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 367,154 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

R.N. Khemka Enterprises (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3299/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

R.N. Khemka Enterprises (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

ITA 1029/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

R.N. Khemka Enterprises (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

ITA 585/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

Shri Ravindrasinh N.Gohil, Bhavnagar vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1(1), Bhavnagar

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3344/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Rastogi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…opening the reassessment, are to be examined on a standalone basis. Nothing can be added to the reasons so recorded, nor anything can be deleted from the reasons so recorded. Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332/137 Taxmann 479 , 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. It is for the AO to disclose…

Shri Ravindrasinh N.Gohil, Bhavnagar vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1(1), Bhavnagar

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3343/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Rastogi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…opening the reassessment, are to be examined on a standalone basis. Nothing can be added to the reasons so recorded, nor anything can be deleted from the reasons so recorded. Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332/137 Taxmann 479 , 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. It is for the AO to disclose…

Echjay Industries P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

Appeals are allowed

ITA 5245/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Assessment Year :2006-07) Assessment Year :2010-11) Assessment Year :2011-12) Assessment Year :2012-13) Assessment Year :2013-14) Assessment Year :2014-15) Assessment Year :2010-11) & Assessment Year :2012-13) M/S. Echjay Industries Pvt. Ltd. M/S. Echjay Industries Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, Central Circle- 83, Bajaj Bhavan 45,/Dy.Commissioner Of Nariman Point Income Tax-Circle 8(2) Mumbai – 400 023 Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. : Aaace1157B (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.R. RaoFor Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube
Section 143(3)Section 147

…d hereinabove, we do not find any such mention about the failure on the part of the ld AO in terms of proviso to section 147 of the Act, by the ld AO. In this regard, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd vs ACIT reported in 268 ITR 332 (Bom), wherein it was held as under:- ―Reasons recorded should be elaborate and should speak for itself about the mind of the AO for formation of belief that income had escaped assessment. It should not be vague. The satisfaction of the AO that income had escaped assessment should emanate from the reasons recorded at the time of initiation of re…

DCIT, Central Circle -1(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Deepak Budharmal Vaswani, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above, and the appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 667/AHD/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jun 2019AY 2007-08
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…s submitted that the reasons recorded for reopening are factually incorrect and, therefore, unsustainable in law. Learned counsel then invites our attention to the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R B Wadkar [(2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom)] in support of the proposition that nothing can be read into the reasons and that reasons must be read as the reasons are recorded. Nothing can be added to, or deleted from, the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, and the validity of reopening the assessment is to be adjudicated upon in ITA No.: 161 and 667/Ahd/18 Assessment year: 2…

Shri Deepak Budharmal Vaswani, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle -1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above, and the appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 161/AHD/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jun 2019AY 2007-08
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…s submitted that the reasons recorded for reopening are factually incorrect and, therefore, unsustainable in law. Learned counsel then invites our attention to the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs R B Wadkar [(2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom)] in support of the proposition that nothing can be read into the reasons and that reasons must be read as the reasons are recorded. Nothing can be added to, or deleted from, the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, and the validity of reopening the assessment is to be adjudicated upon in ITA No.: 161 and 667/Ahd/18 Assessment year: 2…

DCIT 11(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Suraksha Realty Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6258/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 6258//Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12) The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Suraksha Realty Ltd. Income Tax, Circle 11(2)(2) 3, Narayan Building, 23 L.N. 421, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Vs. Road Dadar (E), Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 014 Mumbai-20 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aalcs7864A प्रत्याक्षेप सM./ Co No. 28/Mum/2019 (Arising In Ita No. 6258/Mum/2017 For Ay 2011-12) M/S Suraksha Realty Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of 3, Narayan Building, 23 L.N. Income Tax, Circle 11(2)(2) Road Dadar (E), Mumbai-400 Vs. 421, 4Th Floor, Aayakar 014 Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08-04-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12-06-2019

For Appellant: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar SinghFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta, AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…fied in the reasons communicated to the petitioner on July 23, 2012, for the purpose of reopening the assessment for the assessment year 2007-08. Our court in the matter of Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R. B. Wadkar, Asstt. CIT (No.1) [2004] 21 CO No. 28/Mum/2019 268 ITR 332/137 Taxman 479 (Bom.) has held that for the purpose of examining the jurisdiction to reopen a completed assessment one is only concerned with the reasons recorded at the time of issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. These reasons cannot be supplemented/improved upon later. Therefore, the order dated October 15, 2012, disposing of the objec…

Anjan Kumar Naha, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 2381/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the basis of initiation of the assessment proceedings u/s 147 was the information with the Department, of the deposits made by the assessee in his bank account. 46. ‘Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali’ (supra), makes reference to ‘Hindusan Lever Ltd. vs. R.B. Wadkar’, 268 ITR 332 (Bom.), to hold that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment are to be examined on a standalone basis and nothing can be added to the reasons. It was also observed that the reasons must point out to an income escaping assessment and not merely need of an enquiry which may result in detection of an income escaping assessment. It was obse…

Anjan Kumar Naha, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 2380/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the basis of initiation of the assessment proceedings u/s 147 was the information with the Department, of the deposits made by the assessee in his bank account. 46. ‘Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali’ (supra), makes reference to ‘Hindusan Lever Ltd. vs. R.B. Wadkar’, 268 ITR 332 (Bom.), to hold that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment are to be examined on a standalone basis and nothing can be added to the reasons. It was also observed that the reasons must point out to an income escaping assessment and not merely need of an enquiry which may result in detection of an income escaping assessment. It was obse…

Anjan Kumar Naha, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed

ITA 2379/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the basis of initiation of the assessment proceedings u/s 147 was the information with the Department, of the deposits made by the assessee in his bank account. 46. ‘Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali’ (supra), makes reference to ‘Hindusan Lever Ltd. vs. R.B. Wadkar’, 268 ITR 332 (Bom.), to hold that the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment are to be examined on a standalone basis and nothing can be added to the reasons. It was also observed that the reasons must point out to an income escaping assessment and not merely need of an enquiry which may result in detection of an income escaping assessment. It was obse…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7377/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7325/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) Tata Chemicals Limited The Deputy Commissioner Bombay House, Fort, Of Income Tax Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaact4059M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7377/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) The Deputy Commissioner Of Tata Chemicals Limited Income Tax Bombay House, Fort, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12-02-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-05-2019 Aadosa / O R D E R महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य/ Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80ISection 80M

…open the assessment proceedings by the AO in the facts of that case. Hon’ble Bombay High Court has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) and Hindustand Liver Ltd. Vs. Wadkar (R.B), ACIT (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) and also Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 343 ITR 183 (Bom.) and held as under: “13. In the instant case, the notice under section 148 has not been issued after the expiry of four years, but within four years. Therefore, the assessee must have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and which alone wi…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7325/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7325/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) Tata Chemicals Limited The Deputy Commissioner Bombay House, Fort, Of Income Tax Vs. Mumbai-400 001 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaact4059M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 7377/Mum/2013 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2003-04) The Deputy Commissioner Of Tata Chemicals Limited Income Tax Bombay House, Fort, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12-02-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-05-2019 Aadosa / O R D E R महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य/ Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 80Section 80ISection 80M

…open the assessment proceedings by the AO in the facts of that case. Hon’ble Bombay High Court has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) and Hindustand Liver Ltd. Vs. Wadkar (R.B), ACIT (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) and also Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 343 ITR 183 (Bom.) and held as under: “13. In the instant case, the notice under section 148 has not been issued after the expiry of four years, but within four years. Therefore, the assessee must have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and which alone wi…

ACIT, Circle-5(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Navkar Nivesh Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 729/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2007-08 Acit, Circle-5(2), V/S. M/S Navkar Nivesh Pvt. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Ltd., (Formerly M/S Pingle Chowringhe Square, 8Th Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., 81, Floor, Kolkata-69 Metcalf Street, Kolkata-700 013 [Pan No.Aabcp 4879 K] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Dr. P.K Srihari, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 23-04-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 08-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2007-08 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata’S Order Dated 30.01.2017 Passed In Case No.2412/Cit(A)-2/2015-16, Involving Proceedings U/S 144 R.W.S. 147 R.W.S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. Learned Cit-Dr Vehemently Contends During The Course Of Hearing That Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts Both In Annulling The Impugned Assessment / Re-Assessment Dated 31.03.2015 Framed On U/S 144/147/143(3) As Well As In Deleting The Unexplained Share Application / Premium Addition Amounting To ₹54,72,75,000/- Made In Assessment Order On Merits. His Argument Is That The Assessing Officer Had Rightly Taken Recourse To Impugned

Section 133ASection 144Section 148Section 68

…ening the reassessment, are to be examined on a standalone basis. Nothing can be added to the reasons so recorded, nor anything can be deleted from the reasons so recorded. Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs. R.B. Wadkar [(2004) 268 ITR 332], 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 the basis of reasons not recorded. It is for the AO to disclose and open his mind thr…

Amit G. Vanani, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 4569/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4569/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2007-08) Shri Amit G. Vanani, The Dy. Commissioner Of 112, The Jewel, Tata Road Income Tax, Circle-4(4), No. 2, Opera House, Mumbai- Room No. 409, 4Th Floor, Vs. 400 004 Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaipv6300L अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri B.V. Jhaveri, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri B.S. Bist, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08-05-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 08-05-2019

For Appellant: Shri B.V. Jhaveri, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…no addition on account of the loan taken from MIs. Nice Diamonds, is bad in law and without jurisdiction. 3 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) failed to appreciate that as held by the Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs. R.B. Wadkar and Ors. (268 ITR 332) the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the A.O. No addition can be made to those reasons. No inference can be allowed to be drawn based on the reasons not recorded. The reasons recorded should be self-explanatory and should not keep the assessee guessing for the reasons. The reasons recorded by the A.O. cannot be supplement…

Sri Udit Kumar Dugar, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 799/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…1 Shri Udit Kumar Dugar, AY 2012-13 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 799/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri Udit Kumar Dugar Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward-36(4), (PAN: ACWPD5996Q) Kolkata Appellant Respondent For the Appellant Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate For the Respondent Shri Sankar Halder, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement 03.05.2019 ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This appeal o…

Premwati Suman, Agra vs. ITO-1(3), Agra

In the result both appeals are allowed

ITA 393/AGR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Premwati Suman, Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(3), 1/1, Hig Flats, Sanjay Place, Agra. Agra. Pan: Bnvps9819N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri. Ranjeet Suman, Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(3), 1/1, Hig Flats, Sanjay Place, Agra. Agra. Pan: Bnlps9622P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Smt. Premwati Suman, Vs.. Income tax Officer- 1(3), 1/1, HIG Flats, Sanjay Place, Agra. Agra. PAN: BNVPS9819N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri. Ranjeet Suman, Vs.. Income tax Officer- 1(3), 1/1, HIG Flats, Sanjay Place, Agra. Agra. PAN: BNLPS9622P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Anurag Sinha, AR Respondent by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 20.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement 22.03.2019 ORDER Per Dr.M. L. Meena, A. M.: Both these appeals, filed…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jai Gajanan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4861/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi Before : Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2007-08 Income-tax Officer, vs. Jai Gajanan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Ward 13(12), New Delhi. E-292, IInd Floor, Old Double Storey Lane, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi. PAN-AABCJ6528Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR Respondent by Sh. D.C. Agarwal, Advocate Date of Hearing 26.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement 15.03.2019 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This appeal filed by the Revenue arises out of the impugned order dated 26.05.2015 of…

Navneet Goenka, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1613/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S, Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2009-10 Navneet Goenka Income Tax Officer, बनाम / C/o A.K. Kataruka & Co. Ward-44(1), 3, Govt. V/s. Chartered Accountants, 41, Place (West), Gr. B.B. Ganguly Street, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700 Floor Central Plaza, 001 Kolkata-700012 [PAN No.ADKPG 4048 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri P.K. Himmatsinghka, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Kalyan Nath Addl. CIT-SR-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 24-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 13-02-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of P…