Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 10(38), Section 115JB, Section 14A.

Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

Q: How many judgments cite Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT?

83 judgments on BharatTax cite Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (350 ITR 651), spanning 2015 to 2026.

350 ITR 651High Court2013#1382 most cited

What is Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT authority for?

For reopening an assessment, the Assessing Officer needs a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, supported by tangible material that is not illusory or conjectural; conclusive proof of escaped income is not required at this stage. Even if the assessee made full disclosure, a complete failure by the Assessing Officer to apply mind during the original assessment can constitute tangible material for reopening.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Export Credit Guarantee Corporation v. Addl. CIT · Section 147 reopening · Section 148 reassessment · reason to believe · tangible material · escaped income · conclusive proof not required · Assessing Officer failure to apply mind · mere change of opinion doctrine · reopening assessment test

Also reported as

30 Taxmann.com 211228 Taxmann 28259 CTR 465

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 10(38)Section 115JB Section 14A Section 195 Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 55a nav method fresh tangible material section 13(2)dcf method within four years section 114 approval under section 151 full and true disclosure material facts necessary for assessment mere change of opinion section 56(2)(viib)

Judgments citing Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

ACIT 7(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Niyanand Inrastructure Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross

ITA 2255/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Acit, 7(2)(2), R. No. 623, 6 Th Nityanand Infrastructure Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Ltd., Opp Abhudaya Nagar Vs. Rd, Mumbai Post Office, G.D. Ambedkar Marg, Mumbai -400033 (Appellant) .. Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacn1981E Co No. 266/Mum/2018 (Arising In Ita No. 2255/Mum/2017 For Ay 2009-10) Nityanand Infrastructure Ltd., Acit, 7(2)(2), R. No. 623, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Opp Abhudaya Nagar Post Vs. Office, G.D. Ambedkar Marg, M.K. Rd, Mumbai Mumbai -400033 (Appellant) .. Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Sh. Vachashpati Tripathi, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Sh. Dr. K. Shivram, Sr. Adv Sh. Rahul K. Hakani, ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01-07-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 19-07-2019

For Appellant: Sh. Vachashpati Tripathi, DRFor Respondent: Sh. Dr. K. Shivram, Sr. Adv

Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “B” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री राजेश कुमार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ACIT, 7(2)(2), R. No. 623, 6 th Nityanand Infrastructure Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Ltd., Opp Abhudaya Nagar Vs. Rd, Mumbai Post Office, G.D. Ambedkar Marg, Mumbai -400033 (Appellant) .. Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AAACN1981E CO No. 266/Mum/2018 (Arising in ITA No. 2255/Mum/2017 for AY 2009-10) Nityanand Infrastructure Ltd., ACIT, 7(2)(2), R. No. 623, 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Op…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(2), Mumbai vs. Khyati Realtors Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, therefore, petition succeeds and is allowed

ITA 4710/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh , Jm Dcit, Cir. 6(3)(2) Vs. M/S. Khyati Realtors Pvt.Ltd R.No.522, 5Th Floor 301/68, Manek Bhuvan 1St Hindu Colony Aayakar Bhavan M.K.Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 014 Pan/Gir No.Aacck4422B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH , JM DCIT, CIR. 6(3)(2) Vs. M/s. Khyati Realtors Pvt.Ltd R.No.522, 5th Floor 301/68, Manek Bhuvan 1st Hindu Colony Aayakar Bhavan M.K.Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 014 PAN/GIR No.AACCK4422B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by Shri. B. Yadagiri Assessee by Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Date of Hearing 17/06/2019 Date of Pronouncement 17/07/2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.4710/Mum/2017 for A.Y.2008-09 arises out of the order by the ld. Com…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5191/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5191/Mum/2009 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Dcit-Circle 3(1) Icici Bank Limited बनाम Room No.607, 6Th Floor नाम/ नाम नाम Icici Bank Towers Aaykar Bhavan Bandra-Kurla Complex Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci-1195-H (अपीलाथ" / Appellant) (ू"यथ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No.127/Mum/2010 [Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.5191/Mum/2009] (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) Icici Bank Limited Dcit-Circle 3(1) बनाम नाम नाम/ नाम Room No.607, 6Th Floor Icici Bank Towers Bandra-Kurla Complex Aaykar Bhavan Vs. Mumbai-400 051. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaci 1195 H (""ा"ेप ""ा"ेप ""ा"ेप /Cross Objector) ""ा"ेप (ू"यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray -Ld.DR

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35DSection 36(1)(vii)

…dit objections etc.: - ICICI Bank Limited Assessment Year-2004-05 No. Case Law Judicial Authority Citation 1. ACIT V/s Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Hon’ble Supreme 291 ITR 500 Pvt. Ltd. Court 2. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of Hon'ble Bombay High 2013 350 ITR 651 India Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT & Ors. Court 3. ITO & Ors. vs. Biju Patnaik Hon'ble Supreme [1991] 188 ITR 247 Court 4. A.L.A. Firm vs. CIT Hon'ble Supreme [1991] 189 ITR 285 Court 5. M/s. Eleganza Jewellery Limited vs. CIT Hon'ble Bombay High W.P.No.2763 of 2013 Court Dated 18/02/2014 6. Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO & Hon'ble Supreme [1999] 236 I…

Tanaya Gems & Jewellery Exports Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly confirm the addition. The ground is dismissed

ITA 3196/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. G. Manjunatha, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3196/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D. G. Pansari, DR

Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234ASection 271Section 271(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SH. G. MANJUNATHA, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3196/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) DCIT-5(3)(2), M/s Tanaya Gems & Jewellery Mumbai, Exports Ltd. बिधम/ 5th floor, 52 Marble Arch, Dr. Pin- Vs. G. D. Deshmukh Marg, Peddar Road, Mumbai-400 026 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AACCT5863H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / : Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : None प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri D. G. Pansari, DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 02.04.2019 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 24.06.2019 Date o…

DCIT- Cir- 6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Imperial Procurement Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2737/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Jacinta Zimik Vishai, DRFor Respondent: Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala, AR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “C” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री राजेश कुमार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 2737/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2007-08) The Dy. Commissioner of Imperial Procurement Income Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) Services Pvt. Ltd. R.No. 506, 5th floor, Aayakar (Formerly Known as Essar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Projects Ltd.) Mumbai-20 Essar House, 11, K K Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400 034 (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) स्थाय…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 23(1), Mumbai vs. Calvin Properties, Mumbai

ITA 6561/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. N. K. Pradhan, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6561, 6562 & 6564/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Abi Rama KarthikeyanFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, AR

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SH. N. K. PRADHAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6561, 6562 & 6564/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s Calvin Properties, ACIT Cir 23(1) R. No. 113, 1st floor, 14, Gitanjali, Plot No. 234, बिधम/ Patkarwadi, S. V. Road, Matru Mandit, Tardeo Vs. Bandra (west), Road, Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai-400 050 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AAGFC2218L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, DR by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri…

ITO 13(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Vulvan Traders P. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4137/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Years: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer-13(3)(3), M/S Vulvan Traders, 805, Room No.227,02Nd Floor, A Wingh, Corporate Avenue, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Sonawala Raod, Vs. M. K. Road, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400063 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aaacv1603K Assessment Years: 2008-09 M/S Vulvan Traders, 805, Income Tax Officer-13(3)(3), A Wingh, Corporate Room No.227,02Nd Floor, बनाम/ Avenue, Sonawala Raod, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Goregaon East, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400063 Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aaacv1603K

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…rt held that the Assessing Officer can form a bona fide belief that there was escapement of income in relation to assessment year 1992-93. 2.9. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, (2013) 350 ITR 651 (Bom), where there had been no application of mind to the relevant facts during the course of the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of the assessment was held to be valid. 2.10. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO, (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extr…

Solo Hardware P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 5(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1486/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 115JSection 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ourt held that the Assessing Officer can form a bona fide belief that there was escapement of income in relation to assessment year 1992-93. 2.8. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, (2013) 350 ITR 651 (Bom), where there had been no application of mind to the relevant facts during the course of the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of the assessment was held to be valid. 2.9. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO, (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extra…

Snehalata Ahnand Rane, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 3(3), Kalyan

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1787/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…rt held that the Assessing Officer can form a bona fide belief that there was escapement of income in relation to assessment year 1992-93. 2.8. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, (2013) 350 ITR 651 (Bom), where there had been no application of mind to the relevant facts during the course of the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of the assessment was held to be valid. 2.9. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO, (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extrao…

Snehalata Ahnand Rane, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 3(3), Kalyan

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1786/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

Snehalata Ahnand Rane, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 3(3), Kalyan

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1785/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

Shri Dineshkumar C. Doshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1730/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

…rt held that the Assessing Officer can form a bona fide belief that there was escapement of income in relation to assessment year 1992-93. 4.7. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, (2013) 350 ITR 651 (Bom), where there had been no application of mind to the relevant facts during the course of the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of the assessment was held to be valid. 4.8. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO, (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extra…

ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Jaydeep Profiles P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3236/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, बनाम/ Bhavan, M.K.Road, Darukhana, Reay Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai 400 086 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B Assessment Year: 2009-10 Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar बनाम/ Darukhana, Reay Road, Bhavan, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 086 Mumbai 400 020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B 2 & 2698/Mum/2016

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

Jaydeep Profiles Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO WD 6 (3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2698/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

Mohd Hasan Abdul Gafoor Momin, Thane vs. ITO WD 1(2), Kalyan

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3336/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Mohd. Hasan Abdul Gafoor Momin, Income Tax Officer, 430/2, Kotwal Shah Dargha Ward-1(2), बनाम/ Road, Bhiwandi, District- Thane, 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Vs. Maharashtra-421308 Wayale Nagar, Kalyan ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aekpm0354F

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254

…r can form a bona fide belief that there was escapement of income in relation to assessment year 1992-93. 17 Mohd. Hasan Abdul Gafoor Momin 3.9. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, (2013) 350 ITR 651 (Bom), where there had been no application of mind to the relevant facts during the course of the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of the assessment was held to be valid. 3.10. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO, (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extr…

DCIT Cir 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Kargwal Construction P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and the cross- objection by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7108/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Acit Cir-6(3)(2), Room No. M/S Kargwal 522, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, 107, First Floor, Mumbai-400020. Runwal Omkar Esquare, Off Eastern Exp. Highway, Sion, Mumbai-400022 Pan No. Aadck1853D Appellant Respondent Co No. 75/Mum/2018 (Ita No. 7108/Mum/2016) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Kargwal Construction Acit Cir-6(3)(2), Pvt. Ltd. 107, First Floor, Room No. 522, 5Th Vs. Runwal Omkar Esquare, Off Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Eastern Exp. Highway, Sion, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400022 400020. Pan No. Aadck1853D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Dharmesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. M. Naveen, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…/2016 & CO No. 75/Mum/2018 opportunity was given to the assessee to explain anything on the issue of share premium. The Ld. CIT(A) followed the decision in CIT v. Usha International 348 ITR 485 (Delhi), Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India v. Addl CIT 350 ITR 651, Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 and Sheo Nath Singh 82 ITR 147 and held that the reopening the assessment done by the AO was only on the basis of guess-work and mere change in opinion. The Ld. CIT(A) thus concluded that there was no merit in reopening of the assessment by the AO. 5. Before us, the Ld. DR submits that during the financial ye…

Idhasoft Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 15(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5139/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Idhasoft Ltd. Dcit-15(2)(1), 3, Narayan Building, Room No.357, 3Rd Floor बनाम/ 23 L. N. Road, Dadar East, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400014 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aabci6090G Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-15(2)(1), M/S Idhasoft Ltd. Room No.357, 3Rd Floor 3, Narayan Building, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 23 L. N. Road, Dadar East, Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400014 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aabci6090G

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…form a bona fide belief that there was escapement of income in relation to assessment year 1992-93. 2.12. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, (2013) 16 5139 & 5338/Mum/2016 Idhasoft Ltd. 350 ITR 651 (Bom), where there had been no application of mind to the relevant facts during the course of the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of the assessment was held to be valid. 2.12. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO, (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bom), held that in order to invoke the ext…

ACIT Cir 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Chemical Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed is dismissed

ITA 5650/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2004-05 Acit Circle-2(3)(1), M/S Tata Chemical Ltd. R. No. 552, 5Th Floor, Bombay House, 24, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Homi Mody Street, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aabct4059M Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. S. Padmaja, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Atul T. Suraiya, Ar Date Of Hearing : 18/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/06/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Atul T. Suraiya, ARFor Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2004-05 ACIT Circle-2(3)(1), M/s Tata Chemical Ltd. R. No. 552, 5th floor, Bombay House, 24, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Homi Mody Street, Fort, Road, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AABCT4059M Appellant Respondent Revenue by : Ms. S. Padmaja, DR Assessee by : Mr. Atul T. Suraiya, AR Date of Hearing : 18/04/2018 Date of pronouncement : 28/06/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 200…

ITO 19(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Meenakshi N Shah, Mumbai

ITA 7082/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit 5(2)(2) Meridian Chem Bond Mumbai Purchase Ltd., बनाम/ 903 Raheja Centre, Free Vs. Press Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. Aaacr1789G

Section 68

…urt held that the Assessing Officer can form a bona fide belief that there was escapement of income in relation to assessment year 1992-93. 7.9 The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, (2013) 350 ITR 651 (Bom), where there had been no application of mind to the relevant facts during the course of the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of the assessment was held to be valid. 7.10. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO, (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bom), held that in order to invoke the ext…

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Airport Developement. Co Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1586/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumard C I T - 3(2)(1) M/S. Maharashtra Airport Room No. 674, 6Th Floor Development Co. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. 12Th Floor, World Trade Mumbai 400020 Centre Tower No. 1 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Pan –Aadcm9623M Appellant Respondent Co No. 45/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year:2008-09) M/S. Maharashtra Airport D C I T - 3(2)(1) Development Co. Ltd. Room No. 674, 6Th Floor 12Th Floor, World Trade Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Centre Tower No. 1 Mumbai 400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 Pan –Aadcm9623M Cross Objector Appellant In Appeal Revenue By: Shri Abhijit Patankar Assesseeby: Shri Salil Kapoor & Shri Sumit Lal Chandani Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.05.2018 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Jm The Aforesaid Appeal Of The Department & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 11.12.2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai For A.Y. 2008-09. Ita No. 1586/Mum/2016 – A.Y. 2008-09 2. The Basic Grievance Of The Department In This Appeal Is Against The Decision Of The Learned Cit(A) In Holding The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter “The Act”) As Bad In Law & Void.

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor &For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

…impugned assessment order as bad in law and void. In support of his contention the learned D.R. relied upon the following decisions: - (i) Yuvraj vs. Union of India (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bom) (ii) Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT 350 ITR 651 (Bom) The learned D.R. submitted, since in the present case the assessment has been reopened within a period of four years, the proviso to Section 147 of the Act is not applicable and the AO retains the power to reopen the assessment without being fettered by the conditions imposed in the said proviso. 6. The learned A.R. submitted that during…