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.

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Idea Cellular Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 2277/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Ms. Krupa R. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri L.K.S. Dehiya-DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 195Section 254(1)Section 37Section 40

…ble to roaming charges, that payment for use of standard facilities did not amount to fees for technical services, that if there was no human intervention during roaming process the payment was not for FTS. He relied upon the cases of Kelvinator of India Ltd.(320 ITR 561)Idea Cellular Ltd (301ITR407),Plus Paper Food Pvt. Ltd.(374 ITR 485), ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd (348 ITR 299) Asian Paints Ltd (308ITR195),Idea Cellular Ltd. (ITA 168 of 2015, dated 11/07/2017),Idea Cellular Ltd.(ITA/ 648-651/Bangalore/2014,dated 6/11/2015),Estel Communication Private Limited (217 CTR 102), Bharti Cellular and Other…

Asst CIT Cir 3, Kalyan vs. Rich & Royal, Kalyan

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed in the manner indicated above

ITA 1007/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1007/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Acit Cir 3 बिाम/ M/S. Rich & Royal 2N D Floor, Rani Mansion, The Raymond Shop, Murbad Road, Kalyan(W), Zojwalla Complex, V. Dist Thane 421301 Agra Road, Kalyan (W) 421301 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aadfr3357G (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri. Saurabh Kumar Rai

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 43B

…nk Ltd. [(2013) 357 ITR 448 (Ker)]; xvi. Sitara Diamond Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [(2013) 358 ITR 424 (Bom)]; xvii. Rayala Corporation P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [(2014) 363 ITR 630 (Mad)]. 2.26. So far as, the decision in the case of CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) is concerned, the Hon‟ble Apex Court, while coming to a particular conclusion, only in a situation, when not a single piece of paper or document was recovered, therefore, the Hon‟ble Court held that since there was no tangible material found and the addition was merely on the basis of statement only then reopening I.T.A. No.1007/Mum/2016 o…

DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Rasa Agrotech Pvt.Ltd., Sec'Bad, Secunderabad

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeal as well as

ITA 730/HYD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 The Dy. Cit, Circle-3(1), Vs. M/S. Rasa Agrotech Pvt Hyderabad. Ltd, Secunderabad.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay GandhiFor Respondent: Smt. U. Minichandran

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50Section 50B

…t considered the applicability of Sec. 50 to the IT Act to the transaction under the business purchase agreement. For coming to this conclusion, the CIT(A) has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator India reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) and also in the case of CIT Vs Usha International Limited reported in 348 ITR 485 (Del) and the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat Power Corporation Limited reported in 350 ITR 266 (Guj). In the case of Kelvinaor India, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that after 01.04.1989, the A.O has power to reopen, provid…

Devi Prasad Sarawgi, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 45(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 3/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Devi Prasad Sarawgi...............................………………………………………................Appellant Flat No. 2B, ‘Gokul Dham’, 32/1B, R.K. Samadhi Road, Kolkata – 700 054 [Pan: Aiwps 7838 N] I.T.O. Ward 45(1) Kolkata,...................……………………………………………........Respondent 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata – 700 001 Appearances By: Shri J.M. Thard, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sailen Samaddar, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 20, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 23, 2018

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…under section 143(3) and such reopening, therefore, was based merely on a change of opinion, which is not permissible in law. In support of this contention, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561. 5. The learned DR, on the other hand, relied on the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) in support of the revenue’s case on this issue. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material available on record. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee, the assessment originally completed in this case…

ACIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Oriental Carbon & Chemicals Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1682/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: "ी पी.एम .जगताप, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

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

…SC); 78 DTR 153 (SC) wherein the Apex Court held that reopening of assessment on change of opinion is not maintainable. There are a number of judgements of the Apex Court and High Courts which support the aforesaid view. CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC), NYK Line (India) Ltd. Vs Dy.CIT [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Born), CIT Vs ICICI Bank Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 482 (Born) : 74 DTR 251 (Bom) Bombay High Court in the case of Rabo India Finance Ltd. Vs DCIT [2012) 346 ITR 528 (Bom) NDT Systems Vs ITO [2013] 81 DTR 1 (Born) Similar views were expressed by the Bombay and Delhi High Courts in the following c…

Rajeev Ranjan, Nalanda vs. I.T.O., Ward 2(3), Biharsharif

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 123/PAT/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 123/Pat./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Rajeev Ranjan, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Sita Ram Singh, Garhpar, Ward-2(3), Bihar Sharif, Nalanda-803101 Bihar Sharif (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agcpr5450R Assessee By : Sh. A. K. Rastogi & Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Advs. Revenue By : Sh. Abhay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 16 .03.2018 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.06.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Patna.

For Appellant: Sh. A. K. Rastogi &For Respondent: Sh. Abhay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234B

…n mere suspicion, gossip and rumour. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the full Bench of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported at 256 ITR 1 which had been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as reported in 320 ITR 561. It was accordingly submitted that the reassessment may be annulled. 6. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the assessment in this case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act after recording the reasons for the same which was communicated to the assessee who filed the objections against the reasons for reopeni…

DCIT, Cir-9(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Lumbini Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 422/KOL/2016[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judical Member] I.T.A. No. 422/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2003-04 D.C.I.T. Circle-9(1), Kolkata….…………………………………………….…….……………...Appellant Ayakar Bhawan 5Th Floor Room No. 22 P-7, Chowringhee Square Kolkata – 700 069 M/S. Lumbini Beverages Pvt. Ltd...……………………...………………………….......…Respondent 41, Chowringhee Square Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aaacl 5205 F] Appearances By: Shri Girish Sharma, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri D.C. Mondal, Jcit, Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 11Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 16Th, 2018 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judical Member] I.T.A. No. 422/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2003-04 D.C.I.T. Circle-9(1), Kolkata….…………………………………………….…….……………...Appellant Ayakar Bhawan 5th Floor Room No. 22 P-7, Chowringhee Square Kolkata – 700 069 M/s. Lumbini Beverages Pvt. Ltd...……………………...………………………….......…Respondent 41, Chowringhee Square Kolkata – 700 071 [PAN : AAACL 5205 F] Appearances by: Shri Girish Sharma, FCA, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri D.C. Mondal, JCIT, DR appearing on behalf of…

M/S Jawahar Lal Jain (HUF), Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1132/CHANDI/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 68

…ame, no addition was made. Therefore, re-opening the same issue amounts to change of opinion, which is impressible in law and therefore the re-opening deserves to be quashed. For this proposition, we rely upon ratio of judgement in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India 320 ITR 561 (SC). 8. The Ld. DR relied on the reasons of reopening on the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 9. We have gone through the material on record and find that the assessment has been reopened after four years. The relevant provisions of the Act are as under: "Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) o f section 143 or this section has bee…

Assitant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S. H.A. Developers, Pune

In the result, the impugned order is upheld and appeal of the Revenue

ITA 478/PUN/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 478/Pun/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…sallow Rs.1,00,000/- from total labour charges claimed by the assessee. The second re-opening of assessment is in clear violation of provision to section 147 and the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India 320 ITR 561. We do not find any infirmity in the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in holding that it is a case of ‘change of opinion’. Accordingly, the impugned order is upheld and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 7. The case laws on which the ld. DR has placed reliance are distinguishable on facts. Hence, they do not support the case of Re…

Van Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors Bv, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (It) 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 495/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ment is liable to quashed in both the years, as the AO has reopened the assessments merely on account of change of opinion. In this regard learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India (320 ITR 561). 4 Van Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors BV 6. The Learned AR also submitted that the assessment orders of both the years are required to be quashed as the Assessing Officer did not issue mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act after filing return of income. Instead he has issued notice u/s. 143(2) in both the years along with notice issued…

Vista Entertainment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 5768/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…n the original assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer has re–opened the assessment which is legally impermissible. In support of his contention, the learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Kelvinator of India, 320 ITR 561; ii) Hindustan Liver Ltd v/s R.B. Wadkar, 268 ITR 332; iii) Sabh Infrastructures Ltd. v/s ACIT, 398 ITR 198; iv) Indulata Rangwala v/s DCIT, 384 ITR 337; and v) NDT Systems v/s ITO, 363 ITR 603. 7 M/s. Vista Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. [Now M/s. PVR Ltd.] 8. Learned Authorised Representative submitted, even otherwise also the issue on which the asse…

Schneider Electric India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 1585/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2003-04 Schneider Electric India Dcit, Circle 7(1) P Ltd. Vs. New Delhi 9Th Floor, Tower Cit(A) Building No.10 Dlf Cyber City Dlf Phase Ii Gurgaon 122 002 Pan: Aabcs1624G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 234BSection 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2003-04 Schneider Electric India DCIT, Circle 7(1) P Ltd. vs. New Delhi 9th floor, Tower CIT(A) Building No.10 DLF Cyber City DLF Phase II Gurgaon 122 002 PAN: AABCS1624G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Ashok Jain, CA Sh. Ashu Goel, CA Respondent by Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 27.12.2017 Date of Pronouncement 27.02.2018 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER The present appeal has been filed by assessee against the order dated 2…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed and the Cross Objection raised by assessee stands allowed

ITA 4181/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2002-03 Acit, Circle 7(1) Vs. Samsung India Room No.312, 3Rd Floor Electronics P Ltd. Cr Building Ip Estate 3Rd Floor, Vipul Tech New Delhi Square Gurgaon Pan: Aaacs5123K Cross Objection No.363/Del/2011 (In Ita No. 4181/Del/2011) Ay: 2002-03 Samsung India Electronics P Ltd. Vs. Acit,Circle 7(1) Gurgaon New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 201

…e additions are based on the materials already available on record. Ld.AR placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kelvinator India Ltd reported in 256 ITR 1 which has been upheld by Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 320 ITR 561. Thus Ld.AR submitted that the reassessment proceedings are bad in law and void ab initio. 3.4. Ld. DR on the contrary placed reliance upon the findings of Ld. CIT (A) on the legality of the reassessment proceedings. 4. We have perused the submissions advanced by both the sides in the light of the records placed before us. 4.1. Admittedly, the ad…

Dipak Kumar Dasbhowmik, Paschim Midnapore vs. I.T.O., Ward - 38(1), Midnapore, Paschim Midnapore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2384/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…, as per the appellant's submission the instant reassessment proceeding is the result of a mere change of opinion on the part or the AO. The appellant has relied on various case laws in support of his submission. These include, KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC), ANDHRA BANK LIMITED (1997) 225 ITR 447 (SC) KANOI INDUSTRIES (P) LTD. [LT.A. No.108 OF 2012 DATED 15.06.2012], and AMRIT FEEDS LTD. (2012) 344 ITR 187 (CAL). These cases have been perused. The entire arguments of the appellant depend on his claim that there has been a change of opinion on the part of the AO. As per the assessment Assessmen…

M/S. R & K Fair Deals Pvt Ltd, Bellary vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2790/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia, Accounant Member

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shankar Prasad K, JDIT DR

Section 148Section 68

…s Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. as reported in 378 ITR 351. It is also noted by CIT (A) in his order that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in this case has followed the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., 320 ITR 561 (SC). I find no infirmity in the order of CIT (A) on the issue regarding validity of reopening. The issue on merit does not arise out of the order of CIT (A) because it was not raised before CIT (A). Hence these grounds on merit are rejected for this reason that these grounds do not arise from the order of CIT (A). 5. In the result, the appeal o…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Dlf Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/263/2009HC Delhi22 Feb 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 147Section 150(1)

…existing material and the reopening is not based upon any concealment of material circumstance but rather a fresh opinion or review thereto. Such notices under Section 147 are contrary to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561. The question of law is answered against the Revenue and in favour of assessee. The appeals are dismissed. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J A. K. CHAWLA, J FEBRUARY 22, 2018/AJK Page 3 of 3…