CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd.

198 ITR 297Supreme Court of India1992#61 most cited

What is CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. authority for?

A court's pronouncement derives its scope and color from the specific questions involved in the case, thus, due regard must always be given to the questions framed before the court when interpreting its judgment.

814

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sun Engineering Works · 198 ITR 297 · Supreme Court 1992 · judgment interpretation · scope of decision · questions framed · judicial precedent · Section 147 · reassessment · income escaping assessment

Also reported as

64 Taxmann 442107 CTR 209

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(1)Section 14A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(viii)section 56(viii)section 45(5)(c)section 155(16)section 23(1a)section 104section 45(5)(b)section 145b(1)section 194lakeyman insurancesection 160section 23(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd.

M/S. Shivalik Prints Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, assessees’ appeals in ITA nos

ITA 2296/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80J

…. Copy of said decision filed on earlier date of hearing is again being attached as Annexure-A 2. It is settled law that a judgement is an authority on the facts of the case and the issue decided therein. Please refer CIT Vs Sun Engineering Works P Ltd [1992] 198 ITR 297 (SC): 304 ITR 216 (AAR) - Airport Authority of India, In re 3. In the case of Nath Brothers exemption was claimed u/s 10B(5) in the revised return which was denied by the AO by application of 4th proviso to section 10B(1) as per which exemption is required to be claimed in the original return filed u/s 139(1). Pending appeal before the ITAT, befo…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 171/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 40A(3)

…rd different case laws which clearly show that the Assessee can make fresh claim in its return of income filed in response to notices u/s 153. 16. The Department relied on the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works’ ,198 ITR 297 (SC.) The ld. Counsel argued that this order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (supra) is applicable for section 147 / 148 of the Act. It is not to be applied on the return filed in response to section 153A/B/C of the Act. 17. On the contrary, he has relied on different case laws some of which hare as under:- 156…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 170/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 40A(3)

…rd different case laws which clearly show that the Assessee can make fresh claim in its return of income filed in response to notices u/s 153. 16. The Department relied on the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works’ ,198 ITR 297 (SC.) The ld. Counsel argued that this order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (supra) is applicable for section 147 / 148 of the Act. It is not to be applied on the return filed in response to section 153A/B/C of the Act. 17. On the contrary, he has relied on different case laws some of which hare as under:- 156…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 169/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 40A(3)

…rd different case laws which clearly show that the Assessee can make fresh claim in its return of income filed in response to notices u/s 153. 16. The Department relied on the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works’ ,198 ITR 297 (SC.) The ld. Counsel argued that this order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (supra) is applicable for section 147 / 148 of the Act. It is not to be applied on the return filed in response to section 153A/B/C of the Act. 17. On the contrary, he has relied on different case laws some of which hare as under:- 156…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 158/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 40A(3)

…rd different case laws which clearly show that the Assessee can make fresh claim in its return of income filed in response to notices u/s 153. 16. The Department relied on the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works’ ,198 ITR 297 (SC.) The ld. Counsel argued that this order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (supra) is applicable for section 147 / 148 of the Act. It is not to be applied on the return filed in response to section 153A/B/C of the Act. 17. On the contrary, he has relied on different case laws some of which hare as under:- 156…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 157/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 40A(3)

…rd different case laws which clearly show that the Assessee can make fresh claim in its return of income filed in response to notices u/s 153. 16. The Department relied on the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works’ ,198 ITR 297 (SC.) The ld. Counsel argued that this order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (supra) is applicable for section 147 / 148 of the Act. It is not to be applied on the return filed in response to section 153A/B/C of the Act. 17. On the contrary, he has relied on different case laws some of which hare as under:- 156…

Shri Munish Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals filed for Assessee are disposed off as under:

ITA 156/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 156/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 157/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 158/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 169/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 170/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 171/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Munish Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aexpa3762N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 40A(3)

…rd different case laws which clearly show that the Assessee can make fresh claim in its return of income filed in response to notices u/s 153. 16. The Department relied on the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works’ ,198 ITR 297 (SC.) The ld. Counsel argued that this order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (supra) is applicable for section 147 / 148 of the Act. It is not to be applied on the return filed in response to section 153A/B/C of the Act. 17. On the contrary, he has relied on different case laws some of which hare as under:- 156…

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are disposed off as under:-

ITA 155/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 153 To 155/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ackpa6762B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 आदेश/Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…9(4) and hence was not entitled to claim the deduction under chapter VI A of the Act. It was further stated that issue of provision of Section 153A not being for the benefit of the assessee. The AO further relied on the case of CIT vs Sun Eng. Works (P) Ltd. 198 ITR 297C. In IT(SS)A No.107 & 108/Ind/2015 Hon'ble ITAT Indore Bench, Indore in the case of Saurabh Singla vs DCIT Central, it has been held that "While filing the Return of Income u/s 153A/153C of the Act, some of the assessee have claimed deduction u/s 80C and 80D of the Act. No such claim was made while filing the Return of income u/s 139(1)/139(4) o…

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are disposed off as under:-

ITA 154/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 153 To 155/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ackpa6762B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 आदेश/Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…9(4) and hence was not entitled to claim the deduction under chapter VI A of the Act. It was further stated that issue of provision of Section 153A not being for the benefit of the assessee. The AO further relied on the case of CIT vs Sun Eng. Works (P) Ltd. 198 ITR 297C. In IT(SS)A No.107 & 108/Ind/2015 Hon'ble ITAT Indore Bench, Indore in the case of Saurabh Singla vs DCIT Central, it has been held that "While filing the Return of Income u/s 153A/153C of the Act, some of the assessee have claimed deduction u/s 80C and 80D of the Act. No such claim was made while filing the Return of income u/s 139(1)/139(4) o…

Smt. Priya Arora, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are disposed off as under:-

ITA 153/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 153 To 155/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Smt. Priya Arora, Vs. The Acit, बनाम Central Circle-Ii, 1136, Ist Floor, Chandigarh Sector 8-C, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ackpa6762B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hering ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2024 आदेश/Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…9(4) and hence was not entitled to claim the deduction under chapter VI A of the Act. It was further stated that issue of provision of Section 153A not being for the benefit of the assessee. The AO further relied on the case of CIT vs Sun Eng. Works (P) Ltd. 198 ITR 297C. In IT(SS)A No.107 & 108/Ind/2015 Hon'ble ITAT Indore Bench, Indore in the case of Saurabh Singla vs DCIT Central, it has been held that "While filing the Return of Income u/s 153A/153C of the Act, some of the assessee have claimed deduction u/s 80C and 80D of the Act. No such claim was made while filing the Return of income u/s 139(1)/139(4) o…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sew Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1717/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.K. ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Smt. Mamata Choudhary
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…e Tax Act, 1961. 3. The AO, after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and taking note of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. reported in (1992) 198 ITR 297 (SC), and the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Jai Steel (India) Vs. ACIT (supra), rejected the fresh claim of deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Act, for the reason that the said deduction cannot be claimed during the proceedings under Section 153A of the Act, as no such claim was made in the return of income or…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Sh. Naval Kishore, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 456/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…gh Court in K. Sudhakar S. Shanbhag Vs ITO [2000] 161 CTR (Bom) 391: [2000] 241 1TR 865 (Bom). This decision was rendered by taking notice of the principle laid by the Hon'ble apex Court in CIT Vs Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. [1992] 107 CTR (SC) 209: [1992] 198 ITR 297 (SC) to the effect that in reassessment proceedings, an assessee can neither claim nor be allowed a deduction that was not claimed in the original return. As such the assessment proceedings initiated on the basis of an action under Section 132 of the Act also cannot be utilised by the assessee to seek relief not claimed earlier. Further, Chapter…

Rajdeep Buildcon Pvt Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 469/PUN/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…the undisclosed income., In the instant case, returns, of income for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2005-06 had been accepted under section 143(1). Therefore, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v: Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. (1992) 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442, the assessee could not be permitted to claim the benefit of closing favourable to the assessee. (Para 11] Therefore, in assessment proceedings under section 1534, which are for the benefit of the revenue, the assessee was not permitted to value the closing stock for concluded years at average cost price Accordingly, the Assessing O…

Rajdeep Buildcon Privat Limited, Ahmednagar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 468/PUN/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…the undisclosed income., In the instant case, returns, of income for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2005-06 had been accepted under section 143(1). Therefore, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v: Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. (1992) 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442, the assessee could not be permitted to claim the benefit of closing favourable to the assessee. (Para 11] Therefore, in assessment proceedings under section 1534, which are for the benefit of the revenue, the assessee was not permitted to value the closing stock for concluded years at average cost price Accordingly, the Assessing O…

Rajdeep Buildcom Private Limited, Ahmednagar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 467/PUN/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…the undisclosed income., In the instant case, returns, of income for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2005-06 had been accepted under section 143(1). Therefore, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v: Sun Engg. Works (P.) Ltd. (1992) 198 ITR 297/64 Taxman 442, the assessee could not be permitted to claim the benefit of closing favourable to the assessee. (Para 11] Therefore, in assessment proceedings under section 1534, which are for the benefit of the revenue, the assessee was not permitted to value the closing stock for concluded years at average cost price Accordingly, the Assessing O…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai vs. Bondalapati Shivaji Rao, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1103/CHNY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1044/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Shri Bondalapati Shivaji Rao, The Dcit, 121, Shankar Nagar, M.G. Road, Central Circle-1(2), Pammal, Chennai-600 075. Chennai. [Pan: Aahpb 0083 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1103/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. The Dcit, Shri Bondalapati Shivaji Rao, Central Circle-1(2), 121, Shankar Nagar, Chennai. M.G. Road, Pammal, Chennai-600 075. [Pan: Aahpb 0083 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

…notice u/s 153A of the Act for an abated assessment year, an assessee can raise a new claim which he omitted to claim in original return u/s 139 of the Act. Taking note of the judgment which was rendered in the case of CIT Vs Sun Engineering Works Pvt Ltd (198 ITR 297) in the context of Section 147/148 of the Act, the Hon'ble High Court found the same to be distinguishable and it accordingly held as under: "..Consequently, the return filed under Section 153A(1) of the Act is a return furnished under Section 139 of the Act. Consequently, the respondent-assessee is being assessed in respect of abated assessment…

Bondalapati Shivaji Rao, Chennai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and

ITA 1044/CHNY/2023[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1044/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Bondalapati Shivaji Rao, 121, Shankar Nagar, M.G. Road, Pammal, Chennai-600 075. [Pan: Aahpb 0083 D] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) The Dcit, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1103/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20 V. Shri Bondalapati Shivaji Rao, 121, Shankar Nagar, M.G. Road, Pammal, Chennai-600 075. [Pan: Aahpb 0083 D] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Fca Shri S. Dwarakesh, Ca Shri Shrenik Chordia, Ca Department By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.08.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2024 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 18, Chennai (Hereinafter In Short `The Ld.Cit(A)') Dated 26.07.2023 Passed For Assessment Year (Hereinafter In Short `Ay') 2019-20.

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

…a notice u/s 153A of the Act for an abated assessment year, an assessee can raise a new claim which he omitted to claim in original return u/s 139 of the Act. Taking note of the judgment which was rendered in the case of CIT Vs Sun Engineering Works Pvt Ltd (198 ITR 297) in the context of Section 147/148 of the Act, the Hon'ble High Court found the same to be distinguishable and it accordingly held as under:- "..Consequently, the return filed under Section 153A(1) of the Act is a return furnished under Section 139 of the Act. Consequently, the respondent-assessee is being assessed in respect of abated assessment…

DCIT, Intl. Taxn., Circle 1(2), Bangalore vs. Ibm Canada Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 1330/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CA, Dhiraj R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201Section 9(1)(vii)

…-07-2021. The relevant question before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and the finding thereon is reproduced as under: "(1) Whether the Tribunal is right iin applying the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Sun Engineering Pvt. Ltd. 198 ITR 297 (SC) and holding that concluded issue in the original proceeding cannot be re-agitated in reassessment proceedings even though the case of the appellant is distinguishable in as much as there was no original assessment proceedings on the facts and circumstances I of the case? XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX “11. In the i…

DCIT, Intl. Taxn., Circle 1(2), Bangalore vs. Ibm Singapore Pte. Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 1329/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CA, Dhiraj R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201Section 9(1)(vii)

…-07-2021. The relevant question before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and the finding thereon is reproduced as under: "(1) Whether the Tribunal is right iin applying the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Sun Engineering Pvt. Ltd. 198 ITR 297 (SC) and holding that concluded issue in the original proceeding cannot be re-agitated in reassessment proceedings even though the case of the appellant is distinguishable in as much as there was no original assessment proceedings on the facts and circumstances I of the case? XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX “11. In the i…

DCIT, Intl Taxn, Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. Ibm Italia Spa, India

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

ITA 1325/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CA, Dhiraj R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 201Section 9(1)(vii)

…-07-2021. The relevant question before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and the finding thereon is reproduced as under: "(1) Whether the Tribunal is right iin applying the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Sun Engineering Pvt. Ltd. 198 ITR 297 (SC) and holding that concluded issue in the original proceeding cannot be re-agitated in reassessment proceedings even though the case of the appellant is distinguishable in as much as there was no original assessment proceedings on the facts and circumstances I of the case? XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX “11. In the i…