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 147Section 148Section 153CSection 153ASection 132Section 153DSection 68

Issues it is cited on

section 158bdfirst proviso to section 147material facts necessary for assessmentincome tax settlement commissionfull and true disclosuresection 144afresh tangible materialkelvinatorbeyond four yearsmere change of opinionescapement of incomelive link

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

Parige Venkat Ram Reddy, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 18/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

Guduri Venkata Raju, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 17/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

Gudduri Venkata Raju, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 16/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

Tricities Security and Allied Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 15/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

Tricities Security and Allied Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 14/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

Sanjay Garudapally, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 13/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

Sanjay Garudapally, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 12/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

Garudapally Shruthi Gupta, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 11/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

Garudapally Shruthi Gupta, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 10/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…any assistance from external material. Some of the decisions which have laid down this legal principle with reference to the reopening of assessment u/s 147 are discussed in the following paragraphs: 1. In the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R.B.Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the Hon’ble High court held as under: “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 re…

M/S. Wescon Finance & Leasing Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle -1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1635/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar singhFor Respondent: Shri Satyapal Kumar (Sr. AR)
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom) has inter alia observed that 8 AY 2010-11 Wescon Finance & Leasing Pvt. Ltd. “……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 recorde…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…452 (Bombay) (iii). Runwal Realty (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (107 taxmann.com 284) (Bombay) (iv). PCIT v. Punjab and Sind Bank (108 taxmann.com 351) (Delhi High Court) (v). [SLP dismissed by Supreme Court in (108 taxmann.com 352)] (vi). Hindustan Lever v. R.B. Wadkar (268 ITR 332) (Bombay High Court) (vii). Business India v. JCIT (370 ITR 154) (Bombay High Court) (viii). Bombay Stock Exchange v. DDIT (365 ITR 160) (Bombay High Court) (ix). Panchratna CHS v. AO (376 ITR 404) (Bombay High Court 5. The Ld. AR has also referred to original assessment order passed in the case of assessee wherein both the issue relating to rea…

Acc Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl CIT(Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3137/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…452 (Bombay) (iii). Runwal Realty (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (107 taxmann.com 284) (Bombay) (iv). PCIT v. Punjab and Sind Bank (108 taxmann.com 351) (Delhi High Court) (v). [SLP dismissed by Supreme Court in (108 taxmann.com 352)] (vi). Hindustan Lever v. R.B. Wadkar (268 ITR 332) (Bombay High Court) (vii). Business India v. JCIT (370 ITR 154) (Bombay High Court) (viii). Bombay Stock Exchange v. DDIT (365 ITR 160) (Bombay High Court) (ix). Panchratna CHS v. AO (376 ITR 404) (Bombay High Court 5. The Ld. AR has also referred to original assessment order passed in the case of assessee wherein both the issue relating to rea…

M/S. Symphony, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir -8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1965/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1965/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Symphony बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-8(2) Skyline Wealth Space Bld, 6Th Floor, Room No. 658, Vs. First Floor, Skyline Oasis Aayakar Bhavan, Compound Premier Road, Maharshi Karve Road, Vidyavihar (West), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400086. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abgf8562C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Jain Revenue By: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/02/2023 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 (Appeals)-50, Mumbai Dated 23.09.2021 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. By Raising The Ground No. 1 To 4, The Assessee Has Challenged The Legality/Validity Of The Reopening Of Assessment For Ay. 2012-13. Ground No. 1 To 4 Is As Under: - “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Ao Erred In Reopening The Assessment U/S 148 & Completing The Assessment U/S 147. 2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Ao Erred In Reopening The Assessment U/S 148 On The Basis Of Information On Record & Without Any New Information.

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JainFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan (Sr
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (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 5 A.Y. 2012-13 M/s. Symphony reasons not recorded by him. He has to…

DCIT 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Watermark Systems (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4834/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh GuptaFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (CIT- DR)
Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (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”.…

DCIT 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Watermark Systems (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4833/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh GuptaFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (CIT- DR)
Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (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”.…

DCIT 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Watermark Financial Consultants Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4832/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh GuptaFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (CIT- DR)
Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (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”.…

DCIT 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Watermark Financial Consultants Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4831/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh GuptaFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (CIT- DR)
Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (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”.…

DCIT 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Watermark Financial Consultants Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4830/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh GuptaFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (CIT- DR)
Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (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”.…

Vivek Vinod Vaid, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4829/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh GuptaFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (CIT- DR)
Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (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”.…

ITO 3(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Watermark Systems (I) P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4828/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal/Saurabh GuptaFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (CIT- DR)
Section 147Section 148

…r re-opening the assessment, are to 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. (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”.…