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 367,164 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, Cir-12, Kolkata vs. M/S Gujrat Nre Coke Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 68/KOL/2014[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am ] Assessment Year : 2004-05 D.C.I.T., Circle-12, -Versus- M/S. Gujarat Nre Coke Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan: Aabcg 6225 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit(Dr) For The Respondent : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca Date Of Hearing : 04.08.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.09.2016. Order

For Appellant: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA

Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 801Section 801BSection 80ISection 80l

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘C’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM ] Assessment Year : 2004-05 D.C.I.T., Circle-12, -versus- M/s. Gujarat NRE Coke Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [PAN: AABCG 6225 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR) For the Respondent : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA Date of Hearing : 04.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 21.09.2016. ORDER Per Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM The captioned appeal filed by the revenue pertaining to A.Y.2004-05, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax –(A)-XII, Ko…

Ecofriendly Hotels India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10, Mumbai

ITA 2333/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Sahu-DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…ration. Accordingly, the case is being re-opened u/s. 147 of the IT Act for Asst. Year 2006-07. Issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Requisite approval of the Joint CIT-Range 16(1), The decision of the Supreme Court in the case of KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD. [2010] 320 ITR 561 was rendered in the background of a case of reopening of an assessment which was previously framed after scrutiny. The observations of the Supreme Court as to the requirement of reason to believe even after the amendment of section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, therefore, must be seen in the background of such facts. The Supreme Court never me…

ACIT Cir 12(3), Mumbai vs. Kabra & Associates, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6965/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6965/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Acit Circle – 12(3), M/S Kabra & Associates, बनाम/ R. No. 137, Ist Floor, 2 Nd Floor, Jash Chambers, V. Aayakar Bhavan, Sir P.M. Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai 400 023. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaffk2000F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 40(1)(ia)

…ts on record that the AO came to the conclusion that the income has escaped assessment which is merely a change of opinion. The assessee relied upon the following decisions:- 1. CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd., 256 ITR 1 (Affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in 320 ITR 561 (SC)). 2. Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT,(2009) 308 ITR 195 (Bom) 3. NDT Systems v. ITO, 255 CTR 113 (Bom) ITA 6965/Mum/2014 7 The ld. CIT(A) rejected the contentions of the assessee on the ground that the A.O. clearly recorded that the assessee has deducted TDS on amount of Rs. 1,29,63,647/- paid for contractors , professionals and brokerage in th…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Barista Coffee Company Ltd., New Delhi

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5324/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Sept 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Barista Coffee Company Ltd, Circle-2(1), Room No. 398D, Shop No. 55, Community Centre, Vs. Cr Building, New Delhi Basant Lok Market, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aabcb798A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. KK Jaiswal, DRFor Respondent: Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35D

…any addition in respect thereof. Thus, the reopening of the assessment which had been con cluded on March 13, 2006, would be nothing but a mere change of opinion." 16. A similar view was expressed by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC), wherein it authoritatively held that a mere change of opinion cannot be a reason to reopen assessments. The relevant extract from the said decision is as under (page 564) : "On going through the changes, quoted above, made to section 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to the Direct Tax Laws (Amend ment) Act, 1987, reopening could be done u…

Basanti Jeevanlal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 14(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 909/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2006-07 Smt. Basanti Jeevanlal Jain, The Income Tax Officer 287, Dharamraj Gully, Ward-14(3)(2), बनाम/ M.J. Market, Earnest House, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Agdpj5258A

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54

…2.3. So far as, second reopening is concerned, it is merely on the basis of change of opinion, more so when the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) and 143 r.w.s 147 of the Act after due application of mind. The ratio laid down in CIT vs Kelvinator India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC), CIT vs Jet Speed Audio Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 762 (Bom.), Arthur Anderson & Co. vs ACIT (324 ITR 240)(Bom.), Titanor components Ltd. vs ACIT (243 CTR 520)(Bom.) supports our view. The material facts were duly made available by the assessee to the Assessing Officer. Even assuming that the ld. Assessing Officer failed to apply his mind, ass…

D.C.I.T Cir - 7, Kolkata. vs. M/S Bch Electric Ltd( Formerly M/S Bhartia Industries Limited), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 634/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Vishwanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 148

…contended that the reopening of assessment by the Assessing Officer thus was based on a mere change of opinion, which is not permissible in law as held, inter alia, by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Kelvinator of India Limited reported in 320 ITR 561 and by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashis Moulik –vs.- ACIT reported in 370 ITR 660. He also contended that the assessment originally completed under section 143(3) for the year under consideration was reopened by the Assessing Officer after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year and as per the first pro…

D.C.I.T Cir - 2, Kolkata vs. M/S West Bengal Fisheries Corporation Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 476/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Vishwanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)

…essment on the basis of same records was based on a mere 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 Limited reported in 320 ITR 561 as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Manmohan Kedia –vs.- ITO reported in 344 ITR 187. 6. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, strongly relied on the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) in support of the revenue’s case on this issue and contended that the assessment having been reopened by the Assessing Officer…

Allied Engineers and Elastomers, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3456/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S Allied Engineers & Income Tax Officer-18(1)(1), Elastomers, Earnest House, बनाम/ 404-A, Waghwadi, Mumbai Vs. Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai-400002 "नधा"रती / Assessee राज"व / Revenue P.A. No.Aahfa7945H

Section 147

…vs Parmanand 107 TTJ 395 (Jodh), Jagdamba Trading Company vs Income Tax Officer, 16 SOT 6 (Jodh), Indian & Eastern News paper society vs CIT 119 ITR 996 (SC), Coca-cola Export Corporation vs Income Tax Officer 231 ITR 200 (SC), CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC), CIT vs Sfil stock broking Ltd. 325 ITR 285 (Del.) and GMR Holding Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT 134 ITD 668 (Bang.). 3.2. It is noted that the assessee made purchases to the tune of Rs.40,00,166/- from the alleged Hawala dealers and the ld. Assessing Officer after considering the factual matrix, added back the pick credit amounting to Rs.9,35,988/- to…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Jyotinder Singh Randhawa, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2256/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 151(1)Section 292BSection 6

…facts. He thus contended that this is a change of opinion on same set of facts as were in the 3 AY: 2005-06 original assessment proceedings. He placed reliance on the following decisions: i. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kelvinator of Indian Learned, (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) ii. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dumraon Cold Storage & Refrigeration Services, (1974) 97 ITR 137 (Pat.) iii. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Maharaja Pratap Singh, 41 ITR 421 (SC). 3. Learned Authorized Representative further pointed out that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in its order for the assessment year 2009-10 had…

Abb India Ltd, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Ltu), Bangalore

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

ITA 1124/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S. Abb India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Abb Ltd.) 21 Floor, World Trade Centre, Brigade Gateway,No.26/01, Dr.Rajkumar Road Malleswaram West, Bangalore-560055. … Appellant Pan: Aaaca 3834 B Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Ltu), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T.Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. ABB India Ltd. (Formerly known as ABB Ltd.) 21 floor, World Trade Centre, Brigade Gateway,No.26/01, Dr.Rajkumar Road Malleswaram West, Bangalore-560055. … Appellant PAN: AAACA 3834 B Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU), Bangalore. … Respondent Appellant by : Shri T.Suryanarayana, Advocate. Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR). Date of hearing : 12/07/2016 Date of pronouncement : 26/08/2016 O R D E R Per INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : This is an appeal fil…

Yes Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1991/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Ms. Krupa Gandhi and Shri Nimesh Jain-ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vidisha Kalra-DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 35DSection 36Section 36(1)(viia)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ “ “ “ जी जी जी” खंडपीठ जी Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“G”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, "याियक राम लाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/1991/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Yes Bank Limited DCIT, -8(3)(2) 9th Floor, Nehru Centre, discovery Room No.615, 6th Floor, A…

Abott India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No 3472/Mum/2013 and ITA No

ITA 832/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Morya Pratap

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

…/148 of the Act as the powers of re-opening the concluded assessment , u/s is to ‘re-assess’ and not to ‘review’ the concluded assessments. The reference is made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Kelvinator of India Limited (2010) 320 ITR 561(SC). The assessee has made a claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act on the basis that the same was common costs which should be allocated between Manufacturing and trading activities based on the ratio of sales turnover which was accepted by the Revenue after detailed scrutiny in original assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act which culmina…

Abbott India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No 3472/Mum/2013 and ITA No

ITA 3472/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Morya Pratap

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

Constellation Capital Ltd vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(4) & Anr

ITA/291/2016HC Delhi22 Aug 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 143(3)Section 147(1)Section 68

…gaged in the business of share broking and finance transactions was subject to Section 143(3) assessment. The law as to the appropriateness of an order reopening assessments is now well settled by the ruling of the judgment in CIT v. Kelvinator India Ltd. 320 ITR 561. The Supreme Court has ruled that “tangible material” should be disclosed or forthcoming to persuade the AO to reopen the assessment and that the text of the statute in that regard as to the satisfaction that the assessee had failed to disclose particulars in the return which resulted in income escaping assessment, should be clear. In th…

DCIT, Cir-33, Kolkata vs. M/S Rahee Gpt Jv, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1188/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Aug 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1188/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT

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

…Act as the status of the assessee is not “firm” and instead assessee joint venture is to be assessed as “AOP”. We find that the reliance placed by the Ld. AR on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 56 (SC) is very well founded as there was absolutely no tangible material available with the AO which would enable him to form a reasonable belief that income had escaped assessment within the manner of section 147 of the Act. In the said case it was held that – “"However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words ‘reason to believe’…

Rahee Gpt (Jv), Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-33, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1109/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Aug 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1188/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT

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

Rrb Energy Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1875/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. K. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1875/Del./2013 Asstt. Year : 2005-06 RRB Energy Ltd., vs. Income-tax Officer, GA-1/B1 Extn. Mohan Coop. Indl. Estate, Ward 15(2), New Delhi New Delhi (PAN: AAACV0109N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. K. Sampath, Advocate Respondent by : Sh. K. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 28.06.16 & 25.07.2016 Date of pronouncement : 12.08.2016 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)- XVI…

Jm Financial Institutional Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 179/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am M/S Jm Financial Institutional Securities Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. (As On Date Merged With Jm Financial Tax 4(3)(Dcit) Consultants P. Ltd. & Name Changed To Jm Mk Road Financial Institutional Securities Ltd) Aayakar Bhavan 7Th Floor, Cnergy Mumbai 400 020 Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400025. Pan: Aabca2496G Appellant .. Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…apparently on the basis of Audit Memo, which is not permissible. No new tangible material has come to the knowledge of the AO so as to justify the reopening. The following observation of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 would be relevant here:- “Assessing Officer has no power to review; he has the power to reassess. But reassessment has to be based on fulfillment of certain preconditions and if the concept of "change of opinion" is removed, as contended on behalf of the Department, then, in the garb of reopening the assessment, review would take place. One must…

ACIT, CC-IV, Kolkata vs. M/S. Inland Vikash Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 900/KOL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 900/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2004-05 A.C.I.T., Central Circle-Iv, -Vs.- M/S. Inland Vikash Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaci 6960 N) (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No. 565/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2004-05 M/S Inland Vikash Ltd. -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Central Circle-Iv, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaci 6960 N) (Respondent) (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri B.C.Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT. Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40

…n the hands of the Id AO to assume jurisdiction u/s 148 . There was no material to form a belief of escapement of income on the basis of TDS certificates. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC) and certain other judicial pronouncements. The ld. DR relied on the order of CIT(A). 9. We have given a very careful consideration to the rival submissions. With regard to the contention that the reopening of assessment is invalid because reopening was made purely on a change of opinion, the following observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Cou…

Inland Vikash Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - IV, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 565/KOL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri B.C.Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT. Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 40