How many judgments cite CIT v. Paramjit Kaur?

106 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Paramjit Kaur (311 ITR 38), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Paramjit Kaur come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 151, Section 250, Section 145(3).

CIT v. Paramjit Kaur

311 ITR 38High Court2008#1024 most cited

What is CIT v. Paramjit Kaur authority for?

An Assessing Officer must have 'reasons to believe,' not just 'reasons to suspect,' that income has escaped assessment before initiating reassessment proceedings. The AO must apply independent mind to the information and record own satisfaction, rather than acting mechanically or on borrowed satisfaction.

106

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Paramjit Kaur · 311 ITR 38 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reasons to believe · reasons to suspect · escapement of income · non-application of mind · borrowed satisfaction · independent satisfaction of AO · reassessment proceedings · initiation of reassessment

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 151 Section 250 Section 145(3)Section 1961 Section 40A(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(40)live link borrowed satisfaction bogus share capital material facts necessary for assessment bogus ltcg escapement of income full and true disclosure bogus long term capital gain non application of mind reason to believe mere change of opinion

Judgments citing CIT v. Paramjit Kaur

Jay Kishore Choubey, Rairangpur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Asansol

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2/CTK/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2010-2011 2011 Jay Jay Kishore Kishore Choubey, Choubey, Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-1, Asansol. Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Acmpc 1759 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Adv Revenue By : Shri Charan Das, Sr. Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11 11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/11 /11/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri P.R.MohantyFor Respondent: Shri Charan Das, Sr

Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK , CUTTACK (through virtual hearing) BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-2011 2011 Jay Jay Kishore Kishore Choubey, Choubey, Vs. ACIT, Circle ACIT, Circle-1, Asansol. Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj. PAN/GIR No. PAN/GIR No.ACMPC 1759 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Adv Revenue by : Sh…

Shark Packaging (India) Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed only on ground no

ITA 2163/DEL/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 46ASection 68Section 69C

…the Country wherein the issuance of a notice for reassessment on the basis of mere suspicion and without any independent application of mind has not been held to be valid some of which are listed below: - Commissioner of Income-tax v. Smt Paramjit Kaur [2009) 311 ITR 38 (Punjab & Haryana)]; Commissioner of Income-tax v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd [(2010) 325 ITR 285 (Delhi)]; PCIT v. N C Cables Pvt Ltd [2017) 391 ITR 11 (Delhi)] Mrs. Sejal J. Panchal v. Income-tax Officer [2018] 90 taxmann.com 305(Ahmedabad - Trib.) In addition to above noted citations, the ld. counsel has also placed vehement reliance on the judgmen…

Shark Packaging (India) Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 23(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed only on ground no

ITA 8310/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 46ASection 68Section 69C

Shark Packaging (India) Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 23(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed only on ground no

ITA 8309/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Addl. CIT

Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 46ASection 68Section 69C

Tej Singh, Mathura vs. ITO 1(3)(4), Mathura

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

ITA 8/AGR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…asons to believe for issuing a notice. The Assessing Officer had clearly substituted form for substance and therefore the action of the Assessing Officer was not sustainable. 4.2 Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Paramjit Kaur, 311 ITR 38 held – “The assessee filed her original return declaring nil income. The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings on the basis of information received from the survey circle that the assessee had got prepared a demand draft for a sum of Rs.83,040 which was not accounted in the books of account Page 11 of 23 Tej Singh vs. ITO of th…

ITO, Ward-50(1), Kolkata vs. Sanat Singha Roy, Kolkata

In the result, the cross-objection of the assessee is allowed and the reopening of the assessment is hereby quashed being bad in law and the consequential additions stand deleted

ITA 624/KOL/2020[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Ito, Ward-50(1), Kolkata................…………………………….….…….……Appellant Vs. Sanat Singha Roy……..……………..........................……........……...…..…..Respondent Mahishpota, Post Office-Natagarh, Kolkata-700113. [Pan: Anips0738A] Appearances By: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 29, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order :April 03, 2023

Section 250

…Court in Income Tax Officer v Lakhmani Mewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437. Reliance in this respect can also be 6 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sanat Singha Roy placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of 'CIT vs Paramjit Kaur' (2008) 311 ITR 38 (P&H), wherein, making identical observations, the Hon'ble High Court held that the in the absence of sufficient material to form satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that income of the assessee had escaped assessment, the issuance of notices u/s 148 of the Act was not valid.“Reasons to believe” is different from “reasons to suspect” or from “to…

Shri Sham Sunder Aggarwal, Kapurthala vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -2, Kaputhala

In the result, the appeal of the assessee, ITA

ITA 410/ASR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 263

…der U/s 263. Both in reopening U/s 148 & revision U/s 263 the same issue, bogus purchase cannot be enquired multiple time. Ld Counsel respectfully considered the order of Hon’able Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT versus Paramjit Kaur (2009) 311 ITR 38 held that the existence of material must be real and it must also have nexus with the believe that income, escaped assessment. Respectful observation of the Hon’able apex court in the case of Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd vs ITO 1977 CTR (SC) 32/ 106 ITR 1 (SC) 12 Sham Sunder Aggarwal v. Pr. CIT “The CIT cannot initiate proceedings with a…

Gold Finch Jewellery Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 273/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: 01/08/2022

Section 131Section 133Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1074/Ahd/2016 & 273/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2010-11) Gold Finch Jewellery Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner of बनाम/ G-5, Pariseema Complex, Income Tax Vs. Nr. Swagat Cross Roads, C. Circle-2(1)(1), G. Road, Ahmedabad - Ahmedabad - 380015 380006 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACG6992L .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/Appellant by : Sh…

Gold Finch Jewellery Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1074/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: 01/08/2022

Section 131Section 133Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

M/S Globe Complex Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 230/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.230/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Globe Complex Pvt. Ltd...………………..............................…….……Appellant 528, Nayabad, Near Mini Bus Stand, Kolkata-700099.( [Pan:Aadcg4222A] Vs. Ito, Ward-5(4), Kolkata……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ca,Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shrigautammondal, Sr. Dr,Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing :February 01, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 16, 2022

Section 147Section 148Section 148aSection 151Section 250

…"reason to believe" had summed up by Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v LakhmaniMewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437. Reliance in this respect can also be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of 'CIT vs ParamjitKaur' (2008) 311 ITR 38 (P&H), wherein, making identical observations, the Hon'ble High Court held that the in the absence of sufficient material to I.T.A. No.230/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Globe Complex Pvt. Ltd form satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that income of the assessee had escaped assessment, the issuance of notices u/s 148 of the Act was not val…

Shri Shish Pal Singh, Jalanhdhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4) Jalandhar

ITA 309/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Trilochan Singh PS Khalsa, Sr DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 309/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shish Pal Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, S/o Sh. Assa Singh, Ward-1(4), Jalandhar Prop. M/s Imperial Furniture, Nakodar Road, Jalandhar [PAN: ABNPS 8286Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Respondent by: Sh. Trilochan Singh PS Khalsa, Sr DR Date of Hearing: 14.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 28.02.2022 ORDER Per Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the asse…

Alankar Commodeal (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1257/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1257/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Alankar Commodeal (P) Ltd..........................................…………………….……Appellant C/O Ca Bal Kishan Kedia, Bansal Complex, 1St Floor, Ram Nivas Talkies Chowk, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh-496001. [Pan: Aahca1771G] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata…………….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Kr. Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 16, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 01, 2022 Hearing Through Video Conferencing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.04.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act(Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Passing Order Ex-Parte. 2. That Under The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Bad In Law & Hence The Consequential Reassessment Order Is Also Illegal & Needs To Be Annulled. 3. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of A Sum Of Rs.2,50,50,000/- For The Share Capital Raised By The Assessee, Holding The Same To Be Unexplained Cash-Credit In Terms Of Sec.68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Addition Is Unjustified & Need To Be Deleted. 4. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Amend Or Withdraw Any Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250Section 68

…elieve" has summed up by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v.LakhmaniMewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437. Reliance in this respect can also be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of 'CIT vs Paramjit Kaur' (2008) 311 ITR 38 (P&H), wherein the Hon'ble High Court held that the in the absence of sufficient material to form satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that income of the assessee had escaped assessment, the issuance of notices u/s 148 of the Act was not valid. 11. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ACIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd. (2017) 82 taxmann.com 300 (De…

Tirlok Singh, Kurukshetra vs. DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3995/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi& Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3995/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Sh. Tirlok Singh, बनाम The Dcit(International S/O Sh. Surjit Singh, Taxation), Circle, Village Kalsa, Tehsil Pehowa, Gurgaon Kurukshetra "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Cbzps6654J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing Though Video Conferencing िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Jagdish Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.10.2021 उदघोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.12.2021 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “B”,DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER& SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.3995/DEL/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Sh. Tirlok Singh, बनाम The DCIT(International S/o Sh. Surjit Singh, Taxation), Circle, Village Kalsa, Tehsil Pehowa, Gurgaon Kurukshetra "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: CBZPS6654J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing though video Conferencing िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue by : Dr. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06.10.2021 उदघोषणाक"तार…

Vijayshree Food Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 587/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Vijayshree Food Products P. Ltd., Vs. Acit, C/O Ravi Gupta, Advocate, Central Circle-30, E-6A, Kailash Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaccv4721C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28Th December, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-30, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Export Of Tobacco Products. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30Th September, 2014 Declaring The Loss Of Rs.18,78,467/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 26Th November, 2014 At The Returned Income. Subsequently, The Ao Reopened The Assessment As Per The Provisions Of Section 147 Of The Act By Recording The Following Reasons:-

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…would not have made incorrect observations and relied on the past events to assume the sanctity of future transactions. For the above proposition, he relied on the following decisions:- (a) G&G Pharma- 384 ITR 147(Del); & (b) CIT v. Smt. Pramjit Kaur (2009) 311 ITR 38 (P&H). 10. The ld. Counsel for the assessee in yet another plank of argument submitted that the date of reasons recorded, the date of sanction and the date of issuance of notice coupled with factual inaccuracies committed by the AO would prove that ld. CIT has granted the approval in a mechanical manner. He submitted that had the CIT perused the…

Mesers Supertech Forgings(India) Pvt.Ltd., Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle IV, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 563/ASR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 147

…m of suspicion fueled by the ADIT’s report.  Apart from above, the reopening on a borrowed satisfaction of another authority has been held to be bad in numerous judicial authorities. Even the Hon’ble P&H High Court in CIT vs. Paramjit kaur reported in (2009) 311 ITR 38(P&H), held as follows (head note): “—Reason to believe—Information from Survey Wing of the Department—AO can assume jurisdiction under s. 147 provided there is sufficient material before him and the existence of material must be real—Further, there must be nexus between the material and the escapement of income—AO has to record reasons showing due…

Gurdish Kaur Khular, Jalandhar vs. ACIT( International Taxation), Circle, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 121/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ashray Sarna, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 69

…erefore the reopening under section 147 r.w.s 148 of the Act was not valid. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: • Amrik Singh Vs. ITO, 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar) • ITO Vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 0437 (SC) • CIT Vs. Smt. Paramjit Kaur (2009) 311 ITR 38 • Smt. Charanjit Kaur Vs. ITO (2021) 211 TTJ (Chd) 614 7.1 Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that cash deposited in the bank account did not mean that income escaped the assessment. It was also stated that it was not clear as to how, the A.O. was of the opinion that the deposits in the bank account was escaped income of the assessee particular…

Kasapu Ramesh Babu, Visakhapatnam vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 210/VIZ/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

…of difference between reasons to believe and reasons to suspect. The reasons to believe must form an definite base and has to be considered in sanctity. 15. Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Smt. Pramjit Kaur [2009] 311 ITR 38 (P&H) while analyzing the reasons recorded, held as under :- (Kasapu Ramesh Babu) “7. It is undisputed that the Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment proceedings on the basis of information received from the survey circle that the assessee had got prepared a demand draft for a sum of Rs.83,040 which was not accounted in the books of accoun…

Ganapati Developers, Howrah vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-47, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Madhumita Roy)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Virtual Court) (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Member) I.T.A. No. 139/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ganapati Developers...………………..…..............................................................................Appellant [PAN: AAIFG 0188 R] Vs. ACIT, Circle-47, Kolkata................................................................................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. S.M. Surana, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. Supriyo Pal, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf…

Sh. Karamjit Singh Rai, Hoshiarpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Hoshiarpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 227/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Saini

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna (Ld. C. A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. D. R.)

Section 144Section 147Section 250(6)Section 69

…picion and there was absolutely no material on record, by which it can be said that there was any reason(s) to believe before the AO qua escapement of income. The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Smt. Pramjit Kaur [2009] 311 ITR 38 (P&H) while dealing with identical facts and issue has held as under . “7. It is undisputed that the Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment proceedings on the basis of information received from the survey circle that the assessee had got prepared a demand draft for a sum of Rs.83,040 which was not accounted in the books of account of the as…

Surinder Kumar & Sons HUF, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 890/DEL/2012[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2019AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 68Section 68oSection 69Section 69A

…vi) CIT vs. Sunita Dhada in SLP(C) Diary No.9432/2018 dated 28.03.2018. vii) ACIT vs. Dhariya Construction Co., (2010) 328 ITR 515 (SC). viii) PCIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd. (Del) (ix) CIT vs. Anupam Kapoor (2008) 299 ITR 179 (x) CIT vs. Paramjit Kaur (2009) 311 ITR 38 (P&H) (xi) CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd., (2010) 325 ITR 285 (Del.) 9 I.T.A. No.890/DEL/2012 10. He further submitted that the approval given u/s.151 by Addl. CIT is also mechanical and casual. On merits, he submitted that assessee has received a gift through banking transactions and there is no record to prove that assessee after receiving th…