CIT v. Promy Kuriakose

386 ITR 597High Court2016#2217 most cited

What is CIT v. Promy Kuriakose authority for?

Assessment proceedings under Section 153C require incriminating material found during a search and cannot be based solely on a Section 132(4) statement without corroboration. Additionally, no mandatory notice under Section 143(2) is required for assessments under Sections 153A or 153C, thus rendering the Section 153A(2) time limit inapplicable to Section 153C assessments.

52

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Promy Kuriakose · Promy Kuriakose · Section 153C · Section 153A · Section 143(2) · Section 132(4) · incriminating material search · statement under section 132(4) · mandatory notice 153A 153C · time limit Section 153A(2)

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 115BBESection 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271ddeletion of penaltysummons under section 131section 271esection 269sssection 271dsection 269section 250(4)agricultural incomesection 153csection 132(4)section 115bbe

Judgments citing CIT v. Promy Kuriakose

M/S. Sangyon Automotive Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, ITA Nos.2991 & 2992/Del/2015 are partly allowed and ITA

ITA 2991/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 iii) Principal CIT vs. Kurele Paper Mills (P) Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 571 (Del) iv) CIT vs. Lancy Constructions (2016) 383 ITR 168; v) CIT vs. ST. Francies Clay Décor Tiles (2016) 240 Taxman 168; & vi) CIT v. Promy Kuriakose (2016) 386 ITR 597 (Ker.) 16.1 He also relied on the following decisions:- i) CIT vs MAF Academy (P) Ltd., 361 ITR 258; ii) CIT vs. Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Del); iii) Konark Structural Engineering (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018) 90 taxmann.com 56 (Bom); iv) DRB Exports (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 93 taxmann.com 490 (Cal); v) Prem Castings (P) Ltd. vs. C…

ACIT Central Circle 3(3), Chennai vs. Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust, Villupuram

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2088/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 2085, 2086, 2087 & 2088/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’सी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस .गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम! BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 2085, 2086, 2087 & 2088/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Income Tax, Vs. Educational Trust, Central Circle -3(3), No. 54, Meenatchi Nagar, Chennai – 600 034. Poonthotam, Villupuram 605 602. [PAN: AAATM 3311L] ("#यथ%/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/App…

ACIT Central Circle 3(3), Chennai vs. Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust, Villupuram

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2087/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 2085, 2086, 2087 & 2088/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’सी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस .गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम! BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 2085, 2086, 2087 & 2088/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Income Tax, Vs. Educational Trust, Central Circle -3(3), No. 54, Meenatchi Nagar, Chennai – 600 034. Poonthotam, Villupuram 605 602. [PAN: AAATM 3311L] ("#यथ%/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/App…

ACIT Central Circle 3(3), Chennai vs. Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust, Villupuram

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2086/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 2085, 2086, 2087 & 2088/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’सी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस .गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम! BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 2085, 2086, 2087 & 2088/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Income Tax, Vs. Educational Trust, Central Circle -3(3), No. 54, Meenatchi Nagar, Chennai – 600 034. Poonthotam, Villupuram 605 602. [PAN: AAATM 3311L] ("#यथ%/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/App…

ACIT Central Circle 3(3), Chennai vs. Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Educational Trust, Villupuram

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2085/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 2085, 2086, 2087 & 2088/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Sailendra Mamidi, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,’सी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस .गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम! BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 2085, 2086, 2087 & 2088/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Mailam Subramaniya Swamy Income Tax, Vs. Educational Trust, Central Circle -3(3), No. 54, Meenatchi Nagar, Chennai – 600 034. Poonthotam, Villupuram 605 602. [PAN: AAATM 3311L] ("#यथ%/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/App…

M/S. Sherawali Yarns Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2996/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2005-06 Sherawali Yarns Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 14D, 14Th Floor, Hansalaya, Central Circle, 15, Barakhamba Road, Bhainsali Road, New Delhi. Meerut. Pan: Aaics3421L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.C. Srivastava & Shri Suvinay K. Dash, Advocates Revenue By : Shri S.S. Rana, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11Th March, 2015 Of The Cit(A), Meerut, Relating To Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Trading & Investment In Shares. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 19Th September, 2005 Declaring Loss Of Rs.320/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & In Response To Notice U/S 143(2) Dated 20Th September, 2006 & Notice U/S 142(1) Dated 3Rd August, 2007, The Counsel Of The Assessee Appeared Before The Assessing Officer

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 iii) Principal CIT vs. Kurele Paper Mills (P) Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 571 (Del) iv) CIT vs. Lancy Constructions (2016) 383 ITR 168; v) CIT vs. ST. Francies Clay Décor Tiles (2016) 240 Taxman 168; & vi) CIT v. Promy Kuriakose (2016) 386 ITR 597 (Ker.) 11.1 He also relied on the following decisions:- i) CIT vs MAF Academy (P) Ltd., 361 ITR 258; ii) CIT vs. Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Del); iii) Konark Structural Engineering (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018) 90 taxmann.com 56 (Bom); iv) DRB Exports (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 93 taxmann.com 490 (Cal); v) Prem Castings (P) Ltd. vs.…

M/S. Roseberry Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2995/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09 Roseberry Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 14D, 14Th Floor, Hansalaya, Central Circle, 15, Barakhamba Road, Bhainsali Road, New Delhi. Meerut. Pan: Aabcr3485J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.C. Srivastava & Shri Suvinay K. Dash, Advocates Revenue By : Shri S.S. Rana, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10Th March, 2015 Of The Cit(A), Meerut, Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Derives Income From Interest On Loans & Advances Granted By It As An Nbfc & Profit On Sale Of Mutual Funds. The Return Of Income Was Filed On 6Th November, 2008 Declaring Total Income Of Rs. Nil. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) On 8Th July, 2009. Subsequently, The Case Was Reopened U/S 147 After Duly Recording The Reasons In Writing. In Response To Notice U/S 148 Of The It Act Dated 23Rd October, 2009, The Assessee Submitted To Treat The Original Return As Return Filed In Compliance To Notice U/S 148 Of The It Act, 1961. Subsequently, The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment U/S 147/143(3) On 31St December, 2009 Determining The Total Income At Rs.73,510/- Wherein He Made Certain Additions By Disallowing Stt Debited To P&L Account, Income-Tax Debited, Disallowance U/S 14A & Preliminary Expenses.

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 153ASection 68

…Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 iii) Principal CIT vs. Kurele Paper Mills (P) Ltd. (2016) 380 ITR 571 (Del) iv) CIT vs. Lancy Constructions (2016) 383 ITR 168; v) CIT vs. ST. Francies Clay Décor Tiles (2016) 240 Taxman 168; & vi) CIT v. Promy Kuriakose (2016) 386 ITR 597 (Ker.) 11.1 He also relied on the following decisions:- i) CIT vs MAF Academy (P) Ltd., 361 ITR 258; ii) CIT vs. Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Del); iii) Konark Structural Engineering (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018) 90 taxmann.com 56 (Bom); iv) DRB Exports (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 93 taxmann.com 490 (Cal); v) Prem Castings (P) Ltd. vs.…

Sasikala Raghupathy, Chennai vs. ACIT Central Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 366/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.366/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Vs The Acit, Smt. Sasikala Raghupathy, New No.60, Old No.100, Central Circle 3(1), Iv Street, Abhiramapuram, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aaafr5481B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Ca Jharna B. Harilal, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Bharath, Cit

For Appellant: Shri CA Jharna B. Harilal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharath, CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(6)Section 263Section 54F

…lain and unambiguous. A statute is an edict of the legislature. The language employed in a statute is the determinative factor of legislative intent". (iv) CIT(A) vs. St. Francis Clay Decor Tiles reported in 385 ITR 624 and CIT vs. Promy Kuriakose reported in 386 ITR 597 wherein it was held that even in the absence of search material proceedings U/s.153C of the Act can be initiated and the assessee is bound to file return in the scheme of the provision. (v) Canara Housing Developing Company reported in 274 CTR 122 wherein it was held by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka that order U/s.263 of the Act is infructu…

DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh vs. M/S Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 994/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms.Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Chandigarh Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcc6359G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…0 ITR 571 (Delhi) (para 4), (iv) CIT v. Lancy Constructions [2016] 383 ITR 168/237 Taxman taxmann.com 264 (Kar.) (para 4), (v) CIT v. ST. Francies Clay Decor Tiles [2016] 240 Taxman 168/70 taxmann.com 234 (Ker.) (para 5) and (vi) CIT v. Promy Kuriakose [2016] 386 ITR 597 (Ker.) (para 5). 2. CIT Vs Rai Kumar Arora F20141 52 taxmann.com 172 Allahabad)/r20141 367 ITR 517 (Allahabad) (PAGE NO.5 TO 17 OF ANNEXURE) where Hon'ble Allahabad High Court held that Assessing Officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only for undisclosed income found during search operation but also with regard to material availab…

DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh vs. M/S Dhg Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA 990/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe D.C.I.T., Vs. M/S Dhg Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-Ii, Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aadcd1364Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Gulshan Raj, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…71 (Delhi) (para 4), (iv) CIT v. Lancy Constructions [2016] 383 ITR 168/237 Taxman 728/66 taxmann.com 264 (Kar.) (para 4), (v) CIT v. ST. Francies Clay Decor Tiles [2016] 240 Taxman 168/70 taxmann.com 234 (Ker.) (para 5) and (vi) CIT v. Promy Kuriakose [2016] 386 ITR 597 (Ker.) para 5). CIT Vs Raj Kumar Arora r2014] 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad)/r2014l 367 ITR 517 (Allahabad) where Hon'ble Allahabad High Court held that Assessing Officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only for undisclosed income found during search operation but also with regard to material available at time of original assessment…

Sri. Eldhose K. Varghese, Muvattupuzha vs. Thedcit, Ernakulam

In the result, appeals for assessment year 2006-07 to 2008-09 and 2010-11 are allowed while the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2009-10, 2011-12 and 2012-13 are partly allowed

ITA 261/COCH/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal & Shri George George K.

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

…issioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. Index Securities Private Limited 2017 (9) TMI 585 – Delhi High Court (ii) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. T. S. Pulses Pvt. Ltd. 2017 (8) TMI 571 – Delhi High Court (iii) CIT vs. Promy Kuriakose [2016] 386 ITR 597 (Ker) (iv) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-3 vs. Dipak Jashvantlal Panchal [2017] 397 ITR 153 (v) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. Index Securities Private Ltd., Vidya Shankar Investment Private Limited 2017(9) TMI 585 Delhi High Court (vi) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. T. S. Pulses Pvt. Lt…

DCIT, Dehradun vs. Sh. Ramesh Batta, Dehradun

In the result, the Cross

ITA 3966/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Dcit, Central Circle, Ramesh Batta, Dehradun. Vs. 81/210, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun.

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)(a)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 288ASection 292CSection 80C

…taxmann.com 412 (Delhi) (para 4), CIT v. Lancy Constructions [2016] 383 ITR 168/237 Taxman 728/66 taxmann.com 264 (Kar.) (para 4), CIT v. ST. Francies Clay Decor Tiles [2016] 240 Taxman 168/70 taxmann.com 234 (Ker.) (para 5) and CIT v. Promy Kuriakose [2016] 386 ITR 597 (Ker.) (para 5). 2. CIT Vs St. Francis Clay Decor Tiles (385 ITR 624) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi Kerala Court held that notice issued under section 153A - return must be filed even if no incriminating documents discovered during search. 3. Smt Dayawanti Vs CIT (75 taxmann.com 308) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that…