CIT v. Lotte India Corporation Ltd.

290 ITR 248High Court2007#9644 most cited

What is CIT v. Lotte India Corporation Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner (Appeals) must provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee before enhancing the assessment. An enhancement made without this opportunity is bad in law and must be deleted.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Lotte India Corporation Ltd · 290 ITR 248 · Commissioner Appeals · enhancement of assessment · opportunity of hearing · natural justice · section 251 · deletion of addition · bad in law

Issues it is cited on

trade creditorssection 251addition u/s 68commissioner (appeals)double taxationsection 133(6)genuineness of the transactionscrutiny assessmentunexplained cash creditsection 143(1)section 68section 143(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Lotte India Corporation Ltd.

Hasmukhbhai Hansraj Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(7), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1377/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2015-16 Hasmukhbhai Hansraj Patel Vs. The Ito, Ward-3(3)(7) C-202, Suvas Residency Ahmedabad. Opp: Maghmalhar Society Nikol Road Ahmedabad 382350. Pan : Bpdpp 1078 Q

For Appellant: Shri Seem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 250Section 69A

…cement to the assessee. During the course of hearing, the Ld. DR has also not given anything concrete to show that such notice of enhancement was furnished to the assessee, during the course of appellate proceedings. In the case of Lotte India Corporation Ltd 290 ITR 248 (Madras), the High Court held that before exercising his power of enhancement of assessment, Commissioner (Appeals) must provide an opportunity to be heard to assessee. Accordingly, in interest of justice, looking into the instant facts, the issue is set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(Appeals) for duly complying 10 with the above regulation/requir…

Kirtikumar Nagindas Shah, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(6), Surat

In the result, ground No.2 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 535/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.535/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Kiritkumar Nagindas Shah, Vs. The Ito, A-1103, Regent Residency, Near Ward – 2(3)(6), Saurabh Society, Pal, Surat Surat – 395009, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anjps9031P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 14ASection 40

…ving opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, enhancement made by the ld CIT(A) is bad in law and needs to be deleted. In this regard, reliance can be placed on the judgment of Hon`ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lotte India Corporation Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 248 (Mad). Hence, I note that ld. CIT(A) without giving an opportunity to the assessee, has ITA.535/SRT/2023/AY.2014-15 Kiritkumar Nagindas Shah enhanced the assessment, therefore addition made by the ld CIT(A) to the tune of Rs. 11,35,955/-, is hereby deleted. 18. In the result, ground No.2 raised by the assessee is allowed. 19. In the result, th…

ITO, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat vs. Shri Umesh P Bansal, Surat

In the result, ground No.1 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 155/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…ootings and ignoring the facts ascertained by the AO.” 34. Thus, it is abundantly clear that ld CIT(A) has enhanced the assessment, without given an opportunity to the assessee. The Hon`ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lotte Corporation Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 248, held that it is mandatory to give an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, if the ld CIT(A) enhances the assessment. The same view was also upheld by the Hon`ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Goel Die Cost Ltd. (2007) 201 Taxman 330. Therefore, based on these facts and circumstances, we delete the addition sustained by ld CIT(A)…

ITO, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat vs. Shri Umesh P Bansal, Surat

In the result, ground No.1 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 154/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…ootings and ignoring the facts ascertained by the AO.” 34. Thus, it is abundantly clear that ld CIT(A) has enhanced the assessment, without given an opportunity to the assessee. The Hon`ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lotte Corporation Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 248, held that it is mandatory to give an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, if the ld CIT(A) enhances the assessment. The same view was also upheld by the Hon`ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Goel Die Cost Ltd. (2007) 201 Taxman 330. Therefore, based on these facts and circumstances, we delete the addition sustained by ld CIT(A)…

Umeshkumar P Bansal, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat

In the result, ground No.1 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 146/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…ootings and ignoring the facts ascertained by the AO.” 34. Thus, it is abundantly clear that ld CIT(A) has enhanced the assessment, without given an opportunity to the assessee. The Hon`ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lotte Corporation Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 248, held that it is mandatory to give an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, if the ld CIT(A) enhances the assessment. The same view was also upheld by the Hon`ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Goel Die Cost Ltd. (2007) 201 Taxman 330. Therefore, based on these facts and circumstances, we delete the addition sustained by ld CIT(A)…

Umeshkumar P Bansal, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-2(2)(4), Surat

In the result, ground No.1 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 145/SRT/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…ootings and ignoring the facts ascertained by the AO.” 34. Thus, it is abundantly clear that ld CIT(A) has enhanced the assessment, without given an opportunity to the assessee. The Hon`ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lotte Corporation Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 248, held that it is mandatory to give an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, if the ld CIT(A) enhances the assessment. The same view was also upheld by the Hon`ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Goel Die Cost Ltd. (2007) 201 Taxman 330. Therefore, based on these facts and circumstances, we delete the addition sustained by ld CIT(A)…

Shri Patel Enterprises, Korba(Cg) vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- Korba

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose in terms of our observations as discussed herein above

ITA 112/BIL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.112/Rpr/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013) M/S Patel Enterprises, Vs Dcit, Circle-Korba A-3, Vikas Complex, First Floor, Power House Road, Korba (C.G.) Pan No. : Aajfm 0718 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Chand Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 251

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, रायऩुर न्यायऩीठ, रायऩुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR श्री रविश सूद, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़वऩया, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ITA No.112/RPR/2017 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013) M/s Patel Enterprises, Vs DCIT, Circle-Korba A-3, Vikas Complex, First Floor, Power House Road, Korba (C.G.) PAN No. : AAJFM 0718 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Prakash Chand Agrawal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri P.K.Mishra, CIT-DR सुनिाई की तार…

DCIT, Circle-2, Trichy vs. M/S. Mc Hospital, Nagapattinam

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as the Cross

ITA 11/CHNY/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. M. C. Hospital Income-Tax, Plot No. 38, Sivan Sannathi Circle-2, Trichy. Street, Velipalayam, O/O The Joint Nagapattinam, Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tamil Nadu-611001. Tax, Range-2, No. 100, (Pan: Aapfm2058R) Nanjikottai Road, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu- 620001. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 6/Chny/2022 In Ita No.11/Chny/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. M. C. Hospital Deputy Commissioner Of Plot No. 38, Sivan Sannathi Income-Tax, Street, Velipalayam, Circle-2, Trichy. Nagapattinam, Vs. O/O The Joint Commissioner Tamil Nadu-611001. Of Income Tax, Range-2, No. (Pan: Aapfm2058R) 100, Nanjikottai Road, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu- 620001. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Present For: Revenue/Appellant By : Shri Chinthapalli Mehar Chand, Jcit Assessee/Cross Objector By : Shri K. P. Dewani, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 24.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Trichy Vide Ita No.535/2019-20/Cit(A0-1/Try Dated 23.09.2020 Against The Assessment Order Passed By Acit, Circle-2(1), Trichy U/S. 143(3) Of The 2

For Appellant: Shri Chinthapalli Mehar Chand, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner of M/s. M. C. Hospital Income-tax, Plot No. 38, Sivan Sannathi Circle-2, Trichy. Street, Velipalayam, O/O The Joint Nagapattinam, Vs. commissioner of Income Tamil Nadu-611001. Tax, Range-2, No. 100, (PAN: AAPFM2058R) Nanjikottai Road, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu- 620001. (Appellant) (Respondent) And C.O. No. 6/CHNY/2022 In ITA No.11/CHNY/2021 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. M. C. Hospital Deputy Commissioner of Plot No. 38, Sivan Sannath…

Milk City Co. Op. Credit Society Ltd., Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Anand

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 296/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Feb 2019AY 2013-14
Section 80Section 80P(2)(a)

…the ld. CIT-A without affording the opportunity of being heard to the assessee will not sustain. In this regard we find support and guidance from the judgment of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lotte India Corporation Limited reported in 290 ITR 248 wherein it was held that : “as contemplated under section 251(2) of the Act, referred to above, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), as rightly held by the Tribunal, should not exercise the power conferred under section 251(2) without giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee showing against such enhancement or reduction, and to that…

Free India Assurance Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 5934/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosaindcit, Circle - 6(2) M/S. Free India Assurance Room No. 563, 5Th Floor Services Ltd. Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 209, Prime Plaza, J.V. Compound Vs. Mumbai 400020 B.M. Road, Elephistone (W) Mumbai 400013 Pan - Aaacf3879K Appellant Respondent M/S. Free India Assurance Acit, Circle - 6(2) Services Ltd. 5Th Floor, Àayakar Bhavan 209, Prime Plaza, J.V. Compound Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 B.M. Road, Elephistone (W) Mumbai 400013 Pan - Aaacf3879K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 249(2)Section 73

…T(A) could not enhance income without giving opportunity as provided under section 251(2) of the Act, the learned A.R. for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lotte India Corporation Ltd. (2007) 290 ITR 248 (Mad). 5.3.1 We have heard both the learned D.R. for Revenue and the learned A.R. for the assessee in the matter and perused and carefully considered the material on record, including the judicial pronouncements cited. At the outset it would be appropriate to mention at this juncture that the learned CIT(A), after dismissing the grounds raised by…

DCIT Cir 6(2), Mumbai vs. Free India Assurance Services Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 5588/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosaindcit, Circle - 6(2) M/S. Free India Assurance Room No. 563, 5Th Floor Services Ltd. Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 209, Prime Plaza, J.V. Compound Vs. Mumbai 400020 B.M. Road, Elephistone (W) Mumbai 400013 Pan - Aaacf3879K Appellant Respondent M/S. Free India Assurance Acit, Circle - 6(2) Services Ltd. 5Th Floor, Àayakar Bhavan 209, Prime Plaza, J.V. Compound Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 B.M. Road, Elephistone (W) Mumbai 400013 Pan - Aaacf3879K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 249(2)Section 73

…T(A) could not enhance income without giving opportunity as provided under section 251(2) of the Act, the learned A.R. for the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lotte India Corporation Ltd. (2007) 290 ITR 248 (Mad). 5.3.1 We have heard both the learned D.R. for Revenue and the learned A.R. for the assessee in the matter and perused and carefully considered the material on record, including the judicial pronouncements cited. At the outset it would be appropriate to mention at this juncture that the learned CIT(A), after dismissing the grounds raised by…

CIT v. Lotte India Corporation Ltd. (290 ITR 248) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax