CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd.

354 ITR 536High Court2013#204 most cited

What is CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd. authority for?

Reassessment of income, especially after a summary assessment under Section 143(1), requires the Assessing Officer to possess fresh, tangible material to form a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment; a mere reappraisal of existing records or a change of opinion without new material is not permissible.

366

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd. · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 143(1) · fresh tangible material · reason to believe · escapement of income · mere change of opinion · live link · reopening of assessment

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd.

Brics Gilt Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 1(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5320/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5320/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Brics Gilt Finance Ltd. Dcit Cir 1(1)(1), Now Known As M/S Brics Aayakar Bhavan, बिधम/ Gilt Finance Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai, 1St Floor, Sadhna House, 570, Pin- Vs. P.H. Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018. & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5685/Mum/2015 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dcit Cir 1(1)(1), Brics Gilt Finance Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Now Known As M/S Mumbai, Brics Gilt Finance Pvt. बिधम/ Pin- Ltd. Vs. 1St Floor, Sadhna House, 570, P.H. Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj8885B अपीऱाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Vijay Mehta, Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. T. Kepgen, Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01/03/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 02/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Sandeep Gosain:

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Sh. T. Kepgen, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…(Mumbai ITAT) 3. Inductotherm (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (258 CTR 61) (Gujarat High Court) 4. CIT vs. Orient Craft Ltd. (215 Taxman 28) (Delhi High Court) Ld. AR also relied upon the following decision which are mentioned below:- 1) CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd. [354 ITR 536, 548 (Del)] 2) CIT v. Atul Kumar Swami [362 ITR 693, 695-696 (Del)] 3) Inductotherm (India) (P) Ltd. v. M. Gopalan, DCIT - 258 CTR 61 (Guj) 4) Bapalal and Co. Exports v. it. CIT [289 ITR 37, 45 (Mad)] 5) Telco Dadajee Dhackjee Ltd. v. DCIT for A.Y 1998- 99 in ITA No. 4613/Mum/2005 dated 1205.2010 (TM) 6) Delta Air Lines Inc. v. ITO [153 Ui 506 (M…

DCIT, Circle-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eih Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the cross objection is allowed and the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1707/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 1707/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2006-07 D.C.I.T., Circle-8(1) -Vs.- M/S Eih Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaace 6898 B] (Respondent) (Appellant) C.O.No.62/Kol/2016 (A/O I.T.A No. 1707/Kol/2016 ) Assessment Year : 2006-07 M/S Eih Ltd. -Vs- D.C.I.T., Circle-8(1) Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaace 6898 B] (Respondent) (Cross Objector) For The Department : Md. Usman, Cit(Dr) For The Assessee : Shri A.K.Gupta, Fca Date Of Hearing : 17.01.2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 02.02.2018. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Gupta, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Usman, CIT(DR)
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…15 ) has taken the view that that even in the case of original assessment order having been passed u/s 143(1), it is mandatory for the AO to have in its possession, fresh tangible material before reopening of the case. In the case of CIT vs. Orient Craft Ltd. 354 ITR 536, it was held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court that reasons for reassessment disclosed that AO reached belief that there was escapement of income "on going through the return of income" filed by assessee after he accepted return u/s. 143(1) without scrutiny, and nothing more. In these facts, it was held by the Hon’ble High Court that it was nothing but…

Shri Anil Singhal, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2044/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.P. Jainassessment Year 2008-09 Anil Singhal C/O. Dinesh Vs. Ito, Mohan, Advocate, 2- Anand Ward-1(1) Vihar, Lane No. 1, Circular Muzaffarnagar Road, Muzaffarnagar Pan-Bksps7631E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Ankit Gupta, Adv Respondent By : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/10/2017 Order Per B.P. Jain, A.M. This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises From The Order Of Learned Cit(A), Muzaffarnagar, Vide Assessment Order Dated 24.01.2017 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised As Many Eleven Grounds Of Appeal & First Four Grounds Being Legal Which Have Been Pressed By The Assessee Are Reproduced Hereinbelow:- That The Notice Issued U/S 148 & Reassessment Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 1) 144 Are Illegal, Bad In Law & Without Jurisdiction. That, In View Of The Facts & Circumstances, No Satisfaction Is Recorded By 2) The Assessing Officer As Required U/S 147/148 Of The Act Prior Issuing The Notice Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. That, No Satisfaction Has Been Recorded By The Assessing Officer After 3) 2

For Appellant: Sh. Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148

…nt to the reopening will not rescue an inherently defective reopening order from invalidity. ” 8. At this stage, we also find it appropriate to consider preposition laid down by Hon ’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Orient Craft Ltd. reported as 354 ITR 536 (Del), as relied by the Id. AR, wherein it was held thus : “The argument of the revenue that an intimation cannot be equated to an assessment, relying upon certain observations of the Supreme Court in Rajesh Jhaveri (Supra) would also appear to be self-defeating, because if an “Intimation”is not an “assessment” then it can never be subjected to s…