What is DIT v. Jyoti Foundation authority for?

An assessment order cannot be deemed erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer conducted an inquiry and applied their mind during the original assessment, as Explanation 2 to Section 263 does not permit unending inquiries by the revisional authority.

How many judgments cite DIT v. Jyoti Foundation?

210 judgments on BharatTax cite DIT v. Jyoti Foundation (357 ITR 388), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does DIT v. Jyoti Foundation come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 263, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 147, Section 148.

DIT v. Jyoti Foundation (357 ITR 388)

Seth Madan Lal Palriwala Foundation, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), New Delhi

ITA 4670/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263

…1 ITR 53 (SC)]. Nothing bars/prohibits the CIT from collecting and relying upon new/additional material/evidence to show and state that the order of the Assessing Officer is erroneous.” 29. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of DIT vs. Jyoti Foundation (2013) 357 ITR 388 (Delhi) held that when enquiries were certainly conducted by the AO as in the instant case, ld. CIT u/s 263 is required to conduct the enquiry himself to record the finding that assessment order was erroneous in case he reaches the conclusion that it is a case of no enquiry. 30. In the instant case, neither it is a case of no enquiry nor the l…

Brahma Center Development Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT-02, New Delhi

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

ITA 4341/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 263

…by the Ld. Assessing Officer is an improbable one. In support of his contentions, the ld. AR placed reliance on the decision in the case of ITO vs. DG Housing Projects Ltd., 343 ITR 329, PCIT vs. Modicare Ltd.in ITA No. 759/2016 and DIT vs. Jyoti Foundation, 357 ITR 388. He further submitted that Explanation 2 to section 263 of the Act has no retrospective application and it is held so by Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in Shri Narayan Taturane vs. ITO (ITA No. 2690/Mum/2016 and M/s. Amira Pure Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. PCIT in ITA No. 3205/Del/2017. 7. The ld. AR further submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in…

M/S. Eveready Industries India Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT-4, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 805/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…ond set of cases, CIT cannot direct the Assessing Officer to conduct further enquiry to verify and find out whether the order passed is erroneous or not.” 17. The above view is also supported by the following decisions: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs R.K. Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 18. Having broadly discussed and set out above the settled judicial principles for usurpation of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, we now proceed to examine whether for the reasons set out in clauses (a) to (g) of the SCN, the Ld…

S. N. Tradelink Private Limited, Surat vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 586/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.586/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. S. N. Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. Principal Commissioner 3010-11, Moamai Complex, Of Income-Tax- 2, Surat Near Bombay Market Surat Pan: Aakcs 0060 R अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 41(1)

…of decisions, including the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co. Limited (243 ITR 83); and CIT V/s. Max India Ltd. 2007] 295 ITR 282 (SC), ITO V. DG Housing Projects Limited [2012] 343 ITR 329 (Del), DIT v. Jyoti Foundation [2013] 357 ITR 388 (Delhi), CIT v. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. [2011] 332 ITR 167 (Delhi) [2010] 189 Taxman 436 (Delhi), CIT v. Gabriel India (P) Ltd. 203 ITR 108 (Bom) and A2Z Maintenance And Engineering Service Ltd. v. CIT [I.T.A.No. 2438/DEL/2012(DelHC). The learned counsel S.N. Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. v. Pr.CIT-2, Surat /I.T.A.No. 586/SRT/2018/A.Y. 13-14 Page 7 of 17 for t…

Shri Narayan Saraf, Kolkata vs. Pr.C.I.T.-12, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2214/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble] I.T.A. No. 2214/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Shri Narayan Saraf………………………….................……....……………..…..……...……………...…Appellant 56, N.S. Road 2Nd Floor Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan: Akkps 6352 B] Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -12, Kolkata………………………..........….....……......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate & Shri Jaydeep Chakraborty, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Dr. P.K. Srihari, Jcit, Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 13Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 29Th, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata -12, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Pr. Cit”), Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’), Dt. 14/03/2019, For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At The Outset We Find That There Is A Delay Of 131 (One Hundred Thirty One) Days In Filing Of This Appeal. After Perusing The Petition For Condonation, We Are Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal On Time. Hence The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted.

Section 143(3)Section 263

…based on surmises and conjectures. Assessments cannot be set aside based on doubts and suspicion. cannot be set aside based on doubts and suspicion. The following case The following case-law lay down the position:- DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. JYOTI FOUNDATION 357 ITR 388 (Delhi High Court ) DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. JYOTI FOUNDATION 357 ITR 388 (Delhi High Court ) DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. JYOTI FOUNDATION 357 ITR 388 (Delhi High Court ) It was held that revisionary power u/s 263 is conferred on the It was held that revisionary power u/s 263 is conferred on the It was held that revisionary power u/s 263 is conf…

Dipanjan Basak, Kolkata vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1316/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) AYs- 2014-15 - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue…

Azharul Haque, Kolkata vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1313/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) AYs- 2014-15 - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue…

Biswajit Swain, Hooghly vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1312/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) AYs- 2014-15 - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue…

Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu, Kadapa vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1310/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) AYs- 2014-15 - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue…

Samir Kumar Nayak, Balasore vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1309/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) AYs- 2014-15 - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue…

Lisa Das, Kolkata vs. ACIT (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1307/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) AYs- 2014-15 - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue…

Mahesh Kumar, Bangalore vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1303/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.Ta No.1303/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Mahesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It&Tp), C/O Ibm India Private Limited Global Kolkata Process Services-1A, Tax Team Hr Delivery Centre ‘D1’, 4Th Floor, Manyata Business Park, Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Karnataka-560045. (Pan:Apspk6683A) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1307/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Smt. Lisa Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bl-353, Sector-2, Salt Lake, Kolkata- (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata. 700 091. (Pan: Amqpd7668B) Appellant Respondent I.Ta Nos.1309/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Samir Kumar Nayak Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), Sales Tax Office Lane, Balasore, Kolkata. Odisha-756001. (Pan: Afcpn5619M) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1310/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 2/423-C, Mangalamitra, Rajampet, Kolkata. Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh-516115 (Pan: Asrpm6979R) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1312/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Biswajit Swain Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It&Tp), 60/4A, Haran Banerjee Lane, Kolkata. Konnagar, Hooghly, West Bengal- 712235 (Pan: Aysps1745C) Appellant Respondent I.Ta No.1313/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 Azharul Haque Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Flat 6, Building 1, Sayed Ismail Lane, Tax (It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata. Ays- 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) AYs- 2014-15 - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue…

Anil T. Kriplani, New Delhi vs. CIT(It-2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 506/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 55A

…file of Assessing Officer and in case he was of the view that no inquiries were made by him then he ought to have made inquiries. In this regard, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Director of Income Tax vs Jyoti Foundation 357 ITR 388 (Delhi). He also pointed out that the amendment to section 263 of the Act is prospective in nature and cannot be applied. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The issue arising in the present appeal is against the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, wherein the Commissioner has the power, incase the assessme…

Shri Debanjan Das Gupta, Kolkata vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1315/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue of taxability…

Shri Bodhisattava Chattopadhyay, Kolkata vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1314/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue of taxability…

Malay Ghosh, Midnapoire vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1311/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue of taxability…

Ravi Kiran Sinha, Dhanbad vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1308/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue of taxability…

Nayan Mukherjee, Kolkata vs. ACIT (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1306/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue of taxability…

Shri Himadri Mallick, Kolkata vs. CIT (It&Tp), Kolkata

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee’s are allowed and the Stay applications are dismissed

ITA 1304/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO's order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 31. In the light of the above, we are of the firm view that not only did the AO enquire into the issue of taxability…

Citystar Ganguly Projects LLP, Kolkata vs. Principal CIT - 9, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1103/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm ]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263

…nothing but giving the AO second innings without establishing that the AO’s order was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Our findings in this regard find support in the following judgments: - DIT vs Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 388 (Del) - ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd reported in 343 ITR 329 - CIT vs Ashish Rajpal reported in 320 ITR 674 (Del) - CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd reported in 332 ITR 167 (Del) - CIT vs R.K.Construction Co. reported in 313 ITR 65 (Guj) 14 I.T.A No.1103/Kol/2019 A.Y 2014-15 16. For these reasons, we are of the considered view that the assessment orde…

DIT v. Jyoti Foundation

What is DIT v. Jyoti Foundation authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing DIT v. Jyoti Foundation

Seth Madan Lal Palriwala Foundation, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), New Delhi

Brahma Center Development Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT-02, New Delhi

M/S. Eveready Industries India Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT-4, Kolkata

S. N. Tradelink Private Limited, Surat vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Surat

Shri Narayan Saraf, Kolkata vs. Pr.C.I.T.-12, Kolkata

Dipanjan Basak, Kolkata vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata

Azharul Haque, Kolkata vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata

Biswajit Swain, Hooghly vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

Balakalyan Chowdary Marathu, Kadapa vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

Samir Kumar Nayak, Balasore vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

Lisa Das, Kolkata vs. ACIT (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

Mahesh Kumar, Bangalore vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

Anil T. Kriplani, New Delhi vs. CIT(It-2), New Delhi

Shri Debanjan Das Gupta, Kolkata vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(1), Kolkata

Shri Bodhisattava Chattopadhyay, Kolkata vs. CIT(It&Tp), Kolkata

Malay Ghosh, Midnapoire vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

Ravi Kiran Sinha, Dhanbad vs. ACIT(It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

Nayan Mukherjee, Kolkata vs. ACIT (It), Circle-1(2), Kolkata

Shri Himadri Mallick, Kolkata vs. CIT (It&Tp), Kolkata

Citystar Ganguly Projects LLP, Kolkata vs. Principal CIT - 9, Kolkata