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 147Section 143(3)Section 148Section 142(1)Section 151Section 143(2)Section 68Section 139
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

kelvinatorfresh tangible materialmere change of opinionfirst proviso to section 147material facts necessary for assessmentfull and true disclosurechange of opinionbeyond four yearslive linktangible materialescapement of incomereason to believe

Judgments citing CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

Belmarks Metal Works, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 32(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 5198/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Sarkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 234B

…in Phool Chand Bajarang Lai v. ITO (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC) that an Income Tax Officer acquired jurisdiction which comes into his 4 I.T.A. No.5198/DEL/2018 possession subsequently. The Apex Court further clarified in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Limited [2010] 320 ITR 561 (561) (SC) that after April 1, 1989, there must be tangible material to come to the conclusion that there was escapement of income from assessment. Reason must have a link with the formation of the belief.” 4. The ld. Assessing Officer however treated the information received from the Investigation Wing to be correct and after incorporating the…

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Rajahmundry vs. Koduri Venkateswara Subhakar Santharam, Rajahmundry

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

ITA 503/VIZ/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, FCAFor Respondent: Smt.U.Mini Chandran, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 43(5)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 503/VIZ/2019 (Asst. Year : 2007-08) ITO, Ward-1(1), vs. Sri Koduri Venkateswara Rajahmundry. Subhakar Santharam, D.No. 8-2-26, NBR Street, Rajahmundry. PAN No. AECPK 6221 M (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 129/VIZ/2019 (Arising out of I.T.A. No. 503/VIZ/2019) (Asst. Year : 2007-08) Sri Koduri Venkateswara vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Subhakar Santharam, Rajahmundry. D.No. 8-2-26, NBR Street, Rajahmundry. PAN No. AECPK 6221 M (Applicant)…

Dilip B. Desai, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 4(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1975/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 40

…ion or material which has been referred to or relied upon by the Assessing Officer in the reasons recorded to form the belief regarding the escapement of any income of the assessee from the assessment. 6. In the case of CIT –vs.- Kelvinator of India Limited (320 ITR 561), Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that after the amendment made with effect from 1st April, 1989 in the relevant provisions, the Assessing Officer has to reason to believe that income has escaped assessment but this does not imply that the Assessing Officer can reopen an assessment on the mere change of opinion. Explaining further, the Hon’ble Ape…

M/S. Spr & RG Constructions P. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle - 6 (2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2334/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganeshआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2334/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mrs. Vijayaprabha, JCITFor Respondent: 25.02.2020
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 32Section 35D

…13] 29 taxmann.com 392 (Del.) and the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of TANMAC India vs. Dy. CIT [2017] 78 taxmann.com 155 (Mad.). The Ld. Counsel stated that the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) was also considered by Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of TANMAC India (supra) and held as under: M/s. SPR & RG Constructions Pvt. Ltd. :- 6 -: “17. A decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Orient Craft Ltd. (supra) had occasion to consider a similar question and the Division Bench, at Page 546, holds as follows; ‘Having reg…

DCIT, Gurgaon vs. Orient Craft Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 710/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas. CIT-DR
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…erefore, it is a case of mere change of opinion. No new material have been considered by the A.O. The assessee relied upon Judgment of the Honb’le Supreme Court in the 3 ITA.No.710/Del./2017 M/s. Orient Craft Ltd., New Delhi. case of Kelvinator of India Ltd., 228 CTR 488. It was also submitted that A.O. has not disposed of objections filed by the assessee against the reopening of the assessment. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) found the contention of assessee to be correct. The assessee filed objections to the re- assessment proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) found that the objections raised by the assessee against the re-assessment…

DCIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. Tamilnadu Minerals Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 1644/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Philip George, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…14.12.2018. Assessee had also filed Cross Objection that the reopening is 6. bad in law, in as much as, it was prompted by mere change of opinion, placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd, (2010) 320 ITR 561. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on 7. record. Ld. Authorised Representative fairly conceded that objections filed by the assessee against reassessment proceedings were disposed of by the Assessing Officer by passing speaking order. In the ITA No.1644/19 & co79/19 :- 5 -: circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) had seriously fel…

Vaishali Dhargalkar, Mumbai vs. ITO 11(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3106/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Vikas Awasthydr. Vaishali Dhargalkar, C/O. V.S.Gokhale, Flat No.404, Gurukrupa Building, Plot No.19/324, Kastur Park, Shimpoli Road, Boriwali (W) Mumbai 400 092 Pan:Aejpd 5685F ...... Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Mandor VaidyaFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…material, which was available before him during scrutiny assessment proceedings invoked the provisions of section 148 of the Act. It is a clearly a case of ‘change of opinion’. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd.,320 ITR 561(SC) has held that Assessing Officer has power to reopen an assessment provided there is “tangible material” to come to the conclusion that there was escapement of income from assessment. The Assessing Officer does not have unfretted powers to reopen the assessment. Reopening based on re-appreciation of documents already on record amounts to ‘chan…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1732/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…er by issuing notice 143(2)/143(3) of the Act. Therefore, reasons recorded by the assessing officer is bad in law. An assessment can be reopened only if there is ‘reason to believe’ that income has escaped assessment. In Kelvinator of India Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) the Hon`ble Supreme Court has stated that the expression "reason to believe" cannot comprehend a mere change of opinion which would only amount to an impermissible review. Therefore, an assessment cannot be reopened merely to verify the genuineness of the expenses/claims. Therefore, the notice of re-assessment u/s 147 of the Act, for verific…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1731/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…er by issuing notice 143(2)/143(3) of the Act. Therefore, reasons recorded by the assessing officer is bad in law. An assessment can be reopened only if there is ‘reason to believe’ that income has escaped assessment. In Kelvinator of India Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) the Hon`ble Supreme Court has stated that the expression "reason to believe" cannot comprehend a mere change of opinion which would only amount to an impermissible review. Therefore, an assessment cannot be reopened merely to verify the genuineness of the expenses/claims. Therefore, the notice of re-assessment u/s 147 of the Act, for verific…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1730/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…er by issuing notice 143(2)/143(3) of the Act. Therefore, reasons recorded by the assessing officer is bad in law. An assessment can be reopened only if there is ‘reason to believe’ that income has escaped assessment. In Kelvinator of India Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) the Hon`ble Supreme Court has stated that the expression "reason to believe" cannot comprehend a mere change of opinion which would only amount to an impermissible review. Therefore, an assessment cannot be reopened merely to verify the genuineness of the expenses/claims. Therefore, the notice of re-assessment u/s 147 of the Act, for verific…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1729/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…er by issuing notice 143(2)/143(3) of the Act. Therefore, reasons recorded by the assessing officer is bad in law. An assessment can be reopened only if there is ‘reason to believe’ that income has escaped assessment. In Kelvinator of India Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) the Hon`ble Supreme Court has stated that the expression "reason to believe" cannot comprehend a mere change of opinion which would only amount to an impermissible review. Therefore, an assessment cannot be reopened merely to verify the genuineness of the expenses/claims. Therefore, the notice of re-assessment u/s 147 of the Act, for verific…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1728/KOL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…er by issuing notice 143(2)/143(3) of the Act. Therefore, reasons recorded by the assessing officer is bad in law. An assessment can be reopened only if there is ‘reason to believe’ that income has escaped assessment. In Kelvinator of India Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) the Hon`ble Supreme Court has stated that the expression "reason to believe" cannot comprehend a mere change of opinion which would only amount to an impermissible review. Therefore, an assessment cannot be reopened merely to verify the genuineness of the expenses/claims. Therefore, the notice of re-assessment u/s 147 of the Act, for verific…

Unity Infrasporjects Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 8(2), Mumbai

ITA 139/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7270 & 7075/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Mohan, AR
Section 143(2)Section 80I

…the AO, he submitted that the information received by AO is fresh material and a proper reason for reopening. He supported the findings of AO that assessee has taken accommodation entries from 2 parties and in this respect, he relied on i) CIT vrs. Kelvinator 320 ITR 561 (SC) and ii) Raymond Wollen Mills Ltd. Vrs. ITO 236 ITR 34 (SC). With regard to mistaken identity, he submitted that assessee has not denied that it has made purchases from these parties. 63 I.T.A. No. 7270 & 7075/Mum/2017 & ITA No. 139 & 140/Mum/2018 M/s Unity Infraprojects Ltd. 37. Considered the rival submission and material placed on record…

Shri. T Shivaji, Vellore vs. ITO Ward 2, Vellore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 415/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.415/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-2010. Shri. T. Shivaji, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hasath Street, Ward -2, Melvisharam, Vellore Vellore 632 509. [Pan Depps 7396B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Salai Varun Isai Azhagan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, IRS, JCIT
Section 133ASection 139Section 144Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" [BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.415/CHNY/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2009-2010. Shri. T. Shivaji, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hasath Street, Ward -2, Melvisharam, Vellore Vellore 632 509. [PAN DEPPS 7396B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr. Salai Varun Isai Azhagan, Adv ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. R.…

R.Jayaselvi, Pondcherry vs. ITO Ward 1, Pondicherry

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 927/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.927/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-2013. R. Jayaselvi, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.27, Mariamman Koil Street, Ward-1, Edayarapalayam, Pondicherry. Pondicherry 605 007. [Pan Awapj 1581D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147oSection 148Section 54Section 54B

…based on change of opinion on the same set of facts which are available with the Assessing Officer at the time of framing the original assessment order. Keeping in view the ratio decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd (2010) 320 ITR 561, we hold that reopening the assessment is bad in law. Accordingly, we squash the re- assessment proceedings and allow the appeal of the assessee. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 8. No.927/CHNY/2018 for assessment year 2012-2013 stands allowed. Order pronounced on 12th day of February, 2020, at Chennai. (इंटूर" रामा राव)…

Price Waterhouse & Co., [Now Known As Price Waterhouse & Co. Chartered Accountants LLP], Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 22, Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1985/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. Dcit, Circle-22, Kolkata Price Waterhouse & Co, Kolkata (Now Versus Known As Price Waterhouse & Co Chartered Accountants Llp)

For Appellant: Shri C.S Agarwal, Sr. Adv., K.M. Gupta, Adv. & Bikash KumarFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 28Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM & DR. A.L. SAINI, AM Vs. DCIT, Circle-22, Kolkata Price Waterhouse & Co, Kolkata (now versus known as Price Waterhouse & Co Chartered Accountants LLP) Block-EP, Plot-Y-14, Salt Lake City, Sector-V, Kolkata – 700091. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAHFP0187A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Appellant by : Shri C.S Agarwal, Sr. Adv., K.M. Gupta, Adv. & Bikash Kumar Jain, CA Respondent by : Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT(DR) सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 19/11/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 05/02/…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Fiem Industries Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2048/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, M/S. Fiem Industries Ltd, Circle-9(1), Vs. D-34, Dsidc Packaging New Delhi Comples, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi – 110 015. Pan : Aaacf1034E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Date of HearingFor Respondent: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Adv
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148

…ing Officer pursuant to the assessment made u/s 143(3) of the Act which is rationale and bear a direct nexus to the material on which recent belief is based. He followed the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. Vs. CIT 320 ITR 561 (SC). Thus he quashed the re-assessment proceedings annulling the order passed by the Assessing Officer. Thus, the Assessing Officer is aggrieved by his order and is in appeal before us. 4. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently referred to the reasons recorded by the learned AO which are placed at para Nos. 2 and 3 of the assessment…

Aes Orissa Distribution Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 69/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 147Section 148

…be said that reopening was based on any change of opinion. We are unable to accept the contention of the ld.DR. As held in various judicial pronouncements including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., 320 ITR 561(SC), when the assessment is completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, there is a presumption that all the issues relevant to the assessment have been considered and concluded by the AO by applying his mind. It was further held that even if there is any mistake committed by the AO while competing the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act, the same cannot be a…

Aes Orissa Distribution Private Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 68/CTK/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 147Section 148

…be said that reopening was based on any change of opinion. We are unable to accept the contention of the ld.DR. As held in various judicial pronouncements including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., 320 ITR 561(SC), when the assessment is completed u/s.143(3) of the Act, there is a presumption that all the issues relevant to the assessment have been considered and concluded by the AO by applying his mind. It was further held that even if there is any mistake committed by the AO while competing the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act, the same cannot be a…

Industrial Promotion and Investment Corporation of Orissa Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 272/CTK/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Sabat/B.K.Mohapatra, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…of jurisdiction under section 147/148 of the Act. On the basis of, inter alia, these submissions, we are urged to quash the reassessment proceedings. Ld counsel relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.: 320 ITR 561(SC). 9. Replying to above, Learned Departmental Representative submitted that when the Assessing Officer did not apply his mind at all on the information before him in the original assessment proceedings, there is no question of fresh application of mind. It was also pointed out that this is a case of reopening of assessment within four years,…