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 367,154 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.

Shri Kashinath Tapuriah, Kolkatta vs. Dy.CIT.C.C.2, Mumbai

In the result, the penalty appeals for all the seven years under reference are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3820/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am Sr. Appellant Respondent A.Ys.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia &For Respondent: Shri Girish Dave &
Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…nt/s to the returned income, can even otherwise be made only on the basis of material on record, applying the extant law (of-course duly confronting the assessee therewith) and, besides, is impermissible to be reviewed (CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC)). Be that as it may, in all cases of completed assessment, as held by the Hon’ble Court in Continental Warehousing Corporation (supra), binding on us, the scope of section 153A assessment shall be confined to the findings of the search or, as the case may be, requisition. 19. Ground # 5 is in respect of an addition for Rs.2,43,80,000/- (the…

M/S R.T. Paper Board Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4868/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Suchitra Kamblea.Y. 2003-04 R.T. Paper Board Ltd. Vs. Acit, Circle 15(1) 407-408, Deepali New Delhi Nehru Place New Delhi 110 019 Pan: Aabcr 9393 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh.Somil Agarwal, Adv. Respondent By : Sh. Raman Kant Garg, Sr.D.R. Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy

For Appellant: Sh.Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Raman Kant Garg, Sr.D.R
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2003-04 R.T. Paper Board Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle 15(1) 407-408, Deepali New Delhi Nehru Place New Delhi 110 019 PAN: AABCR 9393 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh.Somil Agarwal, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Raman Kant Garg, Sr.D.R. ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the order of Ld.CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi pertaining to the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as the A.Y.) 20…

Nirmala R. Goenka, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3667/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm Smt. Nirmala R. Goenka Vs. Income-Tax Officer-12(2)(4), 95-97, Snehdeep, Jolly Maker Apts., Mumbai, New Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 R. No. 123, 1St Floor, Aayakar (Pan:Aalpg7311F) Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhatFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…he AO's such action was against the spirit of 1 st proviso to Sec. 147 of the I. T. Act. Thus, after taking note of the decision cited by the appellant's AR and subsequently the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd, 320 ITR 561 (2010) and jurisdictional ITAT in the case of German Remedies Ltd vs DCIT reported in 2005-TIOL-195-HC-MUM-IT, I consider it proper and appropriate to hold that the AO’s action of reopening the assessment was against the provisions of law. Hence, the AO’s reassessment order so framed cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the 3 Smt.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6542/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri C.M. Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Sharma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Rajeev Saxena, Sumangla Saxena &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…amounted to change of opinion which is not permissible in law and also contrary to the intention of the legislature and as such the words "reason to believe" are absent to initiate the proceedings u/s 147. Hon'ble SC in the matter of CIT vs. Kelvinator India 320 ITR 561 have already held that reopening is not permissible merely on the basis of change of opinion. Hon'ble SC have also held that one of the major reasons for taking such a view also appears to be the fact that if the AO is permitted to reopen the assessment on a mere change of opinion section 147 would give arbitrary powers to the AO to reopen the as…

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Lahoti Overseas Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee company in ITA

ITA 3812/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3812/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Lahoti Overseas Ltd., बनाम/ Tax , 5(2),Room No. 571, 307, Arun Chambers, V. 5 Th Floor, Tardeo Road, Tardeo, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400034. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacl2578 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare (Sr.DR)
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…ee company further relied on the following decisions:- i) Asian Paints Ltd v. DCIT 308 ITR 195 (Bom) ii) Kelvinator of India Limited (2002) 256 ITR 1 (Del) (FB) iii) Cartini India Limited v. ACIT 314 ITR 275 Bom) iv) CIT v. Kelvinator of India Limited (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) v) Rallies India Limited v. ACIT 232 CTR 143 (Bom) vi) Mitsui Marubheni Corpn v. DCIT 298 ITR (AT) 283 vii) IPCA Laqboratories Limited v. Jagdanand Meena DCIT, 251 ITR 416 (Bom). The assessee company contended that there was no failure on the part of the assessee company to disclose full and true facts and the A.O. has incorrectly changed h…

T.I. Steels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4382/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri Kuldip Singh:Asstt. Yr: 2007-08 T.I. Steels Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Plot No. 17-18, F.F., F-Block, Ward-16(1), New Delhi. Commercial Shopping Complex-1, Mansarover Garden, New Delhi. Pan: Aabct 9896 R ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Mohit Sachdeva Adv. Assessee By : Shriy.R. Sonbhadra Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10/03/2016. Date Of Order : 30/03/2016. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M:

For Appellant: ShriY.R. Sonbhadra Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Mohit Sachdeva Adv
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 147

…of assessment proceedings, made specific query on this count. As a matter of fact, the AO wanted to review his order, which is not permissible under proceedings u/s 147, as has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator India Ltd. 320 ITR 561. At page 58 of the PB, complete details have been given as part of tax audit report regarding quantity of raw- material and finished goods, which have not been doubted by AO. It is well settled law that remissness on the part of AO cannot be the basis for re- opening an assessment. In view of above discussion, we quash the reassessment proceedin…

M/S. Vijay Power Generators Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 4086/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahui.T.A. No. 4086/Del/2013 A.Y. : 2004-05 M/S Vijay Power Generators Ltd., Vs. Acit, Circle 17(1), 5, Park End, (Opp.) Preet Vihar, New Delhi Metro Pillar No. 101, Vikas Marg, New Delhi – 11- 0902 (Pan: Aaacv0191N) (Appellant) (Appellant) (Appellant) (Appellant) (Respondent) (Respondent) (Respondent) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanat Kapoor, Adv., Ms. AnanyaFor Respondent: Sh. S.K. Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154

…gh Court). 5 A.Y. 2004-05 c) ITAT, SMC-2, Delhi Bench decision dated 17.11.2015 passed in the case of Sh. Rakesh Bandhu vs. ITO in ITA No. 2586/Del/2014 (AY 2009-10). d) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Limited 256 ITR 1 (Delhi) [FB] e) CIT vs. Kelvinator India 320 ITR 561 (SC) f) CIT vs. Orient Craft 354 ITR 536 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned order on the basis of the documentary evidence filed by the assessee as well as prevailing law. He further stated that Notice u/s. 148 has been issued after adopting the prescrib…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Manish Jain, HUF, New Delhi

The appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 195/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Acit, Vs Manish Jain, Huf Circle-24(1), 13Th Floor, C-1/51, E-2 Block, Civic Centre, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaehm7211D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri P. Damkanunja, Sr. Dr Respondent By : S/Shri R.S. Singhvi, Satyajeet Goel, Cas Date Of Hearing: 05.01.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.03.2016 Order

For Appellant: Shri P. Damkanunja, Sr. DRFor Respondent: S/Shri R.S. Singhvi, Satyajeet Goel, CAs
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J.S. REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2007-08 ACIT, vs Manish Jain, HUF Circle-24(1), 13th Floor, C-1/51, E-2 Block, Civic Centre, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAEHM7211D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri P. Damkanunja, Sr. DR Respondent by : S/Shri R.S. Singhvi, Satyajeet Goel, CAs Date of hearing: 05.01.2016 Date of pronouncement: 22.03.2016 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal has been filed by the department against the i…

M/S Excellent Land Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3052/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri B.R.R. Kumar, Senior DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…Das – 103 ITR 437 at 448 (SC) and Navinchandra Mohanlal Parik vs. vs. WTO – 124 ITR 68). The Hon’ble Supreme Court endorsing the Full Bench decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. – 256 ITR 1 held in its order reported in 320 ITR 561, “…..that Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is “tangible material” to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons must have link with the formation of belief.” Therefore, if the fresh tangible material which the AO has in his possession is relevant to have nexus to the formation of belief…

Sunil Gavaskar, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) 3(1), Mumbai

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 3970/MUM/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri D.V. LakhaniFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Waghmade
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 80RSection 8O

…of opinion by the AO. The law in this regard is also well settled, i.e., the reopening of an assessment cannot be done on the basis of change of opinion by the AO. This issue has been settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. in 320 ITR 561 (SC) and has been followed regularly. Subsequently, in many judgments including various judgments from Hon’ble Bombay High Court also, e.g. in the case of Direct Information Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 349 ITR 150 (Bom), a similar view has been taken by the jurisdictional high court. We shall also like to rely upon a very recent judgment from Hon’ble Bomba…

Smt Santi Sarkar, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-37(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 797/KOL/2015[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri I. Banerjee, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…th Bank of Maharastra. This fact is admitted by CIT(A) but he confirmed the addition. I am of the view that this is merely a change of opinion, which is not possible in term of law. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., (2010) 310 ITR 561 (SC), wherein newly substituted provision of section 147 of the Act with effect from 01.04.1989 is interpreted by observing, that section 147 of the Act, as substituted w.e.f. 01.04.1989 does not postulates conferment of power upon the AO to initiate reassessment proceeding upon his mere change of opinion. 9. Similarly, Hon’ble Supreme Court in t…

JCIT(OSD), Circle - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 36/KOL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Mar 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak & Shri Harish Agarwal, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the case by the AO is held valid and issues are being decided on merits.” 7. We find that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against revenue by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator India Ltd. (2010) 310 ITR 561 (SC), wherein newly substituted provision of section 147 of the Act with effect from 01.04.1989 is interpreted by observing, that section 147 of the Act, as substituted w.e.f. 01.04.1989 does not postulates conferment of power upon the AO to initiate reassessment proceeding upon his mere change of opinion. Further, if ‘reason to believe’ of the A…

Home Linkers vs. DCIT, Circle-12(1)

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3760/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Home Linkers E-Services Pvt. Ltd., Dcit N-53, Panchsheel Park, Circle-12(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh.Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Trajanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 14ASection 234B

…Act without scrutiny and nothing more. Therefore he stated that it was nothing but reappraisal of the earlier proceedings which is not permitted by law. He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd 320 ITR 561 and of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Orient Craft Ltd. 154 ITR 536. Therefore he submitted that appeal of the assessee should succeed on this point only. 7. The ld DR relied upon the order of lower authorities. 8. We have carefully considered the rival contentions as well as the order of the lower authorities on the basis of the…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Aristocrat Luggage Ltd ( Now Merged With Vip Industries Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

ITA 5422/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5422/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Aristocrat Luggage बनाम/ Tax -7(3), Ltd., V. Room No. 615, 6 Th Floor, (Now Merged With Vip Aayakar Bhavan, Industries Ltd.), M.K. Road, Dgp House, Mumbai 400 020. 88-C, Old Prabhadevi Road, Mumbai- 400 025. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacu0092R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 147Section 148Section 43B

…2008, if any other view is taken which tantamount to change of opinion which is not permitted for re-opening of the assessment.” In support, the assessee company relied on the following judgments:- ITA 5422/Mum/2013 8 (i) CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. , 320 ITR 561(SC) (ii) ICICI Home Finance Co. Ltd. v. ACIT [2012] 210 Taxman 67(Bom.HC.) (iii) Vijay Rameshbhai Gupta v. ACIT [2013] 32 taxmann.com 41( Guj. HC), (iv) Rural Electrification Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT (LTU and other writ Petition bearing No. 7943/2011 – 2013-TIOL-366-HC-DEL- IT dated 23-4-2013(Del. HC) (v) Bhor Industries Ltd. v. ACIT and Others, 267 IT…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Invensys India (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4132/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Invensys India (P) Ltd., Circle-11(1), No.18, Kotla Lane, Vs. C.R.Building, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aabcs8027M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh.A.K. Saroha, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh Salil Kapoor, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 148

…e into possession of the assessee and therefore the reopening has been made on the reappraisal of the same material which is not valid. For this he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Kelivinator India Ltd. Vs. CIT reported 187 Taxmann 312. He further relied on the decision of Honourable Delhi high court in case of CIT V Tupperware India Pvt Limited ITA 415/2015 dated 1/8/2015. 7. Against this the ld DR supported that reopening has been validly initiated. Ld DR submitted that a. CO of the assessee is not maintainable in view of the decision of Ahmadabad tribunal In case of DCIT…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Arvind Rajkishore Sharma, Mumbai

In the result, assessment framed on the basis of such invalid and in appropriate reasons is also quashed”

ITA 7137/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Amit Shukla

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

…d not as business income. The assessee has also raised the objection for reopening the case merely on the ground of “change of opinion” and in support relied upon the decision of Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Kelvinator of India Limited, reported in [2010] 320 ITR 561. On merits also, the assessee filed his detailed submissions which has been incorporated by the AO at page 4 of the assessment order. However, the AO without any proper reasoning, held that the income shown by the assessee under the head “on account of sale of shares” is to be treated as “business income” instead of ‘short-term-capital-gain’. 3.…

DCIT, Cir-9(1), New Delhi vs. M/S Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5819/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

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

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…assessment, without there being any new material coming to his possession thus was based on a 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, therefore, strongly supported the impugned order of ld. CIT(Appeals) on this preliminary issue and urged that the same may be upheld. I.T.A. No. 5819/DEL./2012 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 5 of 8 7. We have considered the rival subm…

ADIT (E) -II 2, Mumbai vs. Shri Vile Parle Kelvani Mandal, Mumbai

In the result, Departmental appeals are dismissed

ITA 3319/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri R.K. SinhaFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147

…the believe that income has escaped assessment. There is no live link between the material available on record and formation of belief. That being the case, applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Kalvinator of India Ltd., [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC), re– 11 M/s. Shri Vile Parle Kelavani Mandal opening of assessment has to be declared as illegal. Even otherwise also, as has been brought to our notice by the learned A.R. additions made by the Assessing Officer by treating the receipts from MDP fees, consultancy charges, technical fees and income received from hiring of various halls as b…

Chennai Petroleum Corpn. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 720/CHNY/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. M.N. Maurya, IRS, CIT
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 619(3)(b)

…g of assessment u/s.147 made a detailed findings and relied on the decisions, observed at page no.5 of the order as under;- ‘’For the above proposition, the assessee relied on the Supreme Court decisions in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator India Limited (2010) 320 ITR 561 and CIT vs Bhanji Lavji (1971) 79 ITR 582. The AO rejected the contention of the assessee by relying on the case laws mentioned earlier in this order. 4.1 What is required for reassessment jurisdiction is a prima-facie inference of escapement of income. In this case, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act originally on 30.11.2010. Not…

Sakthi Sugars Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1530/CHNY/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shir. B. Lakshminarayan, JCIT
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ssing Officer order. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on the ground of re-opening of assessment beyond a period of four years, considered the submissions made by the ld. Authorised Representative and relied on the findings of Kelvinator India Ltd 320 ITR 561(SC) referred at page no.4 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) order:- "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 assessments on the basis of 'mere change of opinion; which cannot be per se reason to reopen. One must al…