How many judgments cite CIT v. Shri Ram Singh?

180 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Shri Ram Singh (306 ITR 343), spanning 2012 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Shri Ram Singh come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 147, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 68, Section 139(1).

CIT v. Shri Ram Singh

306 ITR 343High Court2008#534 most cited

What is CIT v. Shri Ram Singh authority for?

The Assessing Officer cannot assess or reassess any other income under Section 147 if the original grounds for issuing the Section 148 notice are not sustained. Jurisdiction to add other income discovered during reassessment proceedings arises only if the income for which the notice was initially issued is successfully assessed or reassessed.

180

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shri Ram Singh · 306 ITR 343 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment jurisdiction · original grounds not sustained · income escaping assessment · scope of reassessment · Jet Airways principle · Explanation 3 Section 147

Also reported as

174 Taxmann 438217 CTR 3458 DTR 118

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 68 Section 139(1)Section 144B Section 234B

Issues it is cited on

section 147(1)section 13(1)(c)(ii)section 148(2)section 32(1)(iia)clarificatory amendment section 140 income escaping assessment kelvinator fresh tangible material section 234d reason to believe additional depreciation

Judgments citing CIT v. Shri Ram Singh

M/S. Rajlaxmi Petrochem Pvt.Ltd, Latur vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Latur

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 1693/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Hariom TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena &

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…income in respect of any other issue though the reasons for such issue had not been included in the reasons recorded under section 148(2). 14. The second line of precedent is reflected in a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343 . The Rajasthan High Court construed the words used by Parliament in section 147 particularly the words that the Assessing Officer 'may 14 ITA.Nos.1693 & 1694/PUN/2019 & ITA.No.210/PUN/2021 M/s. Rajlaxmi Petrochem Pvt. Ltd., Latur, Maharashtra. assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 13(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Sun Metallics & Alloys Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 2628/Mum/2018 for A

ITA 2629/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. K.Shivaram, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Satyapal Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 68

…ion 147. The Parliament must be regarded as being aware of the interpretation placed on the words 'and also', by the Rajasthan High Court in 10 ITA No. 2628 & 2629/Mum/2018, C.O. 95/Mum/2019 M/s. Sun Metallics & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. CIT v. Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343. The Parliament has not taken away the basis of that decision. While it is open to the Parliament, having regard to the plenitude of its legislative powers to do so, the provisions of section 147(1), as they stood after the amendment of 1-4-1989, continue to hold the field. [Para 17] The question of law would, accordingly, stand answered against…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 13(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Sun Metallics & Alloys Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, ITA No. 2628/Mum/2018 for A

ITA 2628/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. K.Shivaram, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Satyapal Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 68

Rajdeep Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, WD. 3(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2053/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Section 147Section 148Section 194A

…income in respect of any other issue though the reasons for such issue had not been included in the reasons recorded under section 148(2). 14. The second line of precedent is reflected in a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343 . The Rajasthan High Court construed the words used by Parliament in section 147 particularly the words that the Assessing Officer 'may assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings' under section 147. The Rajastha…

Solvex Interchem Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT- 2 (3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 6973/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Azhar Zain Vayal Parambath, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147BSection 147CSection 148Section 151(2)Section 68

…s been supported by the background which led to the insertion of the Explanation 3 to section 147. The Parliament must be regarded as being aware of the interpretation placed on the words 'and also', by the Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343. The Parliament has not taken away the basis of that decision. While it is open to the Parliament, having regard to the plenitude of its legislative powers to do so, the provisions of section 147(1), as they stood after the amendment of 1- 4-1989, continue to hold the field. [Para 17] The question of law would, accordingly, stand answered against…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata vs. B.P.Poddar Foundation for Education

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITAT/143/2021HC Calcutta13 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(b)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…e was taken note of in Mohmed Juned Dadani and it was held that the explanatory memorandum to Explanation 3 to Section 147 of the Act was not brought to the notice of the High Court in the 8 (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) 9 (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) 10 (2011) 336 ITR 136 11 (2018) 99 taxmann.com 312 (SC) 12 (2022) 138 taxmann.com 296 (Bombay) 13 (2013) 355 ITR 172 (Guj.) 14 (2012) 344 ITR 641 (Chattisgarh) 15 (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj) 16 T.C. (A) No. 1548 of 2008 17 (2017) 394 ITR 733 (Mad) 18 (2016) 387 ITR 416 (Del) 19 (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) 20 (…

Smt Kiran Anil Shah, Mumbai vs. Prin. Comm of Income Tax -27, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 686/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhsmt. Kiran Anil Shah Vs. Pcit-27, 3Rd Floor, B-14, Plot No. R. No. 401, 4Th Floor, 33/34, Yogakshema Chs Tower No. 6, Vashi Ltd, Nathpai Nagar, Railway Station Ghatkopar- East, Commercial Complex, Mumbai – 400 077 Vavhi, Navi Mumbai 400 703 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Anrps9911N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Tejinder Pal Singh

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 40A(3)

…her income and if, he intends do so, a fresh notice u/s 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee. A similar view has been expressed by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High court in case of shri Ram Singh (306 ITR 343) and Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Allas Cycle Industries (180 ITR 319). The Hon'be Delhi High Court in case of Software Consultants (21 Taxmann.com 155) held that where the AO did not make any additions on issues in respect of which reasons were recorded for issue of notice u/s 148, a general inference is that the AO could not have made…

Shariuzzaman Shamsuzzaman Shaikh, Mumbia vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-26(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5416/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalmr. Shafuzzaman Shamsuzzaman Shaikh Shop No.2, Building No.2, Mubarak Complex, V.B. Nagar, Kurla (West),Mumbai-400070 Pan: Ayips7233B ...... Appellant Vs. Acit-26(3), C-11, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, B.K.C,. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. ..... Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ms. Kavita Kaushik Date Of Hearing : 07/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

…risdictional High Court judgment in the case of Jet Airways Ltd. 331 ITR 236 and Hon'ble Delhi High court Judgment in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories vs. CIT; 336 ITR 136 (Delhi) and Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court Judgment in the case of CIT vs. Sh. Ram Singh; 306 ITR 343 (Rajasthan) whereby the issue as raised in ground herein is squarely covered. ii) Following the above judgments this order also needs to be quashed, 3 ITA No. 5416 Mum 2019-Mr. Shafuzzaman Shamsuzzaman Shaikh 3) The learned C.I.T (A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of learned Assessing Officer in confirming the addition f…

Shri Shantinath Bhagwan Jain Shwetambar Murtipujak Sangh, Pune vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

Appeal is allowed

ITA 203/PUN/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 263

…income in respect of any other issue though the reasons for such issue had not been included in the reasons recorded under section 148(2). 14. The second line of precedent is reflected in a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343 . The Rajasthan High Court construed the words used by Parliament in section 147 particularly the words that the Assessing Officer 'may assess or reassess 7 ITA No.203/PUN/2021, A.Y. 2010-11 such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the procee…

Geetanjali Infraprojects Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 10(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6919/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…without verifying the facts. Therefore, in view of the judicial precedents in the cases of Oriental Bank of Commerce Vs. Addl. CIT WP(C) 2594/2013 dated 11.08.2014 (Del.); CIT Vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom.); CIT Vs. Shri Ram Singh (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj.); Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. CIT (2011) 60 DTR 77 (Del.) dated 3.6.2011; Reliance Electricals and metals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO – ITA no. 2069/Kol/2017 dated 13.4.2018; and Krishan Kumar Vs. ITO – ITA no. 3985/Del/2017 dated 15.12.2017, the impugned assessment order deserves to be quashed. 4. Learned DR opposed the submissions and suppor…

Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Aurangabad vs. M/S. Hassab Realty Pvt.Ltd, Aurangabad

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 2341/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2341/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Ito, Ward -1(1), Aurangabad

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai

Section 143Section 68

…y other issue though the reasons for such issue had not been included in the reasons recorded under s. 148(2). 20. The second line of precedent is reflected in a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in CIT vs. Shri Ram Singh (2008) 217 CTR (Raj) 345 : (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj). The Rajasthan High Court construed the words used by Parliament in s. 147 particularly the words that the AO 'may assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under s. 147. The Rajasthan High Court held as…

M/S. Shi vs. Hakti Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Osmanabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1166/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Shivshakti Shetkari Vs. Dcit, Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Circle-3, Limited, Nanded Washi Dist., Osmanabad. Pan : Aacts1082Q Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…income in respect of any other issue though the reasons for such issue had not been included in the reasons recorded under section 148(2). 14. The second line of precedent is reflected in a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343 . The Rajasthan High Court construed the words used by Parliament in section 147 particularly the words that the Assessing Officer 'may assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings' under section 147. The Rajastha…

Gyanendra Kumar Bansal (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 59(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 2919/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 Gyanendra Kumar Bansal (Huf), Vs. Ito, 25, Dayanand Vihar, Ward-59(3), Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aachg9684E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjeev Saxena, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2022 Order

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Saxena, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 69C

…Ltd. (supra) and Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra), has held as follows:- “15. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs CIT (supra) relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 346 (Raj.) and also referring to the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra) and various other case laws finally referred to the conclusion of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra) and held as under:- 18. "We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench…

Achal Kumar Malhotra, Haryana vs. Pr. CIT, Haryana

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

ITA 455/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, ADvFor Respondent: Shri Ishtiyaque Ahmed, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under the section." 11. Thereafter, the High Court referred to the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT versus Shri Ram Singh, (2008) 306 ITR 343 (Raj.) in which it has been observed as under: "It is only when, in proceedings under section 147 the Assessing Officer, assesses or reassesses any income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment for any assessment year, with respect to which he had 'reason to believe' to be so, then only, in addition, he can also put to tax, the other inc…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Coastal Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 497/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri H. SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153ASection 69

…is of which reasons are recorded, then any other escaped income cannot be brought to Tax . In this contract the Appellant relies on the fallowing decisions.[PB-Caselaws-Vol.l-Pages173 to 196] 1. CIT Vs Jet Airways (I) Ltd 331 ITR 236(Bom) . 2. Shri ram singh -306 ITR 343(raj) Prayer: The assessee's appeal may kindly be allowed.” :- 10 -: ITA No.. 497/Hyd/2019 and CO 16/H/2019 Coastal Projects Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. 6.1 Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and submitted that the AO has erroneously reopened the case of the assessee u/s 147 of the Act as the t…

ACIT, Jammu vs. Sh Vikramaditya Singh, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 269/ASR/2007[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl

Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

…Jammu & Others, i. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Cheil Communications India (P.) Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 170 (Delhi) ii.Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT f2Q111 336 ITR 136 iii. CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. [20111 331 ITR 236 iv. CIT v. Shri Ram Singh [2008] 306 ITR 343 (Raj.) v. CIT vs Devendra Gupta reported in 174 Taxman 438 (Raj) vi. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Software Consultants [2012] 341 ITR 240 (DELHI) vii. Oriental Bank of Commerce v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [2014] 272 CTR 56 (Delhi) viii. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mohmed Juned Dadani[2014] 355 ITR 172 (Gujarat) 40.1 So far as the…

ACIT, Cir-II, Jammu vs. Smt. Yashorajya Laxmi, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 268/ASR/2007[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl

Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

ACIT, Jammu vs. Dr Karan Singh, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 267/ASR/2007[1998-99\u005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005cu005c]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl

Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

ACIT, Jammu vs. Sh M.K. Ajat Shatru, Jammu

In the result, all the fours appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the three Cross Objections as well as the ground as per Rule 27 are allowed

ITA 263/ASR/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, SrFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Kapila, Spl

Section 139(9)Section 147Section 148

Sunayana Commercial P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -City-3, Mumbai

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

ITA 900/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Promod Kumar ()And Ms. Suchitra Kamble () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sunayana Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 609, 6Th Floor, Inizio, Cardial Vs. City-3, Room No. 612, 6Th Floor, Gracious Road, Opp. P & G Plaza, Andheri (East), Aayakarbhavan, Maharshikarve Mumbai-400099. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aajcs 4896 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Harendra Narayan Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/01/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/01/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Prakash Jhunjhunwala, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Harendra Narayan Singh, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 263Section 263d

…ogy (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT Tax Appeal No. 77 of 2015 Westlife Development Ltd. v. PCIT-5, 88 taxmann.com 439 (Mum-ITAT) Krishan Kumar Saraf v. CIT ITA No. 4562/Del/2011 Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) v. ITO 94 ITD 131 (Coch-ITAT) CIT v. Shri Ram Singh (2008) 217 CTR 345 (Rajasthan-HC) CIT v Double Dot Finance Ltd. [2013] 31 taxammn.com 352 (Bom-HC) CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. [2010] 195 Taxman 117 (Bom-HC) 7. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Pr. CIT passed u/s 263. The Ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer has not verified the share transactions and therefore, the Pr. CIT has rightly invoked the r…