyderabad Pan – Aabca 7375C

For Appellant: Shri S. AnanthamFor Respondent: Smt. Amisha S. Gupt

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36

…im a ground to conclude that income had escaped assessment and, therefore, the assessment needed to be reopened. The assessee had no control over the way an assessment order is drafted. (6) In Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kelvinator of India Limited, (2010) 320 ITR 561, the Supreme Court observed that post 01-04- 1989, the power to reopen is much wider. However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words ‘reason to believe’ failing which, Section 147 would give arbitrary powers to the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessments on the basis of ‘mere change of opinion’ which cannot be per se reaso…

ITO 2(1), Ujjain vs. Shri Santosh Agrawal Prop. M/S. Santosh Enterprises, Ujjain

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 989/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2010-11

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54B

…duction under section 54B of the Act has been disallowed in the proceeding under Section 143(3) of the Act. In support of his argument he has relied on the judicial pronouncements in the following matter ; 3 Santosh Agrawal (i) CIT V/s Kelvinator India Ltd 320 ITR 561 (ii) ITO V/s Techspan India (P) Ltd (2018) 404 ITR 10(SC) (iii) Asteroids Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd V/s DCIT (2009) (iv) CITV/s Usha International Ltd 348 ITR 484 (Delhi) 4. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties. We have also perused the relevant materials placed on record including the order passed by the Ld…

DCIT, Circle- 62(1), New Delhi vs. Paveljeet Singh Ruppal, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1449/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Goel, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(iii)

…n record to show that any income has escaped assessment due to any failure on the part of the appellant. 4.4.2 In this regard, reference is made to the decision of Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. 7 Kelvinator of India Limited, (2010) 320 ITR 561, in which the Supreme Court observed that post 01-04-1989, the power to reopen is much wider. However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words ‘reason to believe’ failing which, Section 147 would give arbitrary powers to the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessments on the basis of mere change of opinion’ which cannot be per s…

Razual Rahman, Jsr vs. ITO Ward-2(4), Jsr

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 356/RAN/2017[08-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Apr 2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.356/Ran/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Razual Rahman.…....……………… … ...........…………………………Appellant C/O Ca Nawal Kishore Mahato, Flat No.401, 4Th Floor, K.C. Apartment, 137, Ambagan Road, Sakchi, Jamshedpur, Pin-831001. [Pan:Agvpr2426E] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(4), Jamshedpur...........……………………...………..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Chinmaya Aurangabadkar, Jcit, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing :March 25, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 30, 2021 Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 10.10.2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur [Hereinafter As ‘Cit(A)’]. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

…eme Court Case Laws GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd Vs ITO (2003) 259 ITR 19 (2002) 125 Taxman 963 (SC. (Para-3) Cadla Health Care Ltd Vs Asst CIT (Special Civil Application No 155 66 of 2011 dated 14-12-2011 (Para 5.11) and CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561/187 Taxman 312(SC) (Para 8) The above case laws supports that responding U/S 147 of Income-tax Act, 1961is null and void on the basis ofabove agraw of Learned AO. The captioned addition is the consequent of re-opening U/S 147 of the Act. Therefore, the same may be deleted in toto. 08. The Appellant craves leave to add amount, alter, vary and / or…

The ITO, - 2, Itarsi vs. M/S. Manish Kumar Rakesh Kumar, Hoshagabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 128/IND/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Apr 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2005-06

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND BEFORE HON’BLE MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year 2005-06 Income Tax Officer-2, Itarsi : Revenue V/s M/s. Manish Kumar Rakesh Kumar, NH-69, Powarkheda, Hoshangabad : Assessee PAN : AAKFM3224A Revenue by Shri Harshit Bari, Sr.DR Assessee by Shri Girish Agrawal & Miss Nisha Lahoti, ARs Date of Hearing 05.04.2021 Date of Pronouncement 13.04.2021 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J.M The instant appeal is directed against the order dated 15.12.2014 passed by the Lea…

M/S. the Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(2)(1), Bangalore

Accordingly, Ground No.3 raised by revenue for assessment years 2011-12 stands dismissed

ITA 1761/BANG/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT)For Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanyan, CA

…ded also reveal that, there has been no new material available with the Ld.AO which could justify the reopening of a concluded assessment beyond a period of 4 years. We place reliance on following decision in support: CIT vs Kelvinator India Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) ACIT vs FIS Global Business Solutions India (P) Ltd. (2019) 262 Taxmann 369 (SC) Champ Energy Ventures Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO (2019) 102 taxmann.com 374 (Bom) ITO vs TechSpan India Pvt.Ltd., (2018) 92 taxmann.com 361 (SC) Respectfully following the ratio is laid down above decisions, we set aside and quash the notice dated 03/09/2014, seeking to re…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range - 5, Bangalore vs. M/S. the Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank Limited, Bangalore

Accordingly, Ground No.3 raised by revenue for assessment years 2011-12 stands dismissed

ITA 1327/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT)For Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanyan, CA

…ded also reveal that, there has been no new material available with the Ld.AO which could justify the reopening of a concluded assessment beyond a period of 4 years. We place reliance on following decision in support: CIT vs Kelvinator India Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) ACIT vs FIS Global Business Solutions India (P) Ltd. (2019) 262 Taxmann 369 (SC) Champ Energy Ventures Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO (2019) 102 taxmann.com 374 (Bom) ITO vs TechSpan India Pvt.Ltd., (2018) 92 taxmann.com 361 (SC) Respectfully following the ratio is laid down above decisions, we set aside and quash the notice dated 03/09/2014, seeking to re…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(2)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S the Karnataka State Co-Operative Apex Bank Ltd, Bangalore

Accordingly, Ground No.3 raised by revenue for assessment years 2011-12 stands dismissed

ITA 2160/BANG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT)For Respondent: Shri. S. Ramasubramanyan, CA

…ded also reveal that, there has been no new material available with the Ld.AO which could justify the reopening of a concluded assessment beyond a period of 4 years. We place reliance on following decision in support: CIT vs Kelvinator India Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) ACIT vs FIS Global Business Solutions India (P) Ltd. (2019) 262 Taxmann 369 (SC) Champ Energy Ventures Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO (2019) 102 taxmann.com 374 (Bom) ITO vs TechSpan India Pvt.Ltd., (2018) 92 taxmann.com 361 (SC) Respectfully following the ratio is laid down above decisions, we set aside and quash the notice dated 03/09/2014, seeking to re…