Girilal & Co. v. S.L. Meena, ITO

ACIT-CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. INFRATECH BUILDERS AND AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2009-10 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs Infratech Builders & Agro Pvt. Tax Central Circle 7(2), Ltd. Mumbai 216 Shah & Nahar Industrial E, Room No.655, 6Th Floor Dr. E Moses Road Worli Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road Mumbai 400018, Maharashtra Mumbai, Mumbai India, Mumbai Pan: Aabci7392B Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Shri Niraj Sheth, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. Dr (Virtually Appeared) Date Of Hearing : 29.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawalthis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Cit(A),- 49, Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1072911991(1) Mumbai Vide Order Dated 04.02.2025 Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 13.12.2016 For A.Y. 2009-10. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are As Under: 1."On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Reopening Of The Assessment Under Section 147 Of The Income Infratech Builders & Agro Pvt. Ltd. A.Y.2009-10 Tax Act, 1961 Is Bad In Law Without Considering The Fact That The Assess Had Failed To Provide 1 The Details Of Payments Made To M/S. Bovis India Pvt. Ltd. & M/S. Bovis Lend Lease India Pvt. Ltd. & No Service Tax Was Charged On The Payments Made To These Companies, Unlike Other Similar Payments.”

…ts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in holding that the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law without considering the decision of Bombay High Court in Girilal & Company, ITO (2008) 300 ITR 432 (Bombay) wherein the Hon'ble High Court upheld the reopening of the assessment beyond four years from the end of the assessment year on the ground that the assessee had failed to disclose primary facts during the original assessment proceedings." 5. "On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in holding that the reope…

ITO 13(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. VULVAN TRADERS P. LTD, MUMBAI

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

…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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The reassessment proceedings after…

SOLO HARDWARE P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 5(3)(2), MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

…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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The M/s Solo Hardware Pvt. Ltd. information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The re…

SNEHALATA AHNAND RANE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 3(3), KALYAN

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…o 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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The reassessment proceedings after…

SNEHALATA AHNAND RANE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 3(3), KALYAN

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…o 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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The reassessment proceedings after…

SNEHALATA AHNAND RANE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 3(3), KALYAN

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…o 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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The reassessment proceedings after…

SHRI DINESHKUMAR C. DOSHI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(1)(4), MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

…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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexure and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section Dinesh S. Jain 147 would apply. The reassessment procee…

ITO 6(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. JAYDEEP PROFILES P.LTD, MUMBAI

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

…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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The reassessment proceedings after…

JAYDEEP PROFILES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 6 (3)(2), MUMBAI

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

…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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The reassessment proceedings after…

MOHD HASAN ABDUL GAFOOR MOMIN,THANE vs. ITO WD 1(2), KALYAN

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

…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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The reassessment proceedings after…

IDHASOFT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

…pplication 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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently Explanation 2(c)(iv) of section 147 would apply. The reassessment proceedings after f…

DCIT 15(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. A.J. BUILDCON P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be partly allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6204/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) The Dy. Cit 15(1)(1), बिधम/ M/S. A. J. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Room No. 470, 4Th 514, Marathon Max, Opp, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Nirmal Life Style, Lbs Maharshi Karve Road, Road, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400080. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagca6548Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri M. V. Rajguru (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Dr. P. Daniel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01.06.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29.06.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 22.07.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -24, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. "On The Farts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Taw, The Ld. C1T(A) Erred Directing The Assessing Officer To Delete The Entire Disallowance Of Rs.67,99Hl3Q/-Mad Account Of Alleged Bogus Purchases, Without Appreciating The Fact That The Said Seller Pa Were Found To Be Hawala Operators/ Bogus Billers?, As Per Findings Given By (He Sales A.Y.2009-10

…be unreasonable for the A.O. not to draw inference from the accounts produced during the original assessment proceedings. Sustenance in this regard is also drawn from the judgement of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s, Girilal & Co. vs. ITO 300 ITR 432 (Bom). 2.4.21 Any fresh information received by the A.O. can entitle him to issue notice u/s.148, if on the basis of such information he has prima facie reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. So much so that it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Claggett Brachi Co. Ld, vs CIT 177 ITR 409 (SC) that an information obtained duri…

ITO 19(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. MEENAKSHI N SHAH, MUMBAI

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

…pplication 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 extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the 45 Meridian Chem Bond P Ltd. & Meenakshi N Shah ITA No.7385 & 7082/Mum/2016 & C.O. No.86 & 85/Mum/2018 Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures…

VIPUL IMPEX & INFRABUILD LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-4(2), MUMBAI

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…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 ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 14 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd. (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently…

VIPUL IMPEX & INFRABUILD LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-4(2), MUMBAI

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…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 ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 14 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd. (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently…

VIPUL IMPEX & INFRABUILD LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-4(2), MUMBAI

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…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 ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 14 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd. (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently…

DCIT CIR. 4(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VIPUL IMPEX & INFRABUILD LTD., MUMBAI

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…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 ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 14 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd. (Bom), held that in order to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the court the petitioner must also make out a case that no part of the relevant material had been kept out from the Assessing Officer). The information was in the annexures and consequently…