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

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Paramjit Kaur

Time Media & Entertainment LLP (Earlier Time Media & Entertainment Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 16(1)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 6534/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6534/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Time Media & Income Tax Officer- Entertainment Llp (Earlier 16(1)(5) Time Media & R.No. 439, 4 Th Floor, V. Entertainment Private Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd.) M.K Marg, 104, Rachna, V.P Road, Mumbai-400020 Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-400056 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaact1581C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Reepal G. Tralshawala Revenue By: Shri. D.G. Pansari (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 28.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 6534/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 31.07.2017, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”) In Appeal No. Cit(A)-4/It-89/Ito-16(1)(5)/2016-17, For Assessment Year 2010-11, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 30.03.2016 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2010-11. I.T.A. No.6534/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri. Reepal G. TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri. D.G. Pansari (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…a facie appeared to be a reason to suspect and not to believe is not well founded. It is only an interim order. No final order has been produced. 31. Mrs. Suri's reliance upon the decision of this Court in CIT v. Smt. Paramjit Kaur [2008] 168 Taxman 39/[2009] 311 ITR 38 is not well founded. In that case, the Court found that there was no reason to believe and that re-opening was merely on suspicion. 32. Mrs. Suri relied upon a decision of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Gupta Abhushan (P.) Ltd., [2009] 178 Taxman 473/312 ITR 166. In that case, the re- opening of an assessment was set aside as the material found in…

Kamal Kishoree Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 34(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6628/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 6628/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Kamal Kishoree Aggarwal, Vs Acit, A-57, Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, Circle-34(1), New Delhi-110052 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ackpa3670L Assessee By : Sh. Pancham Sethi, Fca Revenue By : Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.04.2019 Order This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-12, New Delhi Dated 13.07.2018. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed U/S 250(6) By The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 By The Ld. Assessing Officer Is Bad In Law. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred Both In Law & On The Facts Of The Case By Upholding The Action Of The Ld. Assessing Officer To Initiate Reopening & Reassessment Of The Case U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act 1961. 3. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 5,96,177/- Made By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 By Treating Certain Share Transactions As Bogus. 4. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Recognizing The Fact That The Client Code Modification (Ccm) Was Done To Rectify The Genuine Errors Held At The End Of Broker For Which The Assessee Was Not Responsible. 2 Kamal Kishoree Aggarwal 5. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Order Of Ld. Ao Even When The Ld. Ao Failed To Provide The Details Of The Transactions Where Client Code Was Modified. 6. Ld. Assessing Officer Has Erred Both In Law & On Facts Of The Case In Initiating Penalty Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) Read With Section 274 Of The It Act, 1961. 7. The Appellant Craves Leave To Amend, Delete Or Add Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or During The Course Of Hearing Of The Appeal.” 3. In Ground Nos. 1 & 2 Of The Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Reopening Of Assessment Made U/S 147 Of The Act Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Sh. Pancham Sethi, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. S. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 6628/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Kamal Kishoree Aggarwal, Vs ACIT, A-57, Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, Circle-34(1), New Delhi-110052 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ACKPA3670L Assessee by : Sh. Pancham Sethi, FCA Revenue by : Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 11.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 12.04.2019 ORDER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-12, New Delhi dated 13.07.2018. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts…