How many judgments cite ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd.?

78 judgments on BharatTax cite ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd. (20 Taxmann.com 587), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 263, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 10(37), Section 145A(b).

ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd.

20 Taxmann.com 587High Court2012#1463 most cited

What is ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd. authority for?

Under Section 263, the PCIT/CIT cannot set aside an assessment order for mere 'insufficiency of enquiry' or by remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. The PCIT/CIT must conduct necessary inquiries and themselves establish how the order is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue before passing a revision order.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd. · Section 263 revision · PCIT powers · CIT power to revise · erroneous and prejudicial assessment · insufficiency of enquiry · remand to AO · fishing and roving enquiry · revision without finding · Malabar Industrial · 345 ITR 153

Also reported as

212 Taxmann 132345 ITR 153

Sections most often in play

Section 263 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 10(37)Section 145A(b)Section 151 Section 56(2)(viii)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 141 section 282a(1)section 194la inadequate enquiry section 145a(b)section 145b lack of enquiry section 45(5)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)section 263(1)malabar industrial

Judgments citing ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd.

M/S Kamlesh Trade & Agency Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 100/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Kamlesh Trade & Income Tax Officer, Ward- Agency Pvt. Ltd., 8, B.R.B 4(4), Kolkata. Vs Basu Road, 2Nd Floor, . Room No. 204, Kolkata- 700 001. (Pan: Aabck3338H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. K. Sonawal, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA आयकर अपीलीय अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Kamlesh Trade & Income Tax Officer, Ward- Agency Pvt. Ltd., 8, B.R.B 4(4), Kolkata. Vs Basu Road, 2nd floor, . Room No. 204, Kolkata- 700 001. (PAN: AABCK3338H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Amit Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri D. K. Sonawal, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 22.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 31.10.2022 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This a…

M/S Sudhir Forgings (P) Ltd., Ludhiana vs. Pr. CIT-3, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 505/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 505/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2013-14

For Appellant: None (Adj. Application)For Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 263Section 68

…filing information in respect of share premium but apparently no meaningful inquiry had been carried out by the AO on such information filed by the assessee. 5.8 The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has emphasized in the case of ITO Vs. DG Housing Projects Ltd. [345 ITR 153 (Del)] that where there is complete lack of inquiry on the part of the AO, the assessment order would be erroneous. We also find that in terms of Explanation 2 below section 263 of the ITA No. 505-Chd-2018 (A.Y. 2013-14) - M/s Sudhir Forgings (P) Ltd., Ludhiana 18 Act, which has been made effective from assessment year 2015-16 w.e.f. 01.04.201…

Radheyshyam Gupta, Kolkata vs. PCIT-9, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 187/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: : Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं"या/ I.T.A. No. 187/कोल/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Radheyshyam Gupta...…………............... (अपीलाथ"/Appellant [Pan: Adjpg 3274 G] Vs. Pcit-9, Kolkata........................................(""यथ")/Respondent Appearances By: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv. & Smt. Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Md. Ghayas Uddin, Cit, (D/R), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of The Hearing : July 19Th, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : Sept 09Th, 2022 Order Per Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2017-18 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax-9, Kolkata [In Short

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘A, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA सम" : "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"य" "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य Before : SRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT & SRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं"या/ I.T.A. No. 187/कोल/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Radheyshyam Gupta...…………............... (अपीलाथ"/Appellant [PAN: ADJPG 3274 G] Vs. PCIT-9, Kolkata........................................(""यथ")/Respondent Appearances by: Sh. S.K. Tulsiyan, Adv. & Smt. Puja Somani, CA, appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Md. Ghayas Uddin, CIT, (D/R), appeared on b…

Mayur Khara, Yavatmal vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Nagpur

In the result, Both the appeals of above mentioned assessee’s are allowed

ITA 64/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mayur Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8869 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Amit Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8868 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Above Mentioned Assessees Against Two Different Orders Passed U/S 263 Of The Act By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Nagpur- 2 Dated 17-02-2017 & 16-02-20217 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Respectively. The Grounds Of Raised By The Above Mentioned Assessees Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mayur Khara Vs. The PCIT Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) PAN No.:ABWPK 8869 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Amit Khara Vs. The PCIT Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) PAN No.:ABWPK 8868 P Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri Mahavir Atal, CA Revenue by :Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. Both these appeals have been filed by t…

Infinity Infotech Parks Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 32/KOL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32Section 43(6)Section 50Section 72

…1 Infinity Infotech Parks Ltd. AY 2017-18 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM ] I.T.A. No. 32/Kol/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 Infinity Infotech Parks Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax- (PAN: AABCI0692J) 1, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 02.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement 18.04.2022 For the Appellant Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA For the Respondent Md. Atahar H. Choudhury, CIT ORDER Per Shri A. T. Varkey, JM: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Pr. CIT, Kolkata-1 dated 15.12.2021…

Varun Khandelwal, New Delhi vs. Prcit-24, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7891/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, C. AFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, [CIT] – D. R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…undertook any enquiry to bring any material to discredit the assessee’s explanation. In support he relied upon the following decisions:- (a) CIT Vs. Delhi Metro Express Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 705/2017 (Del.) - (Para 10); (b) ITO Vs, D.G. Housing Projects Ltd., 20 Taxmann.com 587 (Del.) (Para 16 & 17) (c) Globus Infocom Ltd. Vs. CIT 50 Taxmann.com 100 (Del.) - (Para 17) (d) CIT Vs. Nagesh Knitwears Pvt. Ltd., 22 Taxmann.com 309 (Del.) (Para 36). 10. Another important contention raised by the Ld. Counsel is that, in the entire order of the ld. Pr. CIT there is no whisper about holding that assessment order is err…

Smt. Mamta Sharma, Bargarh vs. Principal CIT (Central), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 33/CTK/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shrichandra Mohan Garg & Manish Boradassessment Year :2012-13 Smt. Mamta Sharma, Ward Vs. Pr. Cit(Central), Visakhapatnam No.10, Near Govt. Bus Stand, Dist: Baragarh Pan/Gir No.Agvps 4382 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 21/10/ 2021 Date Of Pronouncement :10/12/2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (DR)

Section 132Section 153CSection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRICHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2012-13 Smt. Mamta Sharma, Ward Vs. Pr. CIT(Central), Visakhapatnam No.10, Near Govt. Bus Stand, Dist: Baragarh PAN/GIR No.agvps 4382 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, AR Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 21/10/ 2021 Date of Pronouncement :10/12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order u/s 263 of the Act of the Pr. CIT(A), Visakhapatnam dated 11.3.2019 for the…

Kapil Mehta, Delhi vs. PCIT(Central)-3, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 533/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: FixedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: The Assessing Officer

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)

…order if all the facts stated therein are assumed to be correct.” 5.8 In the case of CIT vs. Nagesh Knitwears Hon’ble Delhi High Court after considering the ratio of its earlier decisions including its decision in the case of ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd. 345 ITR 153 held as under: “36. As far as Section 263 is concerned, we have examined the said Section in depth and detail in ITO Vs. D G Housing Projects Ltd. decided on 1st March, 2012, in ITA No. 179/2011 and observed as under:- “10. Revenue does not have any right to appeal to the first appellate authority against an order passed by the Assessing Office…

M/S. Jns Instruments Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1479/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiasstt. Year : 2011-12 Jns Instruments Ltd. Vs. Pr. Cit Gi-48, G.T. Karnal Road Central -2, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Pan Aaacj7034Q New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT (DR)

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 263Section 92C

…the facts stated therein are assumed to be correct. 5.4 In the case of CIT vs. Nagesh Knitwears (ITA 591/2008) Hon’ble Delhi High Court after considering the ratio of its earlier decisions including its decision in the case of ITO vs DG Housing Projects Ltd. 345 ITR 153 held as under: “36. As far as Section 263 is concerned, we have examined the said Section in depth and detail in ITO Vs. D G Housing Projects Ltd. decided on 1st March, 2012, in ITA No. 179/2011 and observed as under:- “10. Revenue does not have any right to appeal to the first appellate authority against an order passed by the Assessing Officer.…

M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd, Bhopal vs. Pr CIT-1, Bhopal

ITA 158/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 41(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. Bhopal PAN:AACCM0327M : Appellant V/s Pr. CIT -1, Bhopal : Respondent Appellant by S/Shri Girish Agrawal, Ajay K. Chhajed & Ms. Nisha Lahoti, ARs Revenue by Shri Rajeeb Jain, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 18.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement 08.10.2021 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M The above captioned appeal filed at the instance of the As…

Shanti Lal Deora, Sumerpur vs. ACIT, Circle, Pali

Appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 22/JODH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year:2016-17 Shri Shanti Laldeora, Vs. A.C.I.T., Hotel Inder Palace, Bhagat Circle- Pali Singh Circle, Sumerpur, Dist.- Pali-306902 (Raj.) Pan No. Adhpd 4172 A Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Adv. & Shrimohitsoni, Adv. Revenue By Smt. Sanchita Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 11/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement 08/09/2021

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54F

…on the material placed on record. The issue regarding whether the assessment order is erroneous or prejudicial on the ground of insufficiency of enquiry has been dealt by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the judgement of ITO Vs. DG Housing Projects Ltd. (2012) 20 Taxmann.com 587, which has been followed by this Tribunal in various cases. Hon’ble High Court while adverting to the issue held that in cases of wrong opinion for finding on merit, the CIT has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that order is erroneous, by conducting necessary enquiry, if required and necessary before the order u/s 263 of the Ac…

M/S Surjeet Auto Agency, Bhopal vs. Pr CIT-2, Bhopal

ITA 189/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Mis Madhumita Royassessment Year:2015-16 M/S Surjeet Auto Agency, Pr. Cit-2, 4-5, Lajpat Nagar, Raisen Bhopal बनाम/ Road, Apsara Cinema, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. Aatfs 4110J Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Piush Parasar Advs. Revenue By Shri S.B. Prasad, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.04.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.05.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: By Way Of This Appeal, The Appellant Has Challenged The Assumption Of Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act 1961( Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’ For Short) By Ld. Pr. Cit-2 Bhopal Vide Order Dated 04.02.2020.The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MIS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year:2015-16 M/s Surjeet Auto Agency, Pr. CIT-2, 4-5, Lajpat Nagar, Raisen Bhopal बनाम/ Road, Apsara Cinema, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. AATFS 4110J Appellant by S/Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. & Gagan Tiwari, Piush Parasar Advs. Revenue by Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 13.04.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 25.05.2021 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: By way of this appeal, the appellant has chall…

Kailashchandra Khandelwal, Sendhwa vs. Pr. CIT -2, Indore

ITA 562/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble’ Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Shri Kailash Khandelwal Pr. Cit-2, Prop. M/S. Vikash Krishi Indore बनाम/ Seva Kendra, Bus Stand, Vs. Sendhwa, Barwani (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. Acmpk2991E Appellant By Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Vijay Bansal, Nisha Lahoti, Ars Revenue By Shri S.B. Prasad, Cit-Dr

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 44A

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE MANISH BORAD,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON'BLE’ MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Kailash Khandelwal Pr. CIT-2, Prop. M/s. Vikash Krishi Indore बनाम/ Seva Kendra, Bus Stand, Vs. Sendhwa, Barwani (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. ACMPK2991E Appellant by Shri Girish Agrawal & Shri Vijay Bansal, Nisha Lahoti, ARs Revenue by Shri S.B. Prasad, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 8.04.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 30.04.2021 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: By way of this appeal, the appell…