Globus Infocom Ltd. v. CIT-IV, Delhi

369 ITR 14High Court2014#7146 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263 Section 143(3A)Section 143(3B)Section 144B Section 119 Section 139(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 263(1)erroneous and prejudicial section 263 section 26 section 143 person company section 14 section 143(3)interest

Judgments citing Globus Infocom Ltd. v. CIT-IV, Delhi

CT. RAMANATHAN (HUF),PUDUKKOTTAI vs. PCIT 1, MADURAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 761/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.761/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2020-21 C.T.Ramanathan(Huf), Income Tax Officer, No.7/45, Ct.Rm.S.House, M.St.S. Street Ward-1, Kulipirai, Pudukottai Dist, Pudukottai. Tamil Nadu-622 402. [Pan: Aaahc0701L] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.V.Subbarayan, Dcit(Retd.) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.M.K.Biju, Cir Dr By Virtual. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr.V.Subbarayan, DCIT(Retd.)For Respondent: Mr.M.K.Biju, CIR DR by virtual

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 3

…hny/2025 course of action under section 263 would be open. In this regard, we may refer the following judicial precedents: - Kwality Steel Suppliers SC 395 ITR 1 Complex Virtusa Consulting Services HC-Madras 442 ITR 385 (P.) Ltd. Globus Infocom Ltd. HC-Delhi 369 ITR 14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. HC-Delhi 332 ITR 167 Mohak Real Estate (P.) Ltd HC-Delhi 161 taxmann.com 388 Clix Finance India (P.) Ltd HC-Delhi 298 Taxman 217 Spectra Shares & Scrips (P) HC-Andra 354 ITR 35 Ltd. Pradesh Chemsworth (P.) Ltd. HC-Karnataka 119 taxmann.com 358 Shriram Properties Limited ITAT-Chennai 2023 (4) TMI 375 Cavinkare (P.) Ltd. ITAT-Chen…

HARKIRAN COMMAR,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT-10, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1428/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalpr. Commissioner Of Mrs. Harkiran Commar Income Tax-10, 28, Poorvi Marg, Vs. New Delhi Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 Pan: Aagpc2911C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Sanjiv Chaudhary, Ca Sh. Anil Chopra, Ca & Sh. Praveen Kumar, Ca Department By Sh. Surender Pal, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/03/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 50CSection 54Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pr. Commissioner of Mrs. Harkiran Commar Income Tax-10, 28, Poorvi Marg, Vs. New Delhi Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 PAN: AAGPC2911C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Sanjiv Chaudhary, CA Sh. Anil Chopra, CA and Sh. Praveen Kumar, CA Department by Sh. Surender Pal, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 24/02/2025 Date of Pronouncement 21/03/2025 O R D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 263 of the Inc…

FAIVELEY TRANSPORT TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,HOSUR vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1598/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80

…ch a course of action under section 263 would be open. In this regard, assessee relied on the following judicial precedents:- Kwality Steel Suppliers Complex SC 395 ITR 1 Virtusa Consulting Services (P.) HC-Madras 442 ITR 385 Ltd. Globus Infocom Ltd. HC-Delhi 369 ITR 14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. HC-Delhi 332 ITR 167 Mohak Real Estate (P.) Ltd HC-Delhi 161 taxmann.com 388 Clix Finance India (P.) Ltd HC-Delhi 298 Taxman 217 Spectra Shares & Scrips (P) Ltd. HC-Andra 354 ITR 35 Pradesh Chemsworth (P.) Ltd. HC-Karnataka 119 taxmann.com 358 ITA No.1598 /Chny/2024 Shriram Properties Limited ITAT-Chennai 2023 (4) TMI 375 Cavi…

VIRENDRA SINGH BHADAURIA,JAIPUR vs. PR. CIT-3, , JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 255/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 255/Jp/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Virendra Singh Bhadauriya, Cuke Pr.Cit-3, Vs. 71, Mansa Nagar, Shirsi Road, Jaipur. Jaipur-302012. Pan No.: Aaepb 0767 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Ms. Datyani Pandey (Adv) & Shri Rajiv Pandey (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 10/02/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 25/03/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit-3, Jaipur Dated 16/03/2020 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Jaipur Erred In:- Ground No.1:- In Holding That The Assessment Order Dt.26.12.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) By Assessing Officer To Be Erroneous In So Far As Is Prejudicial To Interest Of Revenue On Issues Of 2

For Appellant: Ms. Datyani Pandey (Adv) &For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54Section 54F

…notice does not arise. Impugned notice is therefore set aside. [Para 14] The petition is disposed of accordingly. [Para 15] 172 ITR 733 (Kerala) CIT v. Travancore Tea Estates Co. Ltd. [2014] 50 taxmann.com 100 (Delhi)/[2014] 227 Taxman 48 (Delhi)(Mag.)/[2014] 369 ITR 14 (Delhi)Globus Infocom Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income- tax, Delhi- IV It is clear from the order passed by the Ld. AO that the issue relating to disallowance of the claim of assessee u/s 54F was specifically gone 8 ITA 255/JP/2020_ Virendra Singh Bhadauriya Vs Pr.CIT into and examined by the Assessing Officer. Thus, it was not a case of 'no inquir…

PLAY GAMES 24 X 7 PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PR. .CIT-(A) 13, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3910/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Dhamija

Section 263

…108 (Bom); ii) CIT v. Nirav Modi (2016) 390 ITR 292 (Bom); iii) CIT v. Vikas Polymers (2012) 341 ITR 537 (Del); iv) CIT v. Gabriel India (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bom); v) DIT v. Jyoti Foundation (2013) 357 ITR 388 (Del); and, vi) Globus Infocom Ltd. v. CIT (2014) 369 ITR 14 (Del) Furthermore, following case laws have been referred :- i) Malabar Industries Co. Ltd. v. CIT (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC); ii) CIT v. Max India (2007) 295 ITR 282 (SC); iii) CIT v. Reliance Communication Ltd., 396 ITR 217 (Bom); and, iv) Spectra Shares & Scrips (P.) Ltd. v. CIT, 354 ITR 35 (AP) Lastly, it has been submitted that insertion of Ex…

M/S. BHANDARI HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE,INDORE vs. THE PR. CIT-1, INDORE

ITA 355/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Bhandari Hospital & Pr. Cit-(I) Research Centre, Gf-21 & Indore बनाम/ 22, Opp. Meghdoot Garden, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aadfb8151A

Section 131(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 263Section 35A

…order of the AO, and not mere prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue or a mere erroneous view, which can be revised u/s 263 of the Act. 92. 4.6 The appellant relies on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Globus Infocum Ltd. vs. CIT 369 ITR 14 (Delhi) and submitted that under section 263 of the Act, the Commissioner should take a final decision and not merely set aside the assessment order to be made afresh de novo and remanding the matter for fresh examination is not permissible as the commissioner must reach to a conclusion and finding that final finding in assessment order was errone…

CHARBUJA MARMO (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. PR.CIT- 2 , NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 4749/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

…the I.T. Act.” The CIT did not make any investigation by Ltd., vs. Pr. CIT, Central-II, New Delhi 2016-(5)-TMI-1290- ITAT-Delhi. He has also relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Globus Infocom Ltd., vs. CIT- IV, Delhi (2014) 369 ITR 14 (Del.). Learned Counsel for the Assessee has also relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT-8 vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd., 2015-(10)-TMI-1765-Delhi-High Court in which it was held that “no notice under section 143(2) of the I.T. Act was issued to the assessee after 16.12.2010, the date on which t…

STHAPTHYA BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, WARD-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 814/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 814/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 Sthapathya Buildcon Pvt Ltd., D.C.I.T, Pavan Petroleum, Vs. Circle-4(1)(1), Nutun Mill Compund, Ahmedabad. Near City Gold Cinema, Saraspur, Ahmedabad. Pan: Aalcs8818G

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 37

…2013-14 7 various decision cited is as per para 4.1 and finding is as per para 7 and onwards. (c) CIT v/s. Kohinoor Foods Ltd. 414 ITR 249, Delhi High Court as per relevant Pg. 255 in which the decision of, DG Housing 343 com 369 ITR 14(DEL), Globas Info com 369 ITR 14(DEL) has been referred and followed. (d) Narayan Tatu Rane, Mumbai ITAT, 70 Taxmann.com 227 in reference to "Explanation 2(a}", even after this explanation, it is held that no fishing or roving inquiry is permitted which is as per para 12 of the judgment. (e) Gujarat High Court, Amit Corporation 21 Taxmann.com 64, AO has already considered the iss…

M/S. SRI BALAJI FORGINGS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT- 8, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

ITA 3216/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Advocates &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Tirupati Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., vs. Pr. CIT, Central-II, New Delhi 2016-(5)-TMI- 1290-ITAT-Delhi. He has also relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Globus Infocom Ltd., vs. CIT-IV, Delhi (2014) 369 ITR 14 (Del.). Learned Counsel for the Assessee has also relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT-8 vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd., 2015-(10)-TMI-1765-Delhi-High Court in which it was held that “no notice under section 143(2) of the I.T. Act was issued to the assessee after 16.12.2010, the date on which the…

SUPERIOR BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. PR. CIT- 8, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3301/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 263

…f ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Tirupati Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., vs. Pr. CIT, Central-II, New Delhi 2016-(5)-TMI-1290-ITAT-Delhi. He has also relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Globus Infocom Ltd., vs. CIT-IV, Delhi (2014) 369 ITR 14 18 ITA.Nos.2269, 2857, 2527 & 3301/Del./2017 M/s. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, M/s. SPJ Hotels Private Limited, New Delhi, M/s. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi & M/s. Superior Buildwell Private Limited, Delhi. (Del.). Learned Counsel for the Assessee has also relied upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the cas…

M/S. SPJ HOTELS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. PR. CIT- 8, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2857/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 263

M/S. SHIV SAI INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT- 8, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2527/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 263

M/S. SUPERSONIC TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. PR. CIT- 8, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2269/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 263

ITO 2(1)(4), MUMBAI vs. CANARA BANK SECURITIES LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 821/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer-2(1)(4), M/S Canara Bank Securities Room No.553, 5Th Floor, Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 7Th Floor, Maker Chamber-Iii, Vs. M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaacg2218H

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263oSection 56

…hich does not show that the finding as arrived at by the AO is erroneous and hence the order of CIT does not meet the requirement of Section 263 of the Act. Our view is fortified by the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court of Globus Infocom Ltd. v. CIT (2014) 369 ITR 14 (Delhi) and also Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in CIT v. Gabriel India Limited 203 ITR 108 (Bom.) . The reliance of the CIT on the decisions of CIT v. Jagdish Chand Walia & Sons 234 ITR 595(P&H.), CIT v. Emery Stone Manufacturing Co. 213 ITR 843(Raj.) , Mofussil Warehouse and Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT 238 ITR 867 (Mad.) and Hon’ble Sup…

M/S JAYPEE INFRATECH LTD,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3126/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblejaypee Infratech Ltd. Vs Acit Sector 128 Circle 1 Noida Noida Aabcj9042R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)Section 80I

…DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaypee Infratech Ltd. Vs ACIT Sector 128 Circle 1 Noida Noida AABCJ9042R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. A. K. Chopra, Adv & Sh. V. K. Garg, Adv Respondent by Sh. R. C. Dande, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 03.08.2017 Date of Pronouncement 20.09.2017 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM The appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 17/3/2015 passed by Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax- Noida for Assessment Year 2010- 11. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. That the Learned CIT (Ld. CI…

M/S INDIAN FARMERS FERTILISER COOPERATIVE LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. PR CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2487/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J.S. Reddy

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Ranjan, Adv. Sh. Vartik RFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Saroha, CIT(DR)

Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)

…unsure as to the basis on which the the assessment can be held as erroneous. This is clearly not permissible within the four corners of S.263 as interpreted by various Courts including jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of Globus Infocom Vs CIT (2014-369 ITR 14) , relevant extracts from which are reproduced below: “16. Thus, in cases of wrong opinion or finding on merits, the CIT has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that the order is erroneous, by conducting necessary enquiry, if required and necessary, before the order under Section 263 is passed. In such cases, the order of the Assessing…