CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd.

M R Apparels P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Prcit-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

…for payment. The sale deed contains the amount and cheque number but not the date of those cheques. Further, it is an undisputed fact that Rs. 1.45 crore is not received by the appellant company. Delhi High Court - Commissioner of Income Tax vs Sundeam Auto - 332 ITR 167 (2009) 5. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Provisions of section 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961 are as under: Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue. 263. (1) The 99[Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner] or Commissioner may call for and examine th…

Karamveer Electronics Limited, Meerut vs. Pr, CIT, Ghaziabad

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

…t of the Assessing Officer to disclose his satisfaction in the Assessment Order passed thereon. Thus, this objection on the part of the Revenue cannot be accepted.” 20. We find that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto reported in 332 ITR 167 has held as held as under: “12. We have considered the rival submissions of the counsel on the other side and have gone through the records. The first issue that arises for our consideration is about the exercise of power by the CIT under s. 263 of the IT Act. As noted above, the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue was that while passi…

National Udyog, Hisar vs. Pr CIT, Hisar

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

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

…t of the Assessing Officer to disclose his satisfaction in the Assessment Order passed thereon. Thus, this objection on the part of the Revenue cannot be accepted.” 19. We find that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto reported in 332 ITR 167 has held as held as under: “12. We have considered the rival submissions of the counsel on the other side and have gone through the records. The first issue that arises for our consideration is about the exercise of power by the CIT under s. 263 of the IT Act. As noted above, the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue was that while passi…

Purnimasareen, Panipat vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19 Smt. Purnima Sareen Vs. Pr. Cit, 744-745, Model Town, Rohtak Panipat, Haryana-132103 Pan Bokps2116C (Appellant) (Respondent)

…CIT that it is a case of ‘no enquiry’ or ‘lack of enquiry’. No doubt that the Ld. AO did not discuss elaborately in the assessment order but that alone cannot make the order erroneous as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 167 (Del) and Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT vs. Ganpat Ram Bisnoi 296 ITR 292 (Raj.). An incorrect assumption of facts or an incorrect application of law will satisfy the requirement of the order being erroneous as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT 243 ITR 83 (SC). None of these elements exist in the case…

Pawan Kumar, Fatehabad vs. Prcit, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19 Pawan Kumar Vs. Prcit, Near Aggarsain Chowk, Rohtak Prince Plywood Home, Fuwara Chowk, Fatehabad, Haryana 125050 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ely because in his order the Ld. AO did not make elaborate discussion but was satisfied with the explanation of the assessee, the order could not be held to be erroneous. In support the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 167 (Del) and decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT vs. Ganpat Ram Bisnoi 296 ITR 292 (Raj.) were cited. 6.2 The Ld. AR invited our attention to Audit Memo at pages 399-402 of Paper Book in the case of the assessee wherein ITO (Audit) Hisar raised an audit objection observing that interest under section 28 of Land Acquisition Act of Rs. 3,…

Simbhaoli Power Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT Central, Kanpur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

…t of the Assessing Officer to disclose his satisfaction in the Assessment Order passed thereon. Thus, this objection on the part of the Revenue cannot be accepted.” 16. We find that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto reported in 332 ITR 167 has held as held as under: “12. We have considered the rival submissions of the counsel on the other side and have gone through the records. The first issue that arises for our consideration is about the exercise of power by the CIT under s. 263 of the IT Act. As noted above, the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue was that while passi…

Simbhaoli Power Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT Ghaziabad, New Delhi

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

…rt of the Assessing Officer to disclose his satisfaction in the Assessment Order passed thereon. Thus, this objection on the part of the Revenue cannot be accepted." 16. We find that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto reported in 332 ITR 167 has held as held as under: "12. We have considered the rival submissions of the counsel on the other side and have gone through the records. The first issue that arises for our consideration is about the exercise of power by the CIT under s. 263 of the IT Act. As noted above, the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue was that while passi…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 4 vs. Ms Mohak Real Estate Pvt Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

…d reasons in order to justify exercise of jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act; and that where the aforesaid was not carried out, the order passed under Section 263 of the Act was not sustainable. 4.4 In the case of CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (2010) 332 ITR 167, a coordinate bench of this court held that one has to keep in mind the distinction between lack of enquiry and inadequate enquiry; and that merely because the enquiry carried out was inadequate, that by itself would not justify invoking Section 263 of the Act. 4.5 In the case of CIT vs New Delhi Television Ltd., (2014) 220 Taxman 43, a…

Kaustubh Gupta, Meerut vs. Pr. CIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2017-18 Kaustubh Gupta, 412/3, Versus Pr. C.I.T., Mangal Pandey Nagar, Ghaziabad. Meerut. Pan: Aabcs3651B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Sanjeev Sapra, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Waseem Arshad, Cit/Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.12.2023 Order Per Saktijit Dey, Vice-

…Therefore, he submitted, the order passed under section 263 of the Act is unsustainable. In support of such contention, learned counsel relied upon the following decisions : (i). CIT vs. Anil Kumar Sharma, 335 ITR 83 (Del). (ii). CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd., 332 ITR 167 (Del.) (iii). Virtusa Consulting Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, 442 ITR 385 (Mad). (iv). CIT vs. Neerav Modi, 390 ITR 292 (Bom) (v). ITO vs. DG Housing Projects Ltd., 343 ITR 329 (Del) (vi) Eicher Motor Ltd. vs. CIT, 125 taxmann.com 432 (ITAT Delhi) (vii). CIT vs. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd., 333 ITR 547 (Del). (viii). Meerut Roller flour Mills…

DCIT Circle-1(1) Exemption, New Delhi vs. India International Centre, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

…reme Court in the case of Max India Ltd reported in 295 ITR 282 (SC); Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd reported in 243 ITR 83 (SC) and Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 (Del); CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del), among other decisions. 9. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we hold that the issues raised by the Id. PCIT is already decided in favour of the assessee on merits and further since adequate enquiries were already carried out by the Id. AO in the course of asses…

DCIT Circle-1(1) Exemption, New Delhi vs. India International Centre, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

…reme Court in the case of Max India Ltd reported in 295 ITR 282 (SC); Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd reported in 243 ITR 83 (SC) and Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 (Del); CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del), among other decisions. 9. In view of the aforesaid observations and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we hold that the issues raised by the Id. PCIT is already decided in favour of the assessee on merits and further since adequate enquiries were already carried out by the Id. AO in the course of asses…

Raghuvir Singh, Delhi vs. Pr. CIT, Faridabad

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

…t of the Assessing Officer to disclose his satisfaction in the Assessment Order passed thereon. Thus, this objection on the part of the Revenue cannot be accepted.” 26. We find that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto reported in 332 ITR 167 has held as held as under: “12. We have considered the rival submissions of the counsel on the other side and have gone through the records. The first issue that arises for our consideration is about the exercise of power by the CIT under s. 263 of the IT Act. As noted above, the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue was that while passi…