Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU)

432 ITR 212High Court2021#4594 most cited

What is Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) authority for?

A Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) has held that reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated solely on the basis of a mere change of opinion by the assessing officer. Such action requires the existence of new facts and circumstances, and cannot be arbitrary.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Dell India Pvt Ltd vs CIT · 432 ITR 212 · section 147 · section 148 · reassessment · change of opinion · fresh tangible material · Kelvinator of India · Full Bench Karnataka High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151

Issues it is cited on

section 147(b)section 34(1)section 40a(2)(a)kelvinatorsection 148(2)first proviso to section 147beyond four yearssection 145(2)section 34fresh tangible materialmere change of opinionsanctioning authority

Judgments citing Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU)

MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 205/BANG/2022[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Chandrasekhar, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Y. V. Raviraj, Sr. Standing Counsel
Section 153ASection 153C

…rned AR contended that this proposition was also upheld by the Jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rinku Chakraborty 242 CTR 425, which decision was reversed by the Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India Pvt Ltd Vs. CIT in 432 ITR 212. In any case this proposition is not the subject matter for consideration in the present case of this appellant. (vi). Shailesh S Patel Vs. ITO [2018] 97 taxmann.com 570 (Ahmedabad – Trib) The learned Standing Council for the Revenue submitted that in this case the Tribunal relied upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in Pepsico India Holding…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

ITA 45/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundarajan K

For Respondent: Shri. Chandrasekhar, AR
Section 153ASection 153C

…ed that this proposition was also upheld by the Jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rinku Chakraborty 242 CTR 425, which decision was reversed by the Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India Pvt Ltd Vs. CIT in Page 24 of 77 432 ITR 212. In any case this proposition is not the subject matter for consideration in the present case of this appellant. (vi). Shailesh S Patel Vs. ITO [2018] 97 taxmann.com 570 (Ahmedabad – Trib) The learned Standing Council for the Revenue submitted that in this case the Tribunal relied upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in Pepsico India Holdin…

PRADEEP KUMAR AGRAWAL, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

ITA 160/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 158, 159 & 160/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos: 158, 159 & 160/RPR/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Pradeep Kumar Agrawal, v Income Tax Officer, Ward- Dhamtari H. No. 19, Ramjanki Mandir, Sadar s Shankardan Road, Vill- Haraftrai, Bazar, Dhamtari-493773 PAN: ACHPA6856B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) . . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CA राज" की ओर से /Revenue…

PRADEEP KUMAR AGRAWAL, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

ITA 159/RPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 158, 159 & 160/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos: 158, 159 & 160/RPR/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Pradeep Kumar Agrawal, v Income Tax Officer, Ward- Dhamtari H. No. 19, Ramjanki Mandir, Sadar s Shankardan Road, Vill- Haraftrai, Bazar, Dhamtari-493773 PAN: ACHPA6856B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) . . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CA राज" की ओर से /Revenue…

PRADEEP KUMAR AGRAWAL, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

ITA 158/RPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 158, 159 & 160/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़िपया, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos: 158, 159 & 160/RPR/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Pradeep Kumar Agrawal, v Income Tax Officer, Ward- Dhamtari H. No. 19, Ramjanki Mandir, Sadar s Shankardan Road, Vill- Haraftrai, Bazar, Dhamtari-493773 PAN: ACHPA6856B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) . . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CA राज" की ओर से /Revenue…

RAMANATHAN ADAIKALAVAN,COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 557/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.557/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2014-15 Ramanathan Adaikalavan, Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.80, Ansari Street, Ram Nagar, Non-Corporate Circle-2, Coimbatore-641009. Coimbatore [Pan: Aanpa6846P] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri P.M.Kathir, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.11.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri P.M.Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 55A

…Limited Vs DCIT 397 ITR 469 (Delhi) Oracle India (P) Limited Vs ACIT 397 ITR 480(Delhi) Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit Vs DCIT 416 ITR 89 (Bombay) Anand Developers Vs ACIT 425 ITR 261 (Bombay) BPTP Limited Vs PCIT 421 ITR 59 (Delhi) Dell India (P) Limited Vs JCIT 432 ITR 212 (Karnataka) ITO Vs Ramachandra Raman – Co > No. 58/Chny/2018 (ITA No.124/Ch ny/2018) M/s. Star Plastics Vs DCIT – ITA No. 707/Chny/2023. 6.0 The central theme thus emanating from the all the above judicial pronouncements, principally led by Hon’ble Apex Court in its decision of Kelvinator of India is that no action u/s 148 can be taken on the bas…

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1426/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

…7 (SC) Gem Forgings Pvt. Ltd.., AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 suggesting the contrary do not, we say with respect, lay down the correct law.’ 4. This view has been followed by a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) [2021] 432 ITR 212 (Karn). 5. The petition therefore is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) which reads as under: (A) that this hon'ble court may be pleased to issue a writ of cer tiorari or any other writ, order or direction under article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the case leading to the issue of the impugned notice and passing…

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1425/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

…7 (SC) Gem Forgings Pvt. Ltd.., AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 suggesting the contrary do not, we say with respect, lay down the correct law.’ 4. This view has been followed by a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) [2021] 432 ITR 212 (Karn). 5. The petition therefore is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) which reads as under: (A) that this hon'ble court may be pleased to issue a writ of cer tiorari or any other writ, order or direction under article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the case leading to the issue of the impugned notice and passing…

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,DCIT, CIR. 8(1) vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1424/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

…7 (SC) Gem Forgings Pvt. Ltd.., AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 suggesting the contrary do not, we say with respect, lay down the correct law.’ 4. This view has been followed by a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) [2021] 432 ITR 212 (Karn). 5. The petition therefore is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) which reads as under: (A) that this hon'ble court may be pleased to issue a writ of cer tiorari or any other writ, order or direction under article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the case leading to the issue of the impugned notice and passing…

GEM FORGINGS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR. 8(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1423/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

…7 (SC) Gem Forgings Pvt. Ltd.., AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 suggesting the contrary do not, we say with respect, lay down the correct law.’ 4. This view has been followed by a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) [2021] 432 ITR 212 (Karn). 5. The petition therefore is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) which reads as under: (A) that this hon'ble court may be pleased to issue a writ of cer tiorari or any other writ, order or direction under article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the case leading to the issue of the impugned notice and passing…

SAPNA AGARWAL,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIR. 1, JALPAIGURI

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

ITA 1468/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151

…Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) suggesting the contrary do not, we say with respect, lay down the correct law.’ 4. This view has been followed by a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) [2021] 432 ITR 212 (Karn). 5. The petition therefore is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) which reads as under: (A) that this hon'ble court may be pleased to issue a writ of cer tiorari or any other writ, order or direction under article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the case leading to the issue of the impugned notice and passing…

SAPNA AGARWAL,SILIGURI vs. ACIT, CIR. 2, SILIGURI

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

ITA 1467/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151

…Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) suggesting the contrary do not, we say with respect, lay down the correct law.’ 4. This view has been followed by a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) [2021] 432 ITR 212 (Karn). 5. The petition therefore is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) which reads as under: (A) that this hon'ble court may be pleased to issue a writ of cer tiorari or any other writ, order or direction under article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the case leading to the issue of the impugned notice and passing…

THE UNITED THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-2, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 518/BANG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Vargese, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Karthik, D.R
Section 11(5)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…sessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act which is impermissible in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. He placed reliance on the following decisions:- (i) CIT v. Kelvinator of India 320 ITR 561 (ii) Dell India Pvt. Ltd. v. JCIT (2021) 432 ITR 212 (Karn.) (iii) PCIT v. Fibres and Fabrics International Pvt. Ltd. (2022) 139 taxmann.com 561 (Karn.) (iv) CIT v. Bharatiya Reserve Bank Note Mudran Pvt Ltd in ITA No. 433 of 2011 dated 11.08.2011 (Kar) (v) ACIT v. Marico Ltd 117 taxmann.com 244 (SC). (vi) ACIT v. Ms Kotarki Constructions Pvt Ltd in WA No. 842 of 2018 dated 20.03.2021 (Kar). The Un…

SAHARA HOUSINGFINE CORPORATION LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-7(1), KOL. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 504/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) suggesting the contrary do not, we say with respect, lay down the correct law.’ 4. This view has been followed by a Full Bench of the Karnataka High Court in Dell India (P.) Ltd. v. Joint CIT (LTU) [2021] 432 ITR 212 (Karn). 5. The petition therefore is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) which reads as under: (A) that this hon'ble court may be pleased to issue a writ of cer tiorari or any other writ, order or direction under article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the case leading to the issue of the impugned notice and passing…

VENKATA SAI AGENCIES,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1624/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Vasu Pharma Distributors Vs. Acit,Circle-4(1) 3-6-516, Street No.6 Hyderabad Vasu Pharma House Himayatnagar Hydrabad-500 029

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…TR 001(Del.HC) vii. Prakriya Pharmacem vs. ITO reported in 238 taxman 185(Guj.HC) viii.Ratna Trayi Relaity Service Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO reported in 356 ITR 493(Guj.HC) ix.Vipan Khanna vs.CIT reported in 255 ITR 220(P&H) x. Dell India Pvt.Ltd.Jt.CIT,LTU reported in 432 ITR 212 (Kar.HC) xi. Indian and Eastern News paper society vs. CIT reported in 119 ITR 996 xii. Maharaj kumar Kamal singh vs CIT reported in 35 ITR 1 (SC) xiii.CIT vs. A.Raman & Co. reported in 67 ITR 11 (SC) xiv. Bankipur club Ltd. vs CIT reported in 82 ITR 831(SC) xv. Mukesh Modi vs. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 418 (Raj.) 9. The ld. DR on the other hand…

VASU AGENCIES,,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1623/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Vasu Pharma Distributors Vs. Acit,Circle-4(1) 3-6-516, Street No.6 Hyderabad Vasu Pharma House Himayatnagar Hydrabad-500 029

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…TR 001(Del.HC) vii. Prakriya Pharmacem vs. ITO reported in 238 taxman 185(Guj.HC) viii.Ratna Trayi Relaity Service Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO reported in 356 ITR 493(Guj.HC) ix.Vipan Khanna vs.CIT reported in 255 ITR 220(P&H) x. Dell India Pvt.Ltd.Jt.CIT,LTU reported in 432 ITR 212 (Kar.HC) xi. Indian and Eastern News paper society vs. CIT reported in 119 ITR 996 xii. Maharaj kumar Kamal singh vs CIT reported in 35 ITR 1 (SC) xiii.CIT vs. A.Raman & Co. reported in 67 ITR 11 (SC) xiv. Bankipur club Ltd. vs CIT reported in 82 ITR 831(SC) xv. Mukesh Modi vs. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 418 (Raj.) 9. The ld. DR on the other hand…

VASU PHARMA DISTRIBUTORS,,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1622/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Vasu Pharma Distributors Vs. Acit,Circle-4(1) 3-6-516, Street No.6 Hyderabad Vasu Pharma House Himayatnagar Hydrabad-500 029

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40

…TR 001(Del.HC) vii. Prakriya Pharmacem vs. ITO reported in 238 taxman 185(Guj.HC) viii.Ratna Trayi Relaity Service Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO reported in 356 ITR 493(Guj.HC) ix.Vipan Khanna vs.CIT reported in 255 ITR 220(P&H) x. Dell India Pvt.Ltd.Jt.CIT,LTU reported in 432 ITR 212 (Kar.HC) xi. Indian and Eastern News paper society vs. CIT reported in 119 ITR 996 xii. Maharaj kumar Kamal singh vs CIT reported in 35 ITR 1 (SC) xiii.CIT vs. A.Raman & Co. reported in 67 ITR 11 (SC) xiv. Bankipur club Ltd. vs CIT reported in 82 ITR 831(SC) xv. Mukesh Modi vs. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 418 (Raj.) 9. The ld. DR on the other hand…

ACIT,, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. VEENA MIRDHA,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1190/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…lure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts at the time of assessment, reassessment proceedings could not be initiated after expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year. 6 8.4 In recent decision reported in (2021) 432 ITR 212 (Kar), the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court observed in the case of Dell India (P) Ltd. vs. JCIT that after 01.04.1989 the Assessing Officer has power to reopen assessment under section 147, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. The reasons must have a live link with format…

SRI SHANTHAKUMAR MALAGI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER

WP/8630/2022HC Karnataka09 Jun 2022

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice M.I.Arun

Section 143Section 148

…n (2011) 242 CTR 425 (Kar). It is submitted that the said judgment has been subsequently over ruled by this Hon’ble Court in the case of Dell India Private Limited vs. Joint - 4 - Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU) and others reported in (2021) 432 ITR 212 (Kar). 4. The said aspect has not been disputed by the either of the parties. Thus, the order passed at Annexure – K to the writ petition itself requires to be set aside. 5. In respect of jurisdiction, a draft assessment order is passed dated 25.03.2022. It is the contention of the petitioner that the same was not provided to him…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1219/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)

…d Counsel for the assessee, besides relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. vs. Kelvinator India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC) also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Dell International Pvt. Ltd., 432 ITR 212 (Karn.) (Full Bench). 34. We have given a very careful consideration to the rival submissions. A bare perusal of the reasons recorded by the AO which has been reproduced in the earlier part of the order, shows that whatever has been set out therein, is based on the material available on record when the assessment proceedings were concluded under…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2