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

Navnirman Infracon Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 689/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mehta, Addl. Sr. DR
Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(via)Section 56(2)(viia)

…ITA No.689/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA 'C' BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE S/SHRIAND RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.689/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Navnirman Infracon Pvt Itd., 1A, Vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata 1st floor, 121, Kalighat Road, Kolkata PAN/GIR No. AACCN 8248 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA Revenue by : Shri Sandeep Kumar Mehta, Addl. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 04/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 28/10/2025 ORDER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Id. Commi…

Balachandra Builders Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp. Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 989/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 989/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 V. Balchandra Builders Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of No.10 Venkataratnam Nagar, Adyar, Income Tax, Chennai- 600 020. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai. [Pan: Aaacb6727A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate, : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28.07.2025 : घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 21.10.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

…r of Income-tax vs. Indian Syntans Investments Pvt Ltd. [2025] 176 taxmann.com 22 (Madras)[19-06-2025] has held as under: - 8. In any case, the reasons recorded are ambiguous and vague, and as held in Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar [2004] 137 Taxman 479/268 ITR 332 (Bombay), the reasons recorded must disclose the officer's mind because the reasons are the manifestation of mind of the Assessing Officer. The reasons recorded should be self-explanatory and should not keep the assessee guessing for the reasons, and it has to provide link between the conclusion and evidence. 9. Admittedly, the notice issued is b…

Vasudev Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 3176/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 3169/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 3170/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 3171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 3172/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ita No. 3173/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 3174/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 3175/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ita No. 3176/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vasudev Garg, Vs Dcit, Fca 50, Mukesh Colony, Ballabgarh, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aflpg8975Q Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Assessee’S Eight Appeals

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)

…is is for the precise reason that there is no such procedure of getting the field authorities affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Vasudev Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 3175/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 3169/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 3170/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 3171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 3172/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ita No. 3173/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 3174/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 3175/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ita No. 3176/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vasudev Garg, Vs Dcit, Fca 50, Mukesh Colony, Ballabgarh, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aflpg8975Q Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Assessee’S Eight Appeals

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)

…is is for the precise reason that there is no such procedure of getting the field authorities affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Vasudev Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 3174/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 3169/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 3170/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 3171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 3172/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ita No. 3173/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 3174/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 3175/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ita No. 3176/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vasudev Garg, Vs Dcit, Fca 50, Mukesh Colony, Ballabgarh, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aflpg8975Q Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Assessee’S Eight Appeals

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)

…is is for the precise reason that there is no such procedure of getting the field authorities affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Vasudev Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Cricle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 3173/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 3169/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 3170/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 3171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 3172/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ita No. 3173/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 3174/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 3175/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ita No. 3176/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vasudev Garg, Vs Dcit, Fca 50, Mukesh Colony, Ballabgarh, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aflpg8975Q Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Assessee’S Eight Appeals

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)

…is is for the precise reason that there is no such procedure of getting the field authorities affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Vasudev Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 3172/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 3169/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 3170/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 3171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 3172/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ita No. 3173/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 3174/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 3175/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ita No. 3176/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vasudev Garg, Vs Dcit, Fca 50, Mukesh Colony, Ballabgarh, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aflpg8975Q Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Assessee’S Eight Appeals

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)

…is is for the precise reason that there is no such procedure of getting the field authorities affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Vasudev Garg, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 3171/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 3169/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 3170/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 3171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 3172/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ita No. 3173/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 3174/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 3175/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ita No. 3176/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vasudev Garg, Vs Dcit, Fca 50, Mukesh Colony, Ballabgarh, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aflpg8975Q Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Assessee’S Eight Appeals

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)

…is is for the precise reason that there is no such procedure of getting the field authorities affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Vasudev Garg, Faridabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Faridabad, Faridabad

ITA 3170/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 3169/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 3170/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 3171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 3172/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ita No. 3173/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 3174/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 3175/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ita No. 3176/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vasudev Garg, Vs Dcit, Fca 50, Mukesh Colony, Ballabgarh, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aflpg8975Q Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Assessee’S Eight Appeals

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)

…is is for the precise reason that there is no such procedure of getting the field authorities affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Vasudev Garg, Faridabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle1 Fbd, Faridabad

ITA 3169/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 3169/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 3170/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 3171/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Ita No. 3172/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Ita No. 3173/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Ita No. 3174/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 3175/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ita No. 3176/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Vasudev Garg, Vs Dcit, Fca 50, Mukesh Colony, Ballabgarh, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121004 Faridabad, Haryana-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aflpg8975Q Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: The Assessee’S Eight Appeals

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 254(1)

…is is for the precise reason that there is no such procedure of getting the field authorities affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

DCIT, Circle- 19(1), Delhi vs. Punjab National Bank, Delhi

ITA 3235/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…017 without specifying in his reasons recorded that the assessee had not disclosed the relevant particulars “fully” and “truly” in the above first round. That being the clinching factual position, we hereby quote Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadekar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) that such reopening reasons do not have any scope of addition, deletion or substitution therein at any latter stage since the same have to be read on standalone basis only. This is indeed coupled with the fact that the Revenue’s grounds raised even do not rebut all these clinching facts in the instant appeal. We 7 thus find no reason…

Shree Arihant Gems, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-19(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2626/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…efore, the reasons recorded must be self-explanatory disclosing application of mind by the Assessing Officer and identifying the link between the tangible material and formation of belief that income as escaped assessment [Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs. R.B. Badkar 268 ITR 332 (Bom)]. The reasons recorded in the present case fail to meet the aforesaid requirements and therefore, cannot be sustained being in violation of the provisions contained in Section 147 of the Act. Therefore, notice, dated 29/03/2019, issued under Section 148 of the Act, the consequential reassessment proceedings and the Assessment Order, dated 1…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle), Bareilly vs. Varunarjun Trust, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 620/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 153C

…I.T.A. No.619 & 620/Lkw/2024 Assessment year:2015-16 & 16-17 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.619 & 620/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year: 202015-16 & 16-17 A.C.I.T., Vs. Varunarjun Trust Central Circle, B-1153, Indira Nagar, Bareilly. Lucknow. PAN:AABTV5968K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT (D.R.) Respondent by Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate O R D E R PER BENCH: These two appeals have been filed by Revenue pertaining to assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-1…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Bareilly vs. Varunarjun Trust, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 619/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 153C

…I.T.A. No.619 & 620/Lkw/2024 Assessment year:2015-16 & 16-17 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.619 & 620/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year: 202015-16 & 16-17 A.C.I.T., Vs. Varunarjun Trust Central Circle, B-1153, Indira Nagar, Bareilly. Lucknow. PAN:AABTV5968K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT (D.R.) Respondent by Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate O R D E R PER BENCH: These two appeals have been filed by Revenue pertaining to assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-1…

Income Tax Officer-12(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Manju Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes whereas the application under Rule 27 of statistical purposes whereas the application under Rule 27

ITA 2766/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ito-12(3)(1), Manju Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., R.No. 145, 1St Floor, Aayakar 57/59, 1St Floor, Nagdevi Street, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Maszid Bunder, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400 003. Pan No. Aaecm 6609 G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Dinkle Hariya
Section 133(6)Section 68

…Further, the Ld. Counsel Further, the Ld. Counsel referred to the decision of Hon’ble referred to the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bombay High Court in the case of Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) wherein it is held that Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) wherein it is held that Wadkar [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bombay) wherein it is held that reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the Assessing Offi…

Kusum Lata, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

ITA 879/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…8 | P a g e ITA Nos.878 & 879/Del/2018, 880/Del/2018, & 3097 to 3103/Del/2018 authorities’ affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Yadav Singh, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

ITA 3103/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…8 | P a g e ITA Nos.878 & 879/Del/2018, 880/Del/2018, & 3097 to 3103/Del/2018 authorities’ affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Yadav Singh, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

ITA 3102/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…8 | P a g e ITA Nos.878 & 879/Del/2018, 880/Del/2018, & 3097 to 3103/Del/2018 authorities’ affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Yadav Singh, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

ITA 3101/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…8 | P a g e ITA Nos.878 & 879/Del/2018, 880/Del/2018, & 3097 to 3103/Del/2018 authorities’ affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…

Yadav Singh, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

ITA 3099/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

…8 | P a g e ITA Nos.878 & 879/Del/2018, 880/Del/2018, & 3097 to 3103/Del/2018 authorities’ affidavit in support of their respective orders under the provisions of the Act that stated in the case records. Case law Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) has already settled the issue; in section 148/147 jurisprudence, that even reasons recorded by the assessing authority could not be allowed to be improved of any latter stage which have to be read as standalone basis. The very legal proposition is applicable in administrative law as well as in hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Mohi…