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

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.

83

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 147Section 148Section 10(38)Section 115JBSection 14ASection 195Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 55anav methodfresh tangible materialsection 13(2)dcf methodwithin four yearssection 114approval under section 151full and true disclosurematerial facts necessary for assessmentmere change of opinionsection 56(2)(viib)

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

Prakash Fatandas Jassuja, Thane vs. ITO WD 3(2), Thane

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4933/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

Section 133ASection 147

…Court held that the Assessing Officer can form a bona fide belief that there was escapement of income in relation to assessment year 1992-93. 2.10. 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 Shri Prakash Fatandas Jassuja. the assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of the assessment was held to be valid. 2.11. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO, (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bom), held th…

Hanil Era Textiles Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5359/MUM/2011[200-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2015

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri L K Dehiya
Section 1Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234CSection 34A

…at Power Corporation Ltd. vs ACIT, reported in [2013] 350 ITR 266. Regarding plea of the Ld. Counsel, that there was no tangible material, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Export Credit Guarantee vs Addl CIT, reported in 350 ITR 651, wherein Hon’ble High Court held that, it cannot be presumed or held that the AO must too have 7 M/s Hanil Era Textiles Limited deemed to accepted what he has plainly overlooked or ignored in the assessment order. If the AO has ignored a relevant material in arriving at an assessment and acts contrary to the law, then there is an escapement of in…

The Commissioner of Income Tax, CIT(A) vs. M/S Hewlett Packard Globalsoft Pvt Ltd

Appeals are hereby dismissed by

ITA/65/2014HC Karnataka14 Aug 2015

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 260

…esh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. 9 (iii) (2012) 348 ITR 485 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income Tax-VI vs. Usha International Limited. (iv) (2011) 242 CTR 425 Commissioner of Income Tax & Another vs. Rinku Chakraborthy (v) (2013)350 ITR 651 Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (vi) (2014) 265 CTR 540 Commissioner of Income Tax & Another vs. Sasken Communication Technologies Ltd. 7. Per contra, Sri Suryanarayana, learned Advocate would support the order passed by the Tribunal and contends that the assessing…