German Remedies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

287 ITR 494High Court2006#1275 most cited

What is German Remedies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT authority for?

Reassessment proceedings initiated beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year are not justified when the assessee has made a full and true disclosure of all material facts, supported by statutory and tax audit reports, even if a different view could be taken on the valuation of closing stock. Such reopening constitutes a mere change of opinion.

89

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

German Remedies Ltd. v. DCIT · 287 ITR 494 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment beyond four years · full and true disclosure · mere change of opinion · first proviso to Section 147 · material facts · valuation of closing stock

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing German Remedies Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

V.K.Nanavaty Share and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2614/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2614/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13) V. K. Nanavaty Share & बिधम/ Ito, Ward-4(2)(4) R. No. 647, 6Th Floor, Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd Vs. R-709, Rotunda Building, Aaykar Bhavan, Bombay Stock Exchange, Maharishi Karve Road, M. S. Marg, Fort, Mumbai- Churchgate, Mumbai- 400023. 400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacv9670N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ravikant Pathak Revenue By: Dr. Yogendra T. Wakare सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/04/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi, Dated 30.05.2023 For Ay. 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of The Reopening By Ao (Jurisdiction) U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). So The Legal Issue Is Taken Up First.

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant PathakFor Respondent: Dr. Yogendra T. Wakare
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…eme Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Kelvinar of India (256 ITR 1) held that AO has power to re-open, provided he has tangible material to form the belief that the income had escaped assessment [refer decision in (i) Balakrishna Hiralal Wani v ITO (2010) 321 ITR 519 (Bom) (HC) and (ii) Dempo Brothers Pvt. Ltd v ACIT (2018) 403 ITR 196 (Bom) (HC)]. Another aspect one has to keep in mind is that if an AO during the earlier assessment has already queried about the issue, which the present AO wishes to re-open, he may refrain from doing so, because 5 A.Y. 2012-13 V. K. Nanavaty Share and Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.…

Sumangal Techpark (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 24(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3840/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 Sumangal Techpark (P) Ltd., Vs. Ito, 117, Hans Bhawan, Ward-24(3), 1 Bsz Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aalcs4760R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Ms Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2023 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.02.2019 Of The Cit(A)-8, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. First Of All, We Have Heard The Arguments Of Both The Representatives On Legal Ground No.1 Of The Assessee Which Reads As Under:- “3. The Initiation Of The Proceedings U/S 148 & The Consequent Order Us 147 Are Bad In Law As A) The Initiation Of Proceedings U/S 148 Are Contrary To Provisions Of Law B) The Mandatory Procedure Laid Down In The Act Has Not Been Followed. C) The Notice Issued U/S 148 Is Time Barred As Issued After 4 Years From The End Of The Relevant Assessment Year Where The Case Has Already Been Assessed U/S 143(3). D) The Approval Of Addl. Cit & Pcit Is Bad In Law & Mechanical Without Application Of Mind & Has Been Taken Without Bringing To Their Notice Material Facts Of The Case. E) The Information Has Been Collected Behind The Back Of The Assessee & The Assessee Was Never Confronted With The Same Nor An Opportunity Provided For Cross-Examination Of Jain Brothers, Alleged Intermediary & The Relevant Seized Material Relied Upon Has Not Been Provided To The Assessee.”

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292B

…) approved by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 64 taxmann.com 313 (SC). d. Pr. CIT vs. N. C. Cables Ltd 391 ITR 11 (Del) e. Maruti Clean Coal& Power Ltd Vs ACIT WP(T) No.346 of 2017 Dated 03.01.2018 (Chattisgarh High Court); f. German Remedies Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2006) 287 ITR 494 (Bom); g. United Electrical Company PLtd. vs. CIT & Ors[2002) 258 ITR 317(Del)"; h. Central India electric Supply Co. Ltd. Vs .ITO, 333 ITR 237 (Del).” ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… “d. Non-Compliance of First Proviso to sec 147 I. In view of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) dt: 30.11.2012 (PB 181) and the act…

P & C Construction P. Ltd., Erode vs. ACIT, Erode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3243/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3242 & 3243/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S.P & C Constructions (P) Ltd., V. The Asst. Commissioner Of No.140, P & C Towers, Income Tax, Perundurai Road, Range-I, Erode-638 011. Erode [Pan: Aabcp 2483 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.B.Parthasarathy, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.M.S.Deeptha, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.05.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2022

For Respondent: Ms.M.S.Deeptha, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194Section 40a

…recorded by a.o., before initiation, the reopening itself is void-ab-initio as struck by the concept of limitation (Hon'ble High Court of Madras in case of Eco Media(P)Ltd. And Hon'ble ITAT Lucknow in case of Rupani Products and citations in 284 ITR 542 (Bom),287 ITR 494 (Bom), 264 ITR 566 SC). iii) Since re-opening of assessment started subsequent to completion of assessment made u/s143(3) of the IT. Act, notice u/s.143(2) ought to have been issued which the a.o. fatally failed. The a.o. invoked both section 143(3) and section 147 of the LT. Act, which is also null and void. 5. That the Ld. First Appellate Aut…

P & C Construction P. Ltd., Erode vs. ACIT, Erode

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3242/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3242 & 3243/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S.P & C Constructions (P) Ltd., V. The Asst. Commissioner Of No.140, P & C Towers, Income Tax, Perundurai Road, Range-I, Erode-638 011. Erode [Pan: Aabcp 2483 L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.B.Parthasarathy, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.M.S.Deeptha, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.05.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2022

For Respondent: Ms.M.S.Deeptha, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194Section 40a

…recorded by a.o., before initiation, the reopening itself is void-ab-initio as struck by the concept of limitation (Hon'ble High Court of Madras in case of Eco Media(P)Ltd. And Hon'ble ITAT Lucknow in case of Rupani Products and citations in 284 ITR 542 (Bom),287 ITR 494 (Bom), 264 ITR 566 SC). iii) Since re-opening of assessment started subsequent to completion of assessment made u/s143(3) of the IT. Act, notice u/s.143(2) ought to have been issued which the a.o. fatally failed. The a.o. invoked both section 143(3) and section 147 of the LT. Act, which is also null and void. 5. That the Ld. First Appellate Aut…

Rabindra Kumar Mohanty, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Bhubaneswar

In the result, Appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 300/CTK/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.300/Ctk/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Rabindra Kumar Mohanty, Vs Ito, Ward-2(2), C/O Dr. Basudev Mishra, Bhubaneswar Plot No.3C/1, 1St Floor, Near Raj Bhawan Square, Unit-8, Bhubaneswar- 751012 Pan No. : Abxpm 8506 B (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee : Shri Natabar Panda, Advocate By िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date : 21/12/2021 Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Captioned Appeal Filed At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Bhubaneswar (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 22.02.2016 For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. This Appeal Itano.300/Ctk/2016 Was Dismissed By This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 30.08.2017 On Account Of Non- Appearance On The Part Of The Assessee. Thereafter The Assessee Took The Matter Before The Hon’Ble High Court & The Hon’Ble High Court In W.P.(C) No.2487 Of 2019, Vide

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, Advocate byFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 234B

…has escaped assessment we in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Former Finance (2003) 264 ITR 566(SC) and also ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Balkrishna Hiralal Wani vs. ITO (2010) 321 ITR 519(Bom), are of the considered view that the reopening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act in the instant case was not valid and reassessment proceedings deserves to be quashed. Ground No.1, 2 & 3 of the assessee’s appeal are allowed. 11. As far as the remaining grounds on merits are concerned although they are merely academic in nature but still w…

Vijayshree Food Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 587/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Vijayshree Food Products P. Ltd., Vs. Acit, C/O Ravi Gupta, Advocate, Central Circle-30, E-6A, Kailash Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaccv4721C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28Th December, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-30, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Export Of Tobacco Products. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30Th September, 2014 Declaring The Loss Of Rs.18,78,467/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 26Th November, 2014 At The Returned Income. Subsequently, The Ao Reopened The Assessment As Per The Provisions Of Section 147 Of The Act By Recording The Following Reasons:-

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…by him in the reasons recorded. For the above proposition of mechanical approval, he relied on the following decisions:- 13 (A) Central India Electric Supply Co. Ltd vs . ITO (2011) 333 ITR 237 (Del.): 51 DTR 51 (Del.); (B) German Remedies Ltd. v. DCIT (2006) 287 ITR 494 (Bom.); (C) United Electrical Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT (2002) 258 ITR 317 (Del.); (D) CIT Vs Goyanka Lime 237 Taxman 378(SC); (E). CIT Vs N.C. Cables, 98 CCH 18 (Del); and (F) Chuga Mai Rajpal, 79 ITR 603(SC) Larger Bench. 11. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that perusal of sequence of events would prove beyond doubt that AO has passed the fina…