How many judgments cite Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar?

695 judgments on BharatTax cite Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar (268 ITR 332), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 153C, Section 153A, Section 132.

Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar

268 ITR 332High Court2004#77 most cited

What is Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar authority for?

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147, by issuing a notice under Section 148, must be judged solely on the reasons originally recorded by the Assessing Officer. These recorded reasons cannot be supplemented, improved upon, or modified at any later stage.

695

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Hindustan Lever Ltd v R.B. Wadkar · Section 147 · Section 148 · reasons recorded · reassessment validity · improving reasons · beyond four years · mere change of opinion · escapement of income · first proviso section 147

Also reported as

137 Taxmann 479

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 153C Section 153A Section 132 Section 153D Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 158bd first proviso to section 147 material facts necessary for assessment income tax settlement commission full and true disclosure section 144a fresh tangible material kelvinator beyond four years mere change of opinion escapement of income live link

Judgments citing Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar

Kamal Panjwani, Indore vs. The ACIT 3 (1), Indore

ITA 84/IND/2014[1991-97]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Mar 2024AY 1991-97

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,इंदौर"ायपीठ,इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRIB.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.81 to 85/Ind/2014 A.Ys. : 1988-89 to 1992-93 Shri Kamal Panjwani, ACIT, बनाम/ (L/H of Late Shri Namdev 3(1), Vs. Panjwani), Indore. 61,Kesar Bagh Road, Indore. (PAN:ALHPP0723F) (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Assessee by Shri Kailash Agrawal, CA& AR Revenue by Ms.Simran Bhullar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 31.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement 18.03.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: Feeling aggrieved by five separate appeal-ord…

Kamal Panjwani, Indore vs. The ACIT 3 (1), Indore

ITA 83/IND/2014[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Mar 2024AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254

Kamal Panjwani, Indore vs. The ACIT 3 (1), Indore

ITA 82/IND/2014[1989-90]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Mar 2024AY 1989-90

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254

Kamal Panjwani, Indore vs. The ACIT 3 (1), Indore

ITA 81/IND/2014[1988-89]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Mar 2024AY 1988-89

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254

Neel Ventures Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, 15(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1168/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1168/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2009-10) Neel Ventures Pvt. Ltd बिधम/ Ito-15(2)(3) B-47/187, Kalina Sunder 432, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Nagar Chs, Santacruz Maharashi Karve Road, (East), Mumbai-400098. Mumbai-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccn7025R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ashok Bansal Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/02/2024 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 10.02.2023 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 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 Ashok BansalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. DR)

Section 147Section 148

…order has discussed other materials/facts which would show escapement of income. However, we are precluded from considering other material which is not mentioned in the reasons recorded because the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. 268 ITR 332 has held that when the validity of re-opening of an assessment is tested, the reasons recorded by AO for re-opening the assessment needs to be tested on a standalone basis. Nothing can be added nor anything be deleted from the reasons so recorded by AO. No inference can be allowed to be drawn on the basis of reasons not recorded by him. AO has to…

Subhlaxmi Chem Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 992/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 992/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Subhlaxmi Chem Private Limited,...........Appellant R. No. C452, 71, B.R.B,B. Road, Bagri Market, Kolkata-700001 [Pan: Aahcs1598R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-12(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri B.C. Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 20, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 15, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ete and therefore, the assessment framed by the ld. Assessing Officer cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Limited –vs.- R.B. Wadkar, Asst. CITreported in 268 ITR 332(Bom), wherein it has been held that the reasons have to be read as they are recorded and it cannot be substituted. The Hon’ble Court has held that there has to be satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessment and reopening cannot be made for borrowed satisfaction in a mechanical manner. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the…

ITO, Ward- 4, Chandrapur vs. M/S. K.S.R. Transport Company, Chandrapur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 364/NAG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.364/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant M/S.Ksr Transport, Commissioner Of Income V Padoli Chadda Building, Tax, Chandrapur Circle, S Kosara Road, Chandrapur. Chandrapur. Pan: Aabfk3222D Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Cross Objection No.02/Nag/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.364/Nag/2019) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S.Ksr Transport, The Assistant Padoli Chadda Building, V Commissioner Of Income Kosara Road, Chandrapur. S Tax, Chandrapur Circle, Pan: Aabfk3222D Chandrapur. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Mukesh Agrawal – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09/01/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)-2, Nagpur Dated 28.08.2019 Emanating From

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50Section 68

…oni Commercials Ltd. (supra) this change of opinion does not constitute justification and/or reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.” 5.10 The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd vs R B Wadkar 268 ITR 332 (Bom) as under : Quote, “ 20. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer nowhere state that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of that assessment year. It is needless to mention that the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the Assessing…

M/S. Delighted Holdings (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dcir, Cir-8(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 624/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी संजय शमा" "या"यक सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 624/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s Delighted Holdings (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata (PAN: AABCE 0588 P) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / ( !यथ") Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 13.12.2023 क$ "त&थ Date of Pronouncement/ 08.01.2024 आदेश उ)घोषणा क$ "त&थ For the Appellant/ Shri Abhishek Bansal, A.R "नधा"/रती क$ ओर से For the Respondent/ Shri B. K.…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Chandrapur Circle, Chandrapur vs. M/S Chadda Transport, Chandrapur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 363/NAG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.363/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant M/S.Chadda Transport, Commissioner Of V Kosara Road, Padoli, Income Tax, S Chandrapur, Chandrapur Circle, Maharashtra – 442401. Chandrapur. Pan: Aaafc8556F Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Cross Objection No.01/Nag/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.363/Nag/2019) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S.Chadda Transport, The Assistant Kosara Road, Padoli, V Commissioner Of Income Chandrapur, S Tax, Maharashtra – 442401. Chandrapur Circle, Chandrapur. Pan: Aaafc8556F Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Mukesh Agrawal – Ar Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Mrathe – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27/12/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am:

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50Section 68

Dinesh Gangwal, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-50(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1105/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 1105/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Dinesh Gangwal,.....................................Appellant Olympus Court, Flat 102, Block-B, 4/2, Sarat Bose Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Adxpg0498E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-50(1), Kolkata, Income Tax Office, Manicktala, Civil Centre, Uttarapan Complex Ds-Iv, Kolkata-700067 Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Amitava Sen, Addl. Cit, D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 26, 2023 O R D E R

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 68

…ear-cut non- application of mind by the AO. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Limited –vs.- R.B. Wadkar, Asst. 5 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Dinesh Gangwal CITreported in 268 ITR 332(Bom), wherein it has been held that the reasons have to be read as they are recorded and it cannot be substituted. The Hon’ble Court has held that there has to be satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessment and reopening cannot be made for borrowed satisfaction in a mechanical manner.The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the…

Jay Kishore Choubey, Rairangpur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Asansol

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2/CTK/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2010-2011 2011 Jay Jay Kishore Kishore Choubey, Choubey, Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-1, Asansol. Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Acmpc 1759 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Adv Revenue By : Shri Charan Das, Sr. Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11 11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/11 /11/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri P.R.MohantyFor Respondent: Shri Charan Das, Sr

Section 147Section 148

…are to be examined on a standalone basis to determine the validity of proceedings under section 147 of the Act. In this regard, it is relevant to note the following observation of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs R.B.Wadkar: [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bom.): "20. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer nowhere state that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of that assessment year. It is needless to mention that the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the Assessing Officer. No subst…

Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT -Ltu -1, Mumbai

In the result we find that in absence of tangible material, the reopening of assessment cannot be made

ITA 3949/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Dy. Commissioner Of Bajaj Auto Limited 2N D Floor, Bajaj Bhawan, Income-Tax, Vs. 226, Nariman Point, Large Taxpayer Unit-1 Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcb2923M

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 147

…d that reopening has been made merely on the basis of change of opinion. He submits that it is reappraisal of note at schedule 14. vi. He further referred to the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of paragraph number 20 of Hindustan lever Ltd 2004 (268 ITR 332) (Bombay), paragraph number 8t – 11 of the decision of the honourable High Court in case of sesa Goa Ltd (2007) 294 ITR 101 and Ananta landmark private limited versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax in Bajaj Auto Ltd; A.Y. 2010-11 writ petition number 2814 of 2019 dated 14 September 2021. The decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case…

M/S. Arshiya Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT - CC-6(4), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 575/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

Section 133ASection 139Section 142Section 143Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 68

…ason of failure on the part of the assessee inter alia to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year. Honourable Bombay High Court in Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar, Asstt. CIT [2004] 137 Taxman 479/268 ITR 332 (Bom.) [2004] 137 Taxman 479 (Bombay)/[2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) has laid down following guidelines to test the reasons :- i. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer nowhere state that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of that assessment year. ii. Reas…

Smt. Taradevi Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Central), Nagpur

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 1123/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 253Section 263

…of the Act or any other provision as the case may be. And further that there existed contractual relationship between payer-payees hereunder. We thus quote hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s landmark decision in Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Vs. R B Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom) and the Assessing Officer’s reopening reasons have to be read on standalone basis without any external help thereby rejecting any scope of addition, deletion or substitution therein at a later stage even it is found that at some point of time that the same were very well justifiable. We adopt the very reasoning cause hereinabove to quash al…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Guwahati vs. Bath and Sanitary, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 169/GTY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GAUHATI” BENCH, VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 169/Gau/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 ACIT, Circle-1, Guwahati Vs. Bath And Sanitary Room No. 613, 6th Floor, Aayakar Opp. Aayakar Bhawan, G. S. Road, Bhawan, G. S. Road, Christian Basti, Christian Basti, Guwahati, Assam- Guwahati-781005. 781005. (PAN: AAKFB5935B) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 09.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement 30.10.2023 For the Appellant Shri Arun Bhowmick, JCIT For the Respondent Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate ORDER…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad vs. Drs Logistics Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1718/HYD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri KC DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan. Sr. AR

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…was completed u/s. 143(3), subsequently on a mere re-look of the said account earlier furnished by the assessee it is not permissible u/s.147 to reopen the assessment. Similarly, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Hindustan Lever Ltd vs. R.B. Wadker reported in 268 ITR 332 held that the Assessing Officer must disclose in the reasons as to which fact or material was not disclosed by the assessee to establish the vital link between the reasons and evidence. Thus, the initiation of reassessment proceedings by the AO is not in accordance with law. Similar views were also expressed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-1), Raipur vs. M/S Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd., Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 73/RPR/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.73/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. H. No.11, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aahcs7999A ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri, Sakshi Gopal Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(2)(b)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.73/RPR/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. M/s. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. H. No.11, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 (C.G.) PAN : AAHCS7999A ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : S/shri, Sakshi Gopal Agrawal & Sidharth Parakh, CAs Revenue by : Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख…

ACIT(OSD), Ward-22(1), New Delhi vs. S.S. Gas Lab Asia P. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, cross objection of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3246/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaacit(Osd), Vs. S. S. Gas Lab Asia P. Ltd, Ward-22(1), A-6/3, Jhilmil Industrial Area, New Delhi Shahdara, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcs1928C Co No. 54/Del/2023 (In Ita No. 3246/Del/2019) (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Acit(Osd), Vs. S. S. Gas Lab Asia P. Ltd, Ward-22(1), A-6/3, Jhilmil Industrial Area, New Delhi Shahdara, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcs1928C Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Kumar Bindal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05/10/2023 O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh, A. M.: 1. The Appeal In Ita No. 3246/Del/2019 Filed By The Revenue & Co No. 54/Del/2023 387/Del/2021 Filed By The Assessee For Ay 2008-09, Arises Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As „Ld. Cit(A)‟, In Short] In Appeal No. 10208/16-17 Dated 08.02.2019 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 147/143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As „The Act‟) Dated 09.03.2016 By The Assessing Officer, Ito, Ward-22(1), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As „Ld. Ao‟).

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

Section 10BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ke full and true disclosure of all material facts relevant for the purpose of assessment. We find that this issue is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs. R. B. Wadkar reported in 268 ITR 332 (Bom). The relevant operative part of the said order is reproduced herein:- “20. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer nowhere state that there was failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of that assessment year. It is needless to mention that the reasons are required…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur vs. M/S Jagannathdas Harichandmal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Raigarh

In the result appeal of revenue is partly allowed in terms of our observations herein above

ITA 106/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.106/Rpr/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Jagannathdas Harichandmal Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Sadar Bazar, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan: Aaccj2840G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal, Dated 16.03.2022 Which In Turn Arises From The Order By Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Dated 30.12.2018 For A.Y.2012-13. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: “ 1. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, While Holding Assessment Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of Act As Invalid & Void-Ab-Initio, The Ld. Cit(A) Completely Ignored The Fact That During The Course Of Survey, The Assessee Failed To Discharge Its Burden In Establishing 'The Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transactions As Required U/S 68 Of The Income Tac Act. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Reassessment Proceeding Are Based On Fresh Facts/Information Rather Than Change Of Opinion. 2. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Confirmation Of Concealment Of Income/Disclosure Made In Statement Recorded During Survey U/S 133A Of Act Is An Information, Though Not Conclusive, Which May Be Used In Regular Assessment Or Reassessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…hri Shyam Sunder Agrawal is not a fresh material unearth in the source of survey proceedings. Thus, the AO had no material to reason to believe that there was income escaped from the assessment. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Liver Limited 268 ITR 332 has held as under: "The reason recorded for issuing notice provide the link between conclusion and evidence. The reason recoded must be based on evidence. The Assessing Officer in the event of challenge to the reason, must be able to justify the same based on material available on record. He must disclosed in the reason a to which fact or materi…

Shruti Vinimay Limited, Nagpur vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 223/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.223/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shruti Vinimay Private बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-4(3) Limited Room No.1921, 19Th Vs. 502, Mahalaxmi Apartment Floor, Air India Building, Shivaji Nagar, Nagpur Nariman Point, Mumbai- (Urban) Nagpur-440010, 400021. Maharashtra, India. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajcs4629R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue By: Shri Ganesh Shah (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2023 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-52 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)], Mumbai Dated 15.12.2022 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee, After A Preliminary Hearing Has Not Pressed Ground No. 1 & 2 Raised In The Revised/Additional Ground Of Appeal Filed Before Us Viz Action Of The Transfer Of The Case From Kolkata To Mumbai U/S 127 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act) As Well As The Action Of Ao First Of All, Dropping The Proceedings Initiated U/S 153C Of The Act & Instead Resorting To The Impugned Re-Opening Of Assessment, Which According To Assessee Is Bad In Law. Since The Aforesaid Two (2) Grounds Have Not Been Pressed By The Ld. Ar Both Grounds Stands Dismissed. 3. Coming To The Next Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee, Which Is Against The Action Of The Ao To Have Reopened The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Which According To The Assessee Is Bad In Law. Since It Is A Legal Issue The Same Is Dealt With.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Shah (Sr. AR)

Section 127Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…be examined on a stand-alone basis. Neither anything can be added to the reasons so recorded, nor can anything be deleted from the reason so recorded. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. 3 A.Y. 2010-11 Shruti Vinimay Ltd (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom) has inter alia observed that “……it is needless to mention that the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the AO. No substitution or deletion is permissible. No additions can be made to those reasons. No inference can be allowed to be drawn on the basis of reasons not recorded by him. He has to speak through the reasons”.…