Foramer France v. CIT

247 ITR 436High Court2001#1470 most cited

What is Foramer France v. CIT authority for?

The High Court, affirmed by the Supreme Court, clarifies the scope of reassessment under the new Section 147 (post-1989 amendment), holding that reassessment is invalid if the assessee fully disclosed material facts or if the issue was already examined during the original assessment under Section 143(3), especially for proceedings initiated beyond four years.

77

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Foramer France v. CIT · 247 ITR 436 · reassessment · Section 147 · escaped assessment · Section 147 proviso · failure to disclose material facts · original assessment · Section 143(3) · beyond four years · 1989 amendment Section 147 · reason to believe

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Foramer France v. CIT

DCIT, Madurai vs. Ramco Systems Limited, Rajapalayam

In the result, both appeal filed by the Revenue as well as CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 25/CHNY/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jul 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No.25/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2005-06 & C.O. No. 31/Mds/2016 [In I.T.A. No. 25/Mds/216] The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ramco Systems, Income Tax, Vs. 47, Psk Nagar, Corporate Circle 2(1), Rajapalayam. Madurai. [Pan:Aabcr2076B] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Arun C. Bharat, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V. Jagadisan, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.05.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.07.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Preferred By The Revenue & The Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Madurai Dated 06.10.2015 For The Assessment Year 2005-06. In The Appeal, The Grievances Of The Revenue Are That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Cancelling The Reopening Of Assessment Under Section 147Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] On The Ground Of Write Off Of Trade

For Appellant: Shri Arun C. Bharat, CITFor Respondent: Shri V. Jagadisan, CA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147oSection 148

…t is well settled law that assessment cannot be reopened on mere change of opinion. 7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Foramer France [264 ITR 566] affirmed the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Foramer France v. CIT [247 ITR 436], wherein the Hon’ble High Court has held that when there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts for assessment, the assessment cannot be reopened under section 147 of the Act and is barred by limitation. It was also held that the assessment cannot be reopened on mere change of opinion. 7.1 In t…

M/S. Novartis India Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir. - 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1953/MUM/2006[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2017AY 1998-1999

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Novartis India Ltd. Circle 7(1) Sandoz House, Dr. Annie Acit Circle 7(1), Vs. Besant Road, Mumbai-400 018 Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Pan No. Aaach2914F Appellant .. Respondent Novartis India Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sandoz House, Dr. Annie Besant Circle 7(1) Road, Mumbai-400 018 Vs. Acit Circle 7(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Pan No. Aaach2914F Revenue By .. Shri Sanj Kumar Agarwal, Dr Assessee By .. Shri J.D. Mistry, Ar Date Of Hearing .. 13-04-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 13-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 40

…by the taxpayers at large in the court of law and courts have quashed the notice issued by Revenue authorities or quashed the re-assessment orders. Hon’ble Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case Foramer vs. CIT (2001) 247 ITR 436 (All) wherein Hon’ble Allahabad High court has considered the issue as under: - “Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, we are of the view that these petitions deserve to be allowed. Page 5 of 10 ITA No.1282 & 1953/Mum/2006 Novartis India Ltd; AY: 98-99 It may be mentioned that a new section substituted section 147 with effect fro…

ACIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1282/MUM/2006[98-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2017

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Novartis India Ltd. Circle 7(1) Sandoz House, Dr. Annie Acit Circle 7(1), Vs. Besant Road, Mumbai-400 018 Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Pan No. Aaach2914F Appellant .. Respondent Novartis India Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sandoz House, Dr. Annie Besant Circle 7(1) Road, Mumbai-400 018 Vs. Acit Circle 7(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Pan No. Aaach2914F Revenue By .. Shri Sanj Kumar Agarwal, Dr Assessee By .. Shri J.D. Mistry, Ar Date Of Hearing .. 13-04-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 13-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 40

…by the taxpayers at large in the court of law and courts have quashed the notice issued by Revenue authorities or quashed the re-assessment orders. Hon’ble Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case Foramer vs. CIT (2001) 247 ITR 436 (All) wherein Hon’ble Allahabad High court has considered the issue as under: - “Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, we are of the view that these petitions deserve to be allowed. Page 5 of 10 ITA No.1282 & 1953/Mum/2006 Novartis India Ltd; AY: 98-99 It may be mentioned that a new section substituted section 147 with effect fro…

DCIT 1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Intelnet Global Services P. Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7428/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-1(2)(1), M/S Intelnet Global Services R. No.535, 5Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Intelnet Towers, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Mindspace, Malad West, Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaaci7387P C.O. No.99/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.7428/Mum/2014) Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Intelnet Global Services Dcit-1(2)(1), Pvt. Ltd. Intelnet Towers, R. No.535, 5Th Floor, बनाम/ Mindspace, Malad West, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400064 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaaci7387P

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

…support from the decision from Hon’ble Delhi High court in Jindal Photo Films Ltd. vs DCIT (1998) 234 ITR 170 (Del.), Garden Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT (1999) 151 CTR (Guj.) 533, Govind Chhapabhai Patel vs DCIT 240 ITR 628, 630 (Guj.), Foramer vs CIT (2001) 247 ITR 436 (All.), affirmed in CIT vs Foramer Finance (2003) 264 ITR 566, 567 (SC), Ipica Laboratories vs DCIT (2001) 251 ITR 416 (Bom.), Ritu Investment Pvt. Ltd.(2012) 345 ITR 214 (Del.), Ketan B. Mehta vs ACIT 30 ITA No.7428/Mum/2013 & C.O. 99/Mum/2016 M/s Intelnet Global Services Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 346 ITR 254 (Guj.), Ms. Praveen P. Bharucha vs DCIT (20…

Asst CIT Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Prime Focus Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s cross objection is allowed and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6203/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6203/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Asst. Cit (Osd)-I, Prime Focus Ltd. Central Range-7, 2, Anand Kunj, North Avenue, बनाम/ Room No. 413, 4Th Floor, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacp 6811 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : & ""या"ेप सं./C.O. No. 44/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 6203/Mum/2014) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) Prime Focus Ltd. Asst. Cit (Osd)-I, 2, Anand Kunj, North Avenue, Central Range-7, बनाम/ Room No. 413, 4Th Floor, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacp 6811 B (""या"ेपक/Cross Objector) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Premanand J. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Rushabh H. Vyas

For Appellant: Shri Premanand JFor Respondent: Shri Rushabh H. Vyas
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154

…e relevant assessment year. The law in the matter is well settled, even as reliance may be placed on the decision by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Foramer France [2003] 264 ITR 566, 567 (SC), affirming the decision of Foramer vs. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 436, 443 (All). In the present case, apart from the fact that we observe no lapse on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts necessary for the computation of its income, and neither has any been pointed to us, the claim has been subject to verification by the A.O. in the original proceedings. Further, though there…