Indulata Rangwala v. DCIT

384 ITR 337High Court2016#853 most cited

What is Indulata Rangwala v. DCIT authority for?

Mere processing of a return under Section 143(1) and sending an intimation to the assessee does not constitute an 'assessment'. This distinction is crucial for determining the validity of subsequent reassessment proceedings.

123

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Indulata Rangwala v. DCIT · section 143(1) intimation · not assessment · reopening of assessment · section 148 notice · regular assessment · change of opinion · escapement of income · search assessment · abatement proceedings

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 148(1)fresh tangible materialtangible materialfair market valuechange of opinionregular assessmentescapement of incomereason to believereopening of assessmentsection 37notice under section 148section 143(1)

Judgments citing Indulata Rangwala v. DCIT

SHRI V. NATARAJAN (INDIVIDUAL),RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1801/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68

…e, yet the proceedings for assessment stand terminated." 7.2.8 Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Indu Lata Rangwala v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax ITA Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 (AYs 2016-17 & 2015-16) Varadappan Natarajan/ V. Natarajan (Individual) :: 21 :: 384 ITR 337 held that the "mere processing of a return under Section 143(1) of the Act and the sending of an intimation to the Assessee will not make it an 'assessment". 7.2.9 In Chintels India Ltd Vs DCIT [Delhi High Court] 397 ITR 416, assessment year under consideration was 2008-09, return of income was filed by appellant on 28-101-2008. Time to issue not…

VARADAPPAN NATARAJAN,RASIPURAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, SALEM

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1535/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68

…e, yet the proceedings for assessment stand terminated." 7.2.8 Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Indu Lata Rangwala v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax ITA Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 (AYs 2016-17 & 2015-16) Varadappan Natarajan/ V. Natarajan (Individual) :: 21 :: 384 ITR 337 held that the "mere processing of a return under Section 143(1) of the Act and the sending of an intimation to the Assessee will not make it an 'assessment". 7.2.9 In Chintels India Ltd Vs DCIT [Delhi High Court] 397 ITR 416, assessment year under consideration was 2008-09, return of income was filed by appellant on 28-101-2008. Time to issue not…

APTIV CONNECTION SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI, KERALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), ERNAKULAM, KERALA

ITA 749/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 735, 736 & 749/Coch/2023 (Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2014-15 & 2010-11) Aptiv Connection Systems India DCIT, Corporate Circle 1(1) Private Ltd. CR Building, IS Press Road 7/60-A & 60-B, Arakkunnam Kochi 682018 vs. Pulikkamali Road Arakkunnam P.O., Kochi 682313 [PAN: AAACF5044Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 23.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 23.10.2024…

APTIV CONNECTION SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI, KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI, KERALA

ITA 736/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 735, 736 & 749/Coch/2023 (Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2014-15 & 2010-11) Aptiv Connection Systems India DCIT, Corporate Circle 1(1) Private Ltd. CR Building, IS Press Road 7/60-A & 60-B, Arakkunnam Kochi 682018 vs. Pulikkamali Road Arakkunnam P.O., Kochi 682313 [PAN: AAACF5044Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 23.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 23.10.2024…

APTIV CONNECTION SYSTEMS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI, KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, KERALA

ITA 735/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 735, 736 & 749/Coch/2023 (Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2014-15 & 2010-11) Aptiv Connection Systems India DCIT, Corporate Circle 1(1) Private Ltd. CR Building, IS Press Road 7/60-A & 60-B, Arakkunnam Kochi 682018 vs. Pulikkamali Road Arakkunnam P.O., Kochi 682313 [PAN: AAACF5044Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate Respondent by: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 23.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 23.10.2024…

M/S SULAIKHA CLAY MINES,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT ,CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 937/COCH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…of reopening of a regular assessment. Law in the matter is well-settled, for which the Revenue has relied on the decision in Asst. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)and, following it, on Indu Lata Rangwala v. Dy. CIT[2017] 384 ITR 337 (Del), taking stock of the judicial precedents. The Gd. fails. 10. In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on August 31, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax(Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (Manomohan Das) Accountant Member Cochin, Dated: August 31, 2023 Copy…

SULAIKHA CLAY MINES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 627/COCH/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…of reopening of a regular assessment. Law in the matter is well-settled, for which the Revenue has relied on the decision in Asst. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)and, following it, on Indu Lata Rangwala v. Dy. CIT[2017] 384 ITR 337 (Del), taking stock of the judicial precedents. The Gd. fails. 10. In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on August 31, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax(Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (Manomohan Das) Accountant Member Cochin, Dated: August 31, 2023 Copy…

SULAIKHA CLAY MINES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 626/COCH/2022[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…of reopening of a regular assessment. Law in the matter is well-settled, for which the Revenue has relied on the decision in Asst. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)and, following it, on Indu Lata Rangwala v. Dy. CIT[2017] 384 ITR 337 (Del), taking stock of the judicial precedents. The Gd. fails. 10. In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on August 31, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax(Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (Manomohan Das) Accountant Member Cochin, Dated: August 31, 2023 Copy…

SULAIKHA CLAY MINES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 625/COCH/2022[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…of reopening of a regular assessment. Law in the matter is well-settled, for which the Revenue has relied on the decision in Asst. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)and, following it, on Indu Lata Rangwala v. Dy. CIT[2017] 384 ITR 337 (Del), taking stock of the judicial precedents. The Gd. fails. 10. In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on August 31, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax(Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (Manomohan Das) Accountant Member Cochin, Dated: August 31, 2023 Copy…

SULAIKHA CLAY MINES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 624/COCH/2022[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…of reopening of a regular assessment. Law in the matter is well-settled, for which the Revenue has relied on the decision in Asst. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)and, following it, on Indu Lata Rangwala v. Dy. CIT[2017] 384 ITR 337 (Del), taking stock of the judicial precedents. The Gd. fails. 10. In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on August 31, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax(Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (Manomohan Das) Accountant Member Cochin, Dated: August 31, 2023 Copy…

SULAIKHA CLAY MINES,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 623/COCH/2022[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Aug 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Muhammad Shafeeq A., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

…of reopening of a regular assessment. Law in the matter is well-settled, for which the Revenue has relied on the decision in Asst. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)and, following it, on Indu Lata Rangwala v. Dy. CIT[2017] 384 ITR 337 (Del), taking stock of the judicial precedents. The Gd. fails. 10. In the result, the appeals for all the years are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on August 31, 2023 under Rule 34 of The Income Tax(Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (Manomohan Das) Accountant Member Cochin, Dated: August 31, 2023 Copy…

GLEN PROPBUILD PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2752/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

…ip Ltd., 348 ITR 299 (SC) 8. Jindal Photo Films Ltd. Vs. DCIT, [1998] 234 ITR 170 (Del.) 9. Rose Serviced Apartments (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT, [2012] 348 ITR 452 (Del.) 10. Asian Paints Ltd. Vs. DCIT: [20091 308 ITR 195 (Bom) 11. Indu Lata Rangwala Vs. DCIT, [20161 384 ITR 337 (Del.) 12. CIT Vs. CIT Vs. Central Warehousing Corporation, [2015] 371 IT 81 (Del.) 13. CIT Vs. CIT Vs. Rubix Trading (P) Ltd., [2019] 108 taxmann.com 177 (SC) 14. New Delhi Television Ltd.Vs.Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, [2020] 424 ITR 607(SC) 15. M/s. Anand Developers Vs. ACIT & Anr., Writ Petition No. 17 of 2020 dated 18.02.2020. 16. S.S.…

HAZARI LAL KESARI CHAND,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-48(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 8561/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 148

…een made and it is noted by the assessing officer that assessee has understated his income, will be a case of’ escapement of income'. Here, I would like to draw strength from the order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indu Lata Ranqwala Vs DCIT 384 ITR 337 (Delhi) wherein the court held that where the initial return is processed u/s 143(1), there is no necessity of even fresh tangible material. The Court held as under: where initial return of income is processed under section 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for Assessing Officer to come across some fresh tangible material to form 'reaso…

KHANGARAM K DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

ITA 2807/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…on provided by a third party, same was justified. same was justified. 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 384 ITR 337 Del High 384 ITR 337 Del High Court- where initial return of income is where initial return of income is processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come across some fresh tangible…

KHANGARAM K. DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

ITA 2806/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…on provided by a third party, same was justified. same was justified. 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 384 ITR 337 Del High 384 ITR 337 Del High Court- where initial return of income is where initial return of income is processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come across some fresh tangible…

KHANGARAM K. DEWASI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

ITA 2805/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…on provided by a third party, same was justified. same was justified. 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 5. Indu Lata Rangwala vs DCIT 80 Taxmann.com 102 (Delhi)[2016] 384 ITR 337 Del High 384 ITR 337 Del High Court- where initial return of income is where initial return of income is processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come processed u/s 143(1), it is not necessary in such a case for AO to come across some fresh tangible…

J.D. SONS STEEL PVT. LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1061/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr.D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1060 & 1061/DEL/2015 Assessment Year 2007-08 & 2009-10 J.D. Sons Steel Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT, B-17, First Floor, Circle-II, Nehru Ground, NIT, Faridabad. Faridabad. TAN/PAN: AAACJ9814A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Rajesh Jain, CA Respondent by: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing: 05 07 2021 Date of pronouncement: 31 08 2021 O R D E R PER, AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against separate impugned ord…

SH. VALMIK THAPAR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 5767/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…of the act, the learned assessing officer should have a tangible material necessarily to reopen the case of the assessee. Identical issue has been dealt with the honourable Delhi High Court in Indu Lata Rangwala V DCIT [2017]80 taxmann.com 102(Delhi)/ [2016] 384 ITR 337 (Delhi)/ [2016] 286 CTR 474 (Delhi). The honourable High Court after considering all the judicial precedents available on the issue held as Under:- Page 21 of 53 “Legislative background of Section 143 20. At the outset it requires to be noticed that Section 143 of the Act has frequently undergone changes. Though the said provision has been amen…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. VALMIK THAPAR, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 6726/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…of the act, the learned assessing officer should have a tangible material necessarily to reopen the case of the assessee. Identical issue has been dealt with the honourable Delhi High Court in Indu Lata Rangwala V DCIT [2017]80 taxmann.com 102(Delhi)/ [2016] 384 ITR 337 (Delhi)/ [2016] 286 CTR 474 (Delhi). The honourable High Court after considering all the judicial precedents available on the issue held as Under:- Page 21 of 53 “Legislative background of Section 143 20. At the outset it requires to be noticed that Section 143 of the Act has frequently undergone changes. Though the said provision has been amen…

SHRI VALMIK THAPAR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 6346/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…of the act, the learned assessing officer should have a tangible material necessarily to reopen the case of the assessee. Identical issue has been dealt with the honourable Delhi High Court in Indu Lata Rangwala V DCIT [2017]80 taxmann.com 102(Delhi)/ [2016] 384 ITR 337 (Delhi)/ [2016] 286 CTR 474 (Delhi). The honourable High Court after considering all the judicial precedents available on the issue held as Under:- Page 21 of 53 “Legislative background of Section 143 20. At the outset it requires to be noticed that Section 143 of the Act has frequently undergone changes. Though the said provision has been amen…

Showing 1–20 of 123 · Page 1 of 7