CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society

397 ITR 344Supreme Court of India2017#22 most cited

What is CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society authority for?

For assessments under Section 153C, a notice is legally unsustainable if there is no incriminating material correlated to the specific assessment years for which reassessment is sought.

1,589

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,514 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society · Section 153C · incriminating material · validity of notice 153C · search assessment · correlation of material to assessment year · assessment quashed · Section 153A · search and seizure · post-search assessment

Also reported as

96 Taxmann.com 468250 Taxmann 225297 CTR 441156 DTR 161

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 139

Issues it is cited on

abatement of assessmentcasus omissussection 153b(1)section 113section 158bdsection 153c(1)section 153a(1)(b)section 153(1)section 132(1)panchnamasection 153bstatement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society

Dy CIT CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd.(in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 556/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

…on note held the assessment bad in law. The Hon’ble High Court upheld the order of Tribunal. Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India affirmed the view of Tribunal in an appeal filed by the Revenue in CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society reported 397 ITR 344/ 250 Taxman 225. The Hon’ble Apex Court held: “18.The ITAT permitted this additional ground by giving a reason that it was a jurisdictional issue taken up on the basis of facts already on the record and. therefore, could be raised. In this behalf, it was noted by the ITAT that as per the provisions of Section 153C of the Act incriminating materia…

Dy CIT CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd.(in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 555/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

…on note held the assessment bad in law. The Hon’ble High Court upheld the order of Tribunal. Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India affirmed the view of Tribunal in an appeal filed by the Revenue in CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society reported 397 ITR 344/ 250 Taxman 225. The Hon’ble Apex Court held: “18.The ITAT permitted this additional ground by giving a reason that it was a jurisdictional issue taken up on the basis of facts already on the record and. therefore, could be raised. In this behalf, it was noted by the ITAT that as per the provisions of Section 153C of the Act incriminating materia…

Dy CIT CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd.(in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 553/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

…on note held the assessment bad in law. The Hon’ble High Court upheld the order of Tribunal. Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India affirmed the view of Tribunal in an appeal filed by the Revenue in CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society reported 397 ITR 344/ 250 Taxman 225. The Hon’ble Apex Court held: “18.The ITAT permitted this additional ground by giving a reason that it was a jurisdictional issue taken up on the basis of facts already on the record and. therefore, could be raised. In this behalf, it was noted by the ITAT that as per the provisions of Section 153C of the Act incriminating materia…

Dy CIT, CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd., (in Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Loquidator)

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 313/MUM/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

…on note held the assessment bad in law. The Hon’ble High Court upheld the order of Tribunal. Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India affirmed the view of Tribunal in an appeal filed by the Revenue in CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society reported 397 ITR 344/ 250 Taxman 225. The Hon’ble Apex Court held: “18.The ITAT permitted this additional ground by giving a reason that it was a jurisdictional issue taken up on the basis of facts already on the record and. therefore, could be raised. In this behalf, it was noted by the ITAT that as per the provisions of Section 153C of the Act incriminating materia…

ITO Ward - 32(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Genmal Jaswantlal Choudhary, Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 162/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.313/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2008-09) आअसं.557/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2009-10) आअसं.556/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2010-11) आअसं.555/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.553/मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai, 906, 9Th Floor, Pratistha Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg. (Annexe), Mk Road, Mumbai 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Hiranandani Palace Gardens Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation Through Ms. Chetna P. Sutaria, Official Liquidator), C-8,9 & 10, Satyam Shopping Centre, Mez Floor, Mg Road, Ghatkopar(E), Mumbai – 400 077 Pan: Aaccc-8862-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal BhutaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153C

…on note held the assessment bad in law. The Hon’ble High Court upheld the order of Tribunal. Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India affirmed the view of Tribunal in an appeal filed by the Revenue in CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society reported 397 ITR 344/ 250 Taxman 225. The Hon’ble Apex Court held: “18.The ITAT permitted this additional ground by giving a reason that it was a jurisdictional issue taken up on the basis of facts already on the record and. therefore, could be raised. In this behalf, it was noted by the ITAT that as per the provisions of Section 153C of the Act incriminating materia…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 27/CHNY/2012[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Meeta Gutgutia (82 Taxmann.com 287). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 which is reported at 96 Taxmann.com 468. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, drawing attention to the statutory provisions of Sec.153A relied on the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of E.N.Gopakumar V/s CIT (75 Taxmann.com 215; 03.10.2016) which has taken a contrary view by relying upon its earlier decision in CIT V/s St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles (70 Taxmann.com 234;…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 26/CHNY/2012[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Meeta Gutgutia (82 Taxmann.com 287). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 which is reported at 96 Taxmann.com 468. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, drawing attention to the statutory provisions of Sec.153A relied on the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of E.N.Gopakumar V/s CIT (75 Taxmann.com 215; 03.10.2016) which has taken a contrary view by relying upon its earlier decision in CIT V/s St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles (70 Taxmann.com 234;…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 25/CHNY/2012[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2005-2006

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Meeta Gutgutia (82 Taxmann.com 287). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 which is reported at 96 Taxmann.com 468. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, drawing attention to the statutory provisions of Sec.153A relied on the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of E.N.Gopakumar V/s CIT (75 Taxmann.com 215; 03.10.2016) which has taken a contrary view by relying upon its earlier decision in CIT V/s St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles (70 Taxmann.com 234;…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 24/CHNY/2012[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2004-2005

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Meeta Gutgutia (82 Taxmann.com 287). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 which is reported at 96 Taxmann.com 468. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, drawing attention to the statutory provisions of Sec.153A relied on the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of E.N.Gopakumar V/s CIT (75 Taxmann.com 215; 03.10.2016) which has taken a contrary view by relying upon its earlier decision in CIT V/s St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles (70 Taxmann.com 234;…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 23/CHNY/2012[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2003-2004

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Meeta Gutgutia (82 Taxmann.com 287). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 which is reported at 96 Taxmann.com 468. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, drawing attention to the statutory provisions of Sec.153A relied on the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of E.N.Gopakumar V/s CIT (75 Taxmann.com 215; 03.10.2016) which has taken a contrary view by relying upon its earlier decision in CIT V/s St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles (70 Taxmann.com 234;…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 22/CHNY/2012[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2002-2003

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Meeta Gutgutia (82 Taxmann.com 287). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 which is reported at 96 Taxmann.com 468. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, drawing attention to the statutory provisions of Sec.153A relied on the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of E.N.Gopakumar V/s CIT (75 Taxmann.com 215; 03.10.2016) which has taken a contrary view by relying upon its earlier decision in CIT V/s St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles (70 Taxmann.com 234;…

Smt. V.Prremalatha, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 21/CHNY/2012[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2001-2002

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate ) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthick Ranganathan
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 234C

…on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Meeta Gutgutia (82 Taxmann.com 287). The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the revenue against this decision has already been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 which is reported at 96 Taxmann.com 468. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, drawing attention to the statutory provisions of Sec.153A relied on the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of E.N.Gopakumar V/s CIT (75 Taxmann.com 215; 03.10.2016) which has taken a contrary view by relying upon its earlier decision in CIT V/s St. Francis Clay Décor Tiles (70 Taxmann.com 234;…

Bajrang Engineers Private Limited, Rourkela vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiabajrang Engineers Pvt. Ltd. J-3/4, Civil Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan No.Aacca 6655 L …………….. Assessee Versus The Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur ………………Revenue

Section 153Section 153C

…Anr 1991 AIR 241, 1990 SCR Sup!. (1) 340 (ii) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 1998 (99) ELT 200 SC, 1998229 ITR 383 SC, (1997) 7 SCC 489 (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society (2018) 11 SCC 490. 3. Ld. Senior Advocate submitted on behalf of the assessee that the crux of the main argument is twofold, the first being that the additions 3 made in the assessment order had no relationship to the satisfaction note recorded by the AO in the case of the person searched. In short, his submission is that in the satisfaction note by the AO of the…

Manish Periwal, Kolkata vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5295/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 5294/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year 2006-07 ITA No. 5295/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year 2007-08 Shri Manish Periwal, Vs ACIT, R/o 9, Ezra Street, Central Cirecle-2, Kolkata-700001 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AFWPP8883K Assessee by : Sh. V. K. Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Ms. Shivani Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 20.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 18.05.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee again…

Manish Periwal, Kolkata vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5294/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 5294/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year 2006-07 ITA No. 5295/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year 2007-08 Shri Manish Periwal, Vs ACIT, R/o 9, Ezra Street, Central Cirecle-2, Kolkata-700001 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AFWPP8883K Assessee by : Sh. V. K. Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Ms. Shivani Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 20.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 18.05.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee again…

Confident Projects (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 409/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Smt.Pooja Maru, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 80I

…ion that in respect of non-pending / unabated assessments, any addition can be made only on the basis of incriminating material in an assessment u/s 153A of the Act. It has been so held in the following decisions: a) CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society 397 ITR 344 (SC) b) CIT Vs IBC Knowledge Park P. Ltd 385 ITR 346 (Kar) c) ACIT Vs Cornerstone Properties Pvt Ltd (ITA No. 1714 to 1717/Bang/2013) d) CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del) e) Sree Lakshmi Venkateshwara Minerals v. DCIT 186 ITD 695 (Bang) (Para 31) 9. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Canara Housing Development Co., (2014) 49 tax…

Confident Projects (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 336/BANG/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Smt.Pooja Maru, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 80I

…ion that in respect of non-pending / unabated assessments, any addition can be made only on the basis of incriminating material in an assessment u/s 153A of the Act. It has been so held in the following decisions: a) CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society 397 ITR 344 (SC) b) CIT Vs IBC Knowledge Park P. Ltd 385 ITR 346 (Kar) c) ACIT Vs Cornerstone Properties Pvt Ltd (ITA No. 1714 to 1717/Bang/2013) d) CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del) e) Sree Lakshmi Venkateshwara Minerals v. DCIT 186 ITD 695 (Bang) (Para 31) 9. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Canara Housing Development Co., (2014) 49 tax…

ACIT, Allahabad vs. M/S Sunsine Infrastate Pvt Ttd, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue in ITA no

ITA 103/ALLD/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad04 May 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant Commissioner Of Sunshine Infraestate Income-Tax, Central Circle, V. Private Limited Allahabad, U.P. 17, Industrial Area, Naini, Allahabad, U.P. Pan: Aancs9247H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 22/Alld/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No.103/Alld/2017) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sunshine Infraestate Private Limited The Assistant 17, Industrial Area, Naini, V. Commissioner Of Allahabad, U.P. Income-Tax, Central Circle, Allahabad, U.P. Pan: Aancs9247H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Parveen Godbole,CA
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 250

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 103/Alld/2017 and C.O.No. 22/Alld/2017 (arising out of ITA No. 103/Alld/2017) Assessment Year 2011-12 Sunshine Infraestate Private Limited,Allahabad IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH “DB”, ALLAHABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT), BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant Commissioner of Sunshine Infraestate Income-tax, Central Circle, v. Private Limited Allahabad, U.P. 17, Industrial Area, Naini, Allahabad, U.P. PAN: AANCS9247H (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 22/Alld/2017 (arising out of ITA No.10…

Heaven Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, the impugned orders are set aside

ITA 365/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmam/S. Heaven Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit, Business Communication Central Circle-13 Centre, 21, New Delhi Kolkata, West Bengal-700001 Pan : Aabch6901K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250(6)

…e Ld. CIT(A) had appreciated the submission on behalf of the assessee that the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Commissioner of Income 4 ITA No. 365/Del./2018 M/s. Heaven Suppliers P. Ltd. Tax-iii, Pune vs. Singhad Technical Education Society, 397 ITR 344 settles the issue that in order to justify assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C of the Act. The documents seized must be incriminating and must relate to each of the assessment years whose assessments are sought to be reopened. The Ld. CIT(A) without distinguishing still upheld the findings of Ld. AO while in the light of satisfaction note dated 2…

Smt. G. Vijaya, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2007-08 is allowed and the appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed

ITA 948/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Siva Prasad Reddy, ITP, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sameer Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

…person to indicate that the searched person had disclaimed the seized documents before reaching a conclusion/satisfaction that the documents do not belong to the searched person but to the other third person. 36. In CIT V. Sinhgad Technical Education Society, 397 ITR 344 (SC), where loose papers found and seized from residence of President of assessee, an educational institution, indicating capitation fees received by various institutions run by assessee did not establish co- relation document-wise with assessment years in question notice issued under section 153C had rightly been quashed and set aside by the Hon…