Income Tax Officer v. Techspan Pvt. Ltd And Ors.

6 SCC 685Reported decision2018#10088 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 144 Section 144B

Judgments citing Income Tax Officer v. Techspan Pvt. Ltd And Ors.

JAGDISHPRASAD MAHESHWARI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 748/NAG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Apr 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.748/Nag/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Jagdishprasad Maheshwari Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-4, C/O Surgical India, Nagpur Shop No. 214,215,224,225, Sandesh Dawa Bazar, Near Haj House, Ganjipeth, Nagpur-440018, Maharashtra Pan: Acypm9289M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…33 (Bombay)/2007 SCC OnLine Bom 1292; NYK Line (India) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 28 taxmann.com 229/211 Taxman 185 (Mag.)/346 ITR 361 (Bombay)/2012 SCC OnLine Bom 195; ITO v. TechSpan India (P.) Ltd (2018) 92 taxmann.com 361/255 Taxman 152/404 ITR 10 (SC)/(2018) 6 SCC 685; GKN Sinter Metals Ltd v ACIT [2015] [2015] 55 taxmann.com 438/232 Taxman 386/371 ITR 225 (Bombay) (Bombay) In the said case of Imperial Consultants (supra) Justice G.S. Kulkarni speaking for the Division Bench considering of reopening of assessment beyond the period of four years, observed thus:- Adverting to the principles of law as the aforesaid…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PARWANOO, H.P vs. DEYEM INDUSTRY, NALAGARH SOLAN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 708/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 708/Chd/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The ITO Parwanoo, Himachal Pradesh बनाम DEYEM INDUSTRY Nalagarh, Ropar Road Near Hazat Khana, Nalagarh, H.P.- 174101 स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AAGFD0437L अपीलार्थी/ Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ankit Awal, Ms. Khushbu Sood, Advocates राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual) सुनवाई की ता

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Awal & Ms. Khushbu Sood, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)Section 271(1)(c)Section 53A

…3–5]. The Ld. AR also relied on the following judicial 6 precedents, which unequivocally hold that a mere change of opinion cannot constitute valid grounds for reopening an assessment: a. ITO, Ward No. 16(2) v. Techspan India Private Limited and Am.- (2018) 6 SCC 685 b. Maya Appliances Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, WP No. 1212 & 1216 of2020 6.4 The Learned Ld. AR further argued that the reopening of the assessment is in gross contravention of law. He submitted that the assessment order dated 17.08.2017 is contrary to legal principles, as the payment received for the disposition of assets b…

AKSH OPTIFIBRE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, ALWAR

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

ITA 170/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Akul Agarwal, C.A. (thr. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 234ASection 250

…ind that the\nAssessing Officer was justified in issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act on May\n17, 2000.\"\n7.8 This view has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Income\nTax Officer v. Techspan India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. (2018) 6 SCC 685 A Reassessment\ncannot be struck down on account of Change of Opinion if the Assessment Order is non-\nspeaking, cryptic or perfunctory in nature The relevant extract of the judicial\npronouncement is reproduced as under\n14\nITA No. 170/JPR/2024\nAksh Optifibre Limited\n\"12) Before interfering with the proposed re-opening of the assessment on the…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II, KOLKATA vs. M/S. KESORAM IDUSTRIES LIMITED

ITA/1/2014HC Calcutta06 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 6Th May 2024. Appearance: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Advocate Mr. Ankan Das, Advocate … For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Advocate. … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Sri Soumen Bhattacharjee, Learned Junior Standing Counsel For The Appellant & Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sm. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Learned Counsel For The Respondent Assessee. 2. This Appeal Was Admitted By This Court By Order Dated 31St July 2013 On The Following Substantial Question Of Law:- “Whether On Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Erred In Law In Setting Aside The Order Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax, 1961?”

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…r failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts and the notice issued by him would be liable to he struck down as invalid." 18. In the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward No.62 vs. TechSpan India (P.) Ltd. and another, (2018) 6 SCC 685 (Paras 14 to 18), Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: "14. The language of Section 147 makes it clear that the assessing officer certainly has the power to re-assess any income which escaped assessment for any assessment year subject to the provisions of Sections 148 to 153. However, the use of this power is conditional upon the fact that the asse…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. THE TIBETIAN CHILDREN VILLAGE

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/31/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with

Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

…Primary Dealership Limited2 and Income Tax Officer, Ward No.16(2) vs. Techspan India Private Limited and another.3 So we do not find any merit in ITA no.1 of 2020 and ITA no.28 of 2019 for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06. 2(2012) 13 SCC 514 3(2018) 6 SCC 685 12 ITA. no.31 of 2019 and ITA no.29 of 2019, ITA no.30 of 2019 and ITA no.32 of 2019 14. Coming to ITA. no.31 of 2019 and ITA no.29 of 2019, for the assessment year 2006-07, assessment order was passed on 25.06.2008, for the assessment year 2007-08, it was passed on 31.12.2009, but the said orders were revised under Section 263 of the Ac…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. THE TIBETIAN CHILDREN VILLAGE

Accordingly the same are dismissed alongwith pending

ITA/29/2019HC Himachal Pradesh22 Aug 2023

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MAMIDANNA SATYA RATNA SRI RAMACHANDRA RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

For Appellant: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate with

Section 12ASection 148Section 260A

ITO, WARD- 21(4), NEW DELHI vs. RUKMINI IRON PVT. LTD., DELHI

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

ITA 550/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Vs. Rukmini Iron Pvt. Ltd., Ward-21(4), X-55/102, Loha Mandi, New Delhi. Naraina, Delhi. Pan: Aaccr7910H Co No.66/Del/2018 (Ita No.550/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Rukmini Iron Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, X-55/102, Loha Mandi, Ward-21(4), Naraina, New Delhi. Delhi. Pan: Aaccr7910H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suresh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2022 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.10.2017 Of The Cit(A)-38, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2009-10. In This Case, The Assessee Has Filed A Cross Objection. Co No.66/Del/2018 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:- “1. "On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 2,40,00,000/- Made By The Ao U/S 68 Of Income Tax Act, 1961, Ignoring The Decision Of The Ld. Cit (A) In The Case Of Surender Kumar Jain (S. K. Jain) Wherein, It Is Held That Jain Brothers Are Equally Involved In The Accommodation Entry Business & Maintain The Documents & Record. " 2. "On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs 2,40,00,000/- Under Section 68 Of The Act By Ignoring The Ratio Decidendi In The Case Of Cit Vs. M/S N. R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (2014), 2 Itr-Ol-68 & Pcit-7 Vs. Bikram Singh In It A No. 55/2017 Dated 25/08/2017 On Identical Issue Of Addition As Unexplained Share Capital U/S 68 Of The It Act. 3 The Appellant Craves To Be Allowed To Add & Alter Any Fresh Grounds(S) Of Appealand/Or Delete Or Amend Any Of The Ground(S) Of Appeal."

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 68

…t or failure on the part of the Assessee. The reasons also do not explain or specify as to what is the rationale connection between the reasons to believe and the material on record. The Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. Techspan Pvt. Ltd And Ors. (2018) 6 SCC 685 has held that “The use of the words “reason to believe” in Section 147 has to be interpreted schematically as the liberal interpretation of the word would have the consequence of conferring arbitrary powers on the assessing officer who may even initiate such re-assessment proceedings merely on his change of opinion on the basis of some facts and ci…

SHRI VISHAL JAGDISHBHAI MEHTA,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(5),, VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 627/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…2019 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No. 7 Shri Vishal Jagdishbhai Mehta vs. ITO property were within the knowledge of the assessing officer at the time of original assessment. In the case of Income Tax Officer, Ward No.62 vs. Tech Span India (P.) Ltd. and another, (2018) 6 SCC 685 (Paras 14 to 18), Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the assessing officer does not have power of review under section 147 of the Act. While passing the order the Supreme Court observed as under: 15. Section 147 of the IT Act does not allow the re-assessment of an income merely because of the fact that the assessing officer has a change of opinion wi…

ABHISHEK AGARWAL,NANI DAMAN vs. ITO, DAMAN WARD,, DAMAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 97/SRT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Jan 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.97/Srt/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 Abhishek Agarwal Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Radha Madhav Kunj, Opp. Gem Daman Ward, Daman. Plaza, College Road, Nani Daman. [Pan: Adxpa8893P अपीलाथ" /Assessee ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रतीकीओरसे /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, C.A. राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupama Singla – Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 14.10.2020 उद्घोषणाकीतारीख/Pronouncement On: 06.01.2022

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…nature of default or failure on the part of the Assessee. The reasons also do not explain or specify as to what is the rationale connection between the reasons to believe and the material on record. The Supreme Court in ITO v. Techspan India (P.) Ltd. [2018] 6 SCC 685 has held that "The use of the words "reason to believe" in section 147 has to be interpreted schematically as the liberal interpretation of the word would have the consequence of conferring arbitrary powers on the assessing officer who may even initiate such re-assessment proceedings merely on his change of opinion on the basis of some facts and ci…

M/S. BOSE CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5705/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2008-09] Bose Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit 3Rd Floor, Plot No.4, Circle – 5(1), Salcon Aurum, Jasola District New Delhi Centre, New Delhi – 110 025 Pan No. Aaacb 3260 A [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…t or failure on the part of the Assessee. The reasons also do not explain or specify as to what is the rationale connection between the reasons to believe and the material on record. The Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v. Techspan Pvt. Ltd And Ors. (2018) 6 SCC 685 has held that “The use of the words “reason to believe” in Section 147 has to be interpreted schematically as the liberal interpretation of the 17 word would have the consequence of conferring arbitrary powers on the assessing officer who may even initiate such re-assessment proceedings merely on his change of opinion on the basis of some facts and…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NIIT SMARTSERVE LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 5173/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowlaand Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2005-06] The Dy.C.I.T Vs. Niit Smartserve Ltd Circle – 18(2) 8, Balaji Estate New Delhi Guru Ravidas Marg New Delhi Pan: Aabcn 4598 E & Co No. 217/Del/2018 (In Ita No.5173/Del/2015) [Assessment Year: 2005-06] Niit Smartserve Ltd Vs. The Dcit 8, Balaji Estate Circle – 18(2) Guru Ravidas Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabcn 4598 E [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2020

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 32