CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd.

Superior Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

…out of SLP (C) No.22973 of 2007, Dated 02.02.2010 in which it was held that “issue of notice under section 143(2) is mandatory”. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd., (2011) 332 ITR 167 (Del.) in which it was held that “if the ITO acting in accordance with Law, makes certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the Order should have been written more elaborately.” Learned Counsel for the Assessee also relied upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case…

M/S. Spj Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

…out of SLP (C) No.22973 of 2007, Dated 02.02.2010 in which it was held that “issue of notice under section 143(2) is mandatory”. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd., (2011) 332 ITR 167 (Del.) in which it was held that “if the ITO acting in accordance with Law, makes certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the Order should have been written more elaborately.” Learned Counsel for the Assessee also relied upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case…

M/S. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

…out of SLP (C) No.22973 of 2007, Dated 02.02.2010 in which it was held that “issue of notice under section 143(2) is mandatory”. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd., (2011) 332 ITR 167 (Del.) in which it was held that “if the ITO acting in accordance with Law, makes certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the Order should have been written more elaborately.” Learned Counsel for the Assessee also relied upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case…

M/S. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

…out of SLP (C) No.22973 of 2007, Dated 02.02.2010 in which it was held that “issue of notice under section 143(2) is mandatory”. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd., (2011) 332 ITR 167 (Del.) in which it was held that “if the ITO acting in accordance with Law, makes certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as erroneous by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the Order should have been written more elaborately.” Learned Counsel for the Assessee also relied upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case…

Motiwala & Sons, New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT- 17, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

…re, it would be pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of D.G. Housing Project Ltd 343 ITR 329. The relevant part of the order reads as under: “15. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 167 (Del), Delhi High Court was considering the aspect, when there is no proper or full verification, and it was held as under:- "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 Commissioner of Income-t…

Divya Creation, Noida vs. Pr.CIT, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Divya Creation, Vs. Pr. Cit, Plot No. 97, Nsez, Noida Aayakar Bhawan, A2 D- Block, Sector 24, Noida Pan :Aadfd4879K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ly then, the order can be said to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. In support of the above proposition, the Ld. counsel relied on the following decisions: 6 1. Decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd., 332 ITR 167 (Del.); 2. Decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. International Travel House Ltd, 344 ITR 554 (Del.); 3. Decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax Vs. Jyoti Foundation, 357 ITR 388 (Del.); 4. Decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Pr CIT Vs Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd 2017-TIOL-1814-HC-DEL-IT; 5…

Celebi Delhi Cargo Management India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhary[Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Celebi Delhi Cargo Management Vs. The Pr.C.I.T India Pvt. Ltd New Delhi R. No. 23, Import Building - 3 International Cargo Terminal Igi Airport, New Delhi Pan : Aadcc 6885 B [Appellant] [Respondent]

…r enquiry, then the same would come within the ambit of lack of enquiry and inadequate enquiry. 28. In our considered opinion, the answer to the objections raised by the ld. DR is given by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sunbeam Auto Ltd 332 ITR 167 wherein the Hon'ble High Court was considering the aspect, when there is no proper or full verification and it has held as under: “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 Commissioner of Inc…

M/S. Sanspareils Greenlands Pvt. Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT, Meerut

Bench: Shri G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2008-09 Sanspareils Greenlands Cit, Pvt. Ltd. 28/32, Victoria Park Vs. Meerut Meerut Pan : Aaccs2788N Assessment Year: 2008-09

…f the revenue. But that by itself would not be enough to vest the commissioner with the powers of suo motu revision because the first requirement, namely, that the order is erroneous, is lacking. 5.8 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd 332 ITR 167 (Del) has opined in Para 17 of its order as under:- “17. 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 Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 of the Income- tax Act. As noted above, the subm…

M/S Sanspareils Greenlands Pvt. Ltd., Meerut vs. CIT, Meerut

Bench: Shri G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2008-09 Sanspareils Greenlands Cit, Pvt. Ltd. 28/32, Victoria Park Vs. Meerut Meerut Pan : Aaccs2788N Assessment Year: 2008-09

…f the revenue. But that by itself would not be enough to vest the commissioner with the powers of suo motu revision because the first requirement, namely, that the order is erroneous, is lacking. 5.8 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd 332 ITR 167 (Del) has opined in Para 17 of its order as under:- “17. 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 Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 of the Income- tax Act. As noted above, the subm…

Durgesh Autofin P.Ltd, Bijnor vs. Prcit, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 2539/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Durgesh Autofin P. Ltd., Vs Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, C/O Sh. Pankaj Kumar, Director, Muzaffarnagar-251002 S/O Late Sh. Tejpal Singh, Mandi Kotla, Near Nehru Murti, Chandpur, Bijnot, Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccd0768P Assessee By : Sh. Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rachna Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.03.2018 Of Ld. Pr. Cit, Muzaffarnagar U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

…the present case was not a case of lack of inquiry and even if it was inadequate enquiry, the ld. Pr. CIT could not have discarded a quasi-judicial decision taken by the AO. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (2009) 227 CTR 133 (Del.) " ITO Vs D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. (2012) 343 ITR 329 (Del.) " CIT Vs Shree Manjunathesware Packing & Products Camphor Works (1998) 231 ITR 53 (SC) " DIT Vs Jyoti Foundation (2013) 357 ITR 388 (Del.) " CIT Vs Kamal Galani (2018) 95 Taxmann.com 261 (Guj.) " CIT Vs Jawahar Bhattacharjee (2012) 341 ITR 434 (Gauhati) 24 Durgesh Autofin P. L…

M/S. H.M. Agriexports Pvt. Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. Pr. CIT, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2012-13 H.M. Agriexports Pvt. Ltd., Vs Pr. Cit, Hm Agriexports, Muzaffarnagar. Chilkana Road, Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh-247001 (Pan: Aacch5350D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : S/Shri Piyush K. Kamal, D.K. Gandhi, Adv. Respondent By : Smt. Meeta Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.09.2018 O R D E R

…ation of the assessee had passed the assessment order. Such decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be "erroneous". The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the I.T.A. No. 2524/Del/2017 Assessment year 2012-13 case of CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. reported in 332 ITR 167 has held as under: “Therefore, one has to see from the record as to whether there was application of mind before allowing the expenditure in question as revenue expenditure. Learned counsel for the assessee is right in his submission that one has to keep in mind the distinction between "lack of inquiry" and "inadequate inquiry". If there was any…

Shri Balaji Industries Complex, Badaun vs. CIT, Moradabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Balaji Industries Complex, Cit, Ismailpur, Moradabad-244001 Vs Badaun. (Pan: Abefs3007Q) Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Mr. Abhinav Mehrotra, Adv. Department By: Smt. Meeta Singh C.I.T. Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.09.2018

…f the revenue. But that by itself would not be enough to vest the commissioner with the powers of suo motu revision because the first requirement, namely, that the order is erroneous, is lacking. 5.6 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd 332 ITR 167 (Del) has opined in Para 17 of its order as under:- “17. 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 Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 of the Income- tax Act. As noted above, the subm…