Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. v. CIT and Another

368 ITR 601High Court2014#14096 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. v. CIT and Another

ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. M/S K.R. Pulp & Papers Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 5064/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…e an AO may not raise any written query but still the Assessing Officer in the first round/original proceedings may have examined the subject matter because the aspect or question may be too apparent and obvious. In Swarovski India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 120141 368 ITR 601/50 taxmann.com 57/226 Taxman 162 (Mag. I (Delhi), it was held that the escapement of income by itself is not sufficient for reopening the assessment in a case covered by the first proviso to Section 147 of the said Act and unless and until there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts necessary f…

Pramod Paliwal, Khanwa vs. ACIT Khanwa, Khanwa

In the result Ground No. 1 (a) &

ITA 271/IND/2018[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Oct 2019

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year 2009-10 Shri Pramod Paliwal, Acit, Prop. M/S. Pragati Vs. Khandwa Construction, Ramkishanganj, Khandwa (M.P) (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan Adapp8012A Revenue By Shri K.G. Goyal Sr.Dr Assessee By S/Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit Gaur, Cas Date Of Hearing 10.10.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 17.10.2019 O R D E R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…fact, the entire reassessment proceedings deserve to be quashed. For such proposition, reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements : i) Duli Chand Singhania vs. ACIT (2004) 269 ITR 192 (PHHC) ii) Swarovski India Limited v. Deputy CIT' [2014} 368 ITR 601 (Delhi) iii) CITvs. ITW India Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 195 (P&H) Pramod Paliwal State Bank of Patiala vs. CIT & Anr. (2015) 375 ITR 109 iv) (P&H) HCL Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT (2015) 93 CCH 146 (DeI HC) v) vi) Global Signal Cables (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2014) 368 ITR 609 (Del.) vii) Great Eastern Energy Corporation Ltd vs. DCIT (2014) 89 CC…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Engineering Projects India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross-objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2651/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & G.D. Agrawal & And & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 143(3)Section 147

…d u/s 143(3). In support of this contention, he relied upon the following decisions of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court :- (i) Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT and Another – [2009] 308 ITR 38 (Delhi). (ii) Swarovski India P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT – [2014] 368 ITR 601 (Delhi). 4. Learned DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of authorities below. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. Proviso of Section 147 reads as under :- “Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Engineering Projects India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross-objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2028/DEL/2012[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & G.D. Agrawal & And & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 143(3)Section 147

…d u/s 143(3). In support of this contention, he relied upon the following decisions of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court :- (i) Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT and Another – [2009] 308 ITR 38 (Delhi). (ii) Swarovski India P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT – [2014] 368 ITR 601 (Delhi). 4. Learned DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of authorities below. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. Proviso of Section 147 reads as under :- “Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Engineering Projectsw India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross-objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 281/DEL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & G.D. Agrawal & And & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavashri Sudhanshu Srivastava Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 143(3)Section 147

…d u/s 143(3). In support of this contention, he relied upon the following decisions of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court :- (i) Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT and Another – [2009] 308 ITR 38 (Delhi). (ii) Swarovski India P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT – [2014] 368 ITR 601 (Delhi). 4. Learned DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of authorities below. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. Proviso of Section 147 reads as under :- “Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for t…

M/S R. Systems International Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1729/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Apr 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Negi, Senior DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 234BSection 234D

…ding that, “the assessee has not disclosed full and true material facts”. 8 ITA No.1729/Del./2013 12. Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in judgment cited as Atma Ram Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT - 343 ITR 141 and Swarovski India (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT - (2014) 368 ITR 601 (Del.) held that mere recording of reason for reopening that the assessee has failed to disclose full and true facts, is not sufficient for reopening the assessment in a case covered by First Proviso to section 147 of the Act unless AO explains as to why and how the assessee had failed to make full and true disclosure of the material facts. In…

Fibres & Fabrics International P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-11(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 1352/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Fibres & Fabrics International Pvt. Ltd. No.21, E-1, 2Nd Phase, Peenya Industrial Area, Bangalore-560058. … Appellant Pan: Aaacf 6841 M Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(3), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 253Section 32(1)(ii)

…where an AO may not raise any written query but still the Assessing Officer in the first round/original proceedings may have examined the subject matter because the aspect or question may be too apparent and obvious. (vi) In Swarovski India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT(368 ITR 601) (Del), it was held that the escapement of income by itself is not sufficient for reopening the assessment in a case covered by the first proviso to Section 147 of the said Act and unless and until there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts necessary for assessment. It was insisted that the re…