Exports v. Deputy CIT

240 ITR 224High Court1999#1686 most cited

What is Exports v. Deputy CIT authority for?

When an assessment has been completed under section 143(3), reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147/148 are invalid if based merely on a change of opinion without fresh tangible material. The assessee's true and full disclosure during the original assessment restricts the Assessing Officer's power to reopen the assessment.

67

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Adani Exports v. DCIT · Exports v. Deputy CIT · 240 ITR 224 · section 147 · section 148 · section 143(3) · reassessment validity · change of opinion · fresh tangible material · true and full disclosure · reopening of assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 115JBSection 132(1)Section 151Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

Issues it is cited on

section 147(b)test of enduring benefitsection 35ddsection 72atrue and full disclosuresection 54ecsection 115jaasection 2(31)section 147(a)section 39within four yearsfresh tangible material

Judgments citing Exports v. Deputy CIT

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

ITA 1275/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Apr 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 250

…as bad debt, Assessing Officer re-opened assessment by issuing\nnotice in terms of section 148-On writ petition filed by assessee against aforesaid notice,\nHigh Court, following decision of Gujarat High Court in Adanı Exports v. Dy. CIT\n(Assessment) [1999] 240 ITR 224 allowed writ petition Whether since Adani Export's case\n(supra) was related to section 143(3), while instant case was related to section 143(1) and\nthere is conceptual difference between section 143(1) and section 143(3), High Court\nwrongly applied Adani Export's case (supra) - Held, yes\"\nThe ITAT Delhi Bench 'B' in the case of Deputy Commis…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BAREILLY vs. WAVE DISTILLERIES AND BREWERIES LIMITED, BAREILLY

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed

ITA 153/LKW/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor, Vibhu Jain and Sumit Lalchandani, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Smt. Richa Rastogi, CIT (DR)
Section 115JSection 148

…f proceedings under section 147 of the Act) 11.2 In support of the above arguments, the Ld. A.R. has placed reliance on the judgements of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the cases of CIT v. Smt. Vyjayanthimala Bali 155 ITR 662 (Bombay), Adani Exports v. DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Bombay) and the judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Yeshwant Talkies v. CIT 157 ITR 103 (M.P). The Ld. A.R., accordingly, submitted that the reassessment proceedings were void and in contravention to the provisions of section 148 of the Act and that consequently, the reassessment proceedings are to be quashed and the…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN vs. R.B. ENTERPRISES, DEHRADUN

ITA 4/DDN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DEHRADUN BENCH “DB”, DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA Nos.3500 & 3501/Del/2017 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2008-09 Vs. DCIT, M/s. R.B. Enterprises, 7, Saharanpur Road, Central Circle, Dehradun Dehradun PAN :AADFR7892D (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. M/s. R.B. Enterprises, DCIT, Central Circle, 7, Saharanpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun PAN :AADFR7892D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Department by Sh. S.K. Chaterjee, CIT(DR) D…

M/S. R.B. ENTERPRISES,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

ITA 3501/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DEHRADUN BENCH “DB”, DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA Nos.3500 & 3501/Del/2017 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2008-09 Vs. DCIT, M/s. R.B. Enterprises, 7, Saharanpur Road, Central Circle, Dehradun Dehradun PAN :AADFR7892D (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. M/s. R.B. Enterprises, DCIT, Central Circle, 7, Saharanpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun PAN :AADFR7892D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Department by Sh. S.K. Chaterjee, CIT(DR) D…

M/S. R.B. ENTERPRISES,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

ITA 3500/DEL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DEHRADUN BENCH “DB”, DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA Nos.3500 & 3501/Del/2017 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2008-09 Vs. DCIT, M/s. R.B. Enterprises, 7, Saharanpur Road, Central Circle, Dehradun Dehradun PAN :AADFR7892D (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. M/s. R.B. Enterprises, DCIT, Central Circle, 7, Saharanpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun PAN :AADFR7892D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Department by Sh. S.K. Chaterjee, CIT(DR) D…

JT. CIT (ODS) - CC -1(4), MUMBAI vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 222/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…mited. 249 ITR 306 (SC), ii. Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v/s. CIT 119 ITR 996 (SC), iii. Vijaykumar M. Hirakhanawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), iv. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, v. Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), vi. Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.), vii. CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and viii. Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.). 47. Now, let us come to the issues involved in the instant case on which the Revenue has concluded the reassessment proceedings. Elaborate arguments were advanced by both…

ULTRA TECH CEMENT LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CC 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 220/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…mited. 249 ITR 306 (SC), ii. Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v/s. CIT 119 ITR 996 (SC), iii. Vijaykumar M. Hirakhanawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), iv. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, v. Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), vi. Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.), vii. CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and viii. Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.). 47. Now, let us come to the issues involved in the instant case on which the Revenue has concluded the reassessment proceedings. Elaborate arguments were advanced by both…

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1789/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…mited. 249 ITR 306 (SC), ii. Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v/s. CIT 119 ITR 996 (SC), iii. Vijaykumar M. Hirakhanawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), iv. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, v. Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), vi. Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.), vii. CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and viii. Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.). 47. Now, let us come to the issues involved in the instant case on which the Revenue has concluded the reassessment proceedings. Elaborate arguments were advanced by both…

M/S. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT CIR-1(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1466/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Bledeputy Commissioner Of Income Tax V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd., Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan, Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) V. M/S. Ultratech Cement Ltd. Central Circle- 1(4) Ahura Centre, B- Wing Room No. 902, 9Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road Pratishtha Bhavan Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) & M/S. Ultratech Cement Limited V. Dcit, Central Circle- 1(4) [Acit, Cc] Room. No 902, 9Th Floor Ahura Centre, B-Wing, 2Nd Floor Pratishtha Bhavan Mahakali Caves Road Old C.G.O. Bldg, (Annexe) Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400093 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaacl6442L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 35D

…mited. 249 ITR 306 (SC), ii. Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v/s. CIT 119 ITR 996 (SC), iii. Vijaykumar M. Hirakhanawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), iv. Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, v. Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), vi. Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.), vii. CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and viii. Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.). 47. Now, let us come to the issues involved in the instant case on which the Revenue has concluded the reassessment proceedings. Elaborate arguments were advanced by both…

HSBC ASSET MANAGEMENT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, ground no.1 raised by assessee is allowed and assessment order framed found to be without jurisdiction

ITA 7292/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalhsbc Asset Management (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Mercantile Bank Chamber, 16 Veer Nariman, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aabch0007N ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-1(1)(2) Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Niraj Sheth, Ar Respondent By : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit (A)’] Vide Order Dated 13.10.2017 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Distinct & Separate & Without Prejudice To Each Other. 1. On The Facts & In Law, The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - 6, Mumbai [‘Cit(A)’] Erred In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Initiated After Four Years From The End Of Relevant Assessment Year, Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Made & The Appellant Had Disclosed Fully & Truly All Material Facts Necessary

For Appellant: Sh. Niraj Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 37(1)Section 40A(9)

…nt, considered the provisions of ss. 9 and 10 pf the Indian I.T. Act, 1922. Any different view taken by him afterwards on the application of those provisions would amount to a change of opinion on material already considered by him. > Adani Exports vs. DCIT (240 ITR 224) (Guj) - Audit objections were raised but that would not amount to information within the meaning of section 147(b). > Air India vs. V.K. Srivastava, CIT and Others (213 ITR 739)(Bom) wherein it has been held that reopening of the assessment based on the audit objection was without jurisdiction. The Commissioner of Income-tax has failed to exerc…

ASTRAL PROPERTIES & CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 3(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1723/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

…ailure to take steps under section 143(3) will not render the Assessing Officer 7 Astral Properties & Constructions Vs. ITO powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings, even when intimation under section 143(1) has been issued. ADANI EXPORTS v. DCIT[1999J 240 ITR 224 (Guj) was distinguished”. 7.3.4 Thus, in view of the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court cited supra and the facts of the case, I am of the view that the AO has rightly taken the re-course of section 147/148 to re-open the case. 7.3.5 As regards the claim of the appellant that the assessing officer had wrongly invoked clause (b) of the explanatio…

M/S. SHREE GURJARI INDUSTRIES LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT,, SURAT

In the result, ground No. 1of the appeal is allowed

ITA 980/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) M/S Shree Gurjari Industries The Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Am-4, Prsident Plaza, Nr. Income Tax,Circle-2(1)(2), Vs Rto, Ring Road, Surat-395 002 Room No. 323, Pan : Abjfs2664J Aaykarbhavan, Majura Gate, Surat Appellant /Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 263Section 69

…;  Arun Kumar VS Union of India ( 286 ITR 89 SC),  Rajath Leasing & Finance Ltd Vs ACIT (1996) 85 taxmann.com 175 (Guj),  CIT Vs DN Dosani (2006) 197 TAXMAN 13(GUJ),  ACIT Vs Dhariya Construction Co. (2011) 197 TAXMAN 202-SC,  Adani Export Vs DCIT (1999) 240 ITR 224 (Guj),  Kantibhai Dharmshibhai Narola Vs ACIT 125 taxmann.com 348 (Guj),  PCIT VS Royal Western India Turf Club (2019) 103 taxmann.com 13 Bom,  Hotel Apollo Vs ITO (1995) 93 TAXMAN 391 Guj, 5 M/s Shree Gurjari Industries Ltd.  CIT Vs Roadmaster Industries of India (2009) 2 taxmann.com 73 (P&H),  CIT Vs Kelvinator India (2010) TAXMAN 312-SC,…

J.D. SONS STEEL PVT. LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1061/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr.D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 68

…47 and failure :o take steps under section 143(3) will not render the Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings, even when I.T.As. No.1060 & 1061/DEL/2015 21 intimation under section 143(1) has been issued, ADANI EXPORTS v. DCIT[1999] 240 ITR 224 (Guj) was distinguished. 18. Murlibhai Fatandas Sawlani Vs ITO (2016-TIOL-370- HC-AHM-IT) Where Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that it is not open to the assessee to object to the reopening by asking the AO to produce the source from where the AO has gathered the information for forming a belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessme…

SH. VALMIK THAPAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 5767/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE P.P. BHATT, PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. ACIT, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. DCIT, M/s. R. N. Khanna & Company, CA, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi PAN: AACPT7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AACPT7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Salil Agarwal,…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. VALMIK THAPAR, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 6726/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE P.P. BHATT, PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. ACIT, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. DCIT, M/s. R. N. Khanna & Company, CA, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi PAN: AACPT7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AACPT7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Salil Agarwal,…

SHRI VALMIK THAPAR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 6346/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE P.P. BHATT, PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. ACIT, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. DCIT, M/s. R. N. Khanna & Company, CA, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi PAN: AACPT7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AACPT7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Salil Agarwal,…

RAJLAXMI POLYMERS PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1),, SURAT

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2730/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Court Hearing) Vs Rajlaxmi Polymers Pvt Ltd, Income Tax Officer, 5024,World Trade Centre, Ward -2 (1)(1), Near Udhna Darwaja, Surat, Ring Road, Surat-395002 Pan : Aabcr 1210 M Assessee Revenue Assessee By Sh. Sapnesh Sheth Ca/Ar Revenue By Ms. Anupma Singla Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 17/12/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2020

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 254(1)Section 30Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Virtual Court Hearing) Vs Rajlaxmi Polymers Pvt Ltd, Income Tax Officer, 5024,World Trade Centre, Ward -2 (1)(1), Near Udhna Darwaja, Surat, Ring Road, Surat-395002 PAN : AABCR 1210 M Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. Sapnesh Sheth CA/AR Revenue by Ms. Anupma Singla Sr DR Date of hearing 17/12/2020 Date of pronouncement 21/12/2020 Order under section 254(1) of Income-tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee under section 253 of Income-tax Act (Ac…

INCOME TAX 11(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. SONU SYNTHETIC LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 5291/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer – M/S. Sonu Synthetics 11(2)(3), Ltd., Room No.425, 131/B, Sanjay Bldg. Aayakar Bhavan, No.6, Vs. M.K. Road, Mittal Indl. Estate, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai – 400 059 Pan: Aadcs5012J (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.42/M/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5291/M/2017) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer – M/S. Sonu Synthetics 11(2)(3), Ltd., Room No.425, 131/B, Sanjay Bldg. Aayakar Bhavan, No.6, Vs. M.K. Road, Mittal Indl. Estate, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai – 400 059 Pan: Aadcs5012J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 22.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.10.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Above Titled Appeal By The Revenue & Cross Objection By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254

…Lucas T.V.S. Limited. 249 ITR 306 (SC), Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v/s. CIT 119 ITR 996 (SC), Vijaykumar M. Hirakhanawala HUF v/s ITO 287 ITR 443 ( Born.), Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare India P. Ltd v/s. DCIT 74 Taxmann.com 260, Adani Exports v/s DCIT 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), Rajalakshmi Textile processors ltd, v/s. CIT 235 ITR 178 (Mad.) , CIT v/s Ram Mangatrarn 312 ITR 100 (P & H), and Waldies Ltd v/s. ITO 246 ITR 29 (Cal.) I am therefore of the considered opinion that reopening initiated by the AO is not tenable in law. Accordingly I allow this ground of appeal in favor of the appellant and hold that reopen…

SHRI SURESH CHAND NAHATA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 355/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 355/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2010-11 Cuke Shri Suresh Chand Nahata The Ito Vs. 1214, Partaniyon Ka Rasta Ward- 1(1) Johri Bazar, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@ Pan/Gir No.: Aaypn 3419 L Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Ms. Chanchal Meena, Jcit-Dr Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 03/03/2020 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 04/03/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 13-12-2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2.1 None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee When This Appeal Was Called For Hearing Despite The Notice Was Duly Received By The Assessee As Per Acknowledgment Available On Record. The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee Has Though Filed The Written Submission Vide Letter Dated 12-12-2019. 2 Shri Suresh Chand Nahata Vs Ito , Ward-1(1), Jaipur Accordingly, In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, We Propose To Hear & Dispose Off This Appeal Of The Assessee Ex-Parte By Considering

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena, JCIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

…o initiate proceedings under section 147 and failure to take steps under section 143(3) will not render the Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings, even when intimation under section 143(1) has been issued ADAM EXPORTS v. DCI-111999] 240 ITR 224 (Guj) distinguished." (vii) In the case of R.K. Malhotra ITO Vs Kasturbhai Lalbhai [1977] 109 ITR 537 (SC), it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that: "The intimation which the Income-tax Officer received from the audit department would constitute "information" within the meaning of section 147(b)" (viii) Therefore, in view of the above discuss…

ASST CIT 24(3), MUMBAI vs. NANAVATI CONSTRUCTIONS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2424/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri B.V. Jhaveri, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, D.R
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…7 ITR 13 and in case of Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in (1979) 119 ITR 996 is well settled. We also have the decision of this Court in case of Adani Exports v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (1999) 240 ITR 224(Guj) on this issue. In case of Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society (supra), the Supreme observed that the opinion of the audit party on a point of law could not be regarded as information enabling the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings. This aspect was elaborated by Division Bench judgement of this Court in case of Adani Expo…

Showing 1–20 of 67 · Page 1 of 4

Exports v. Deputy CIT (240 ITR 224) — Cited in 67 Judgments | BharatTax