Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Chemsworth Pvt. Ltd.

275 Taxmann 408High Court2020#4833 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Chemsworth Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax cannot substitute their judgment for that of the Assessing Officer regarding the adequacy of an inquiry conducted during an assessment. The revising authority cannot step into the shoes of the assessing officer to re-evaluate the evidence or the extent of investigation.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT vs Chemsworth Private Limited · Section 263 · revisionary powers · adequacy of enquiry · assessing officer prerogative · Pr. CIT · inadequate enquiry · lack of enquiry

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 144BSection 56Section 80P(2)(a)(i)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 80p(2)(a)(iii)inadequate enquirysection 80jlack of enquirysection 120section 80p(1)section 144asection 80hhcsection 129section 80hhmalabar industrialsection 263(1)

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Chemsworth Pvt. Ltd.

Annu Agrotech Private Limited, Kota vs. Pr.CIT, Udiaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9/JPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 09/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Cuke Annu Agrotech Private Limited, Pr.Cit, S-47/48, S-47/48, Vs. Udaipur. Commercial Shops, Ipia 324005, Rajasthan, India. Pan No.: Aagca 5903 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Mahendra Gargieya(Adv.) & Shri Devang Gargieya (Itp) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 27/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15 /09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya(Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 09/JP/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 cuke Annu Agrotech Private Limited, Pr.CIT, S-47/48, S-47/48, Vs. Udaipur. Commercial Shops, IPIA 324005, Rajasthan, India. PAN No.: AAGCA 5903 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya(Adv.) & Shri Devang Gargieya (ITP) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri B.K…

Shri Puneet Talera, Jaipur vs. PCIT, Jaipur-1, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 25/JPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 25/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Puneet Talera, Cuke P.C.I.T. Vs. 17, Purohit Ji Ka Bagh, M.I. Road, Jaipur-1 Jaipur. Pan No.: Aezpt 8279 D Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Pcit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit, Jaipur-1, Jaipur Dated 28/03/2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Order Passed By The Ld. Pcit U/S 263 Is Illegal & Bad In Law & The Same Be Quashed. 2. The Ld. Pcit Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Holding That The Order Passed By The Ao Allowing The Loss On Account Of Differential Interest Under The Head Income From Other Sources In The Absence Of Balance Sheet/ Bank Statement Of Relevant Period Is Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue Ignoring The Fact That:-

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (PCIT-DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 57

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 25/JP/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Puneet Talera, cuke P.C.I.T. Vs. 17, Purohit Ji Ka Bagh, M.I. Road, Jaipur-1 Jaipur. PAN No.: AEZPT 8279 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri B.K. Gupta (PCIT-DR) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 28/07/2021 mn?kk…

M/S I G Petrochemicals Ltd vs. The Asst Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

ITA/219/2011HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 260Section 263

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR I.T.A. NO.219 OF 2011 BETWEEN: M/S. I.G. PETROCHEMICALS LTD, D-4, JYOTHI COMPLEX 134/1, INFANTRY ROAD BANGALORE-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN SRI. MADAN MOHAN DHANUKA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS S/O SRI. HANUMAN PRASAD DHANUKA. ... APPELLANT (BY SMT.JINITHA CHATTERJEE, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR SRI. S. PARTHASARATHI, ADV.) AND: THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(4), BANGALORE-560001.…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agriculturel Market Committee

ITTA/219/2011HC Telangana27 Jun 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN