ITO v. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. As

302 CTR 74Supreme Court of India2018#7390 most cited

What is ITO v. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. As authority for?

Reassessment cannot be initiated unless new or additional material comes on record which leads to the belief of escapement of income, and it is not a case of mere change of opinion.

15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ITO v. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. · section 147 · section 148 · section 143(3) · change of opinion · reopening of assessment · new material · escapement of income

Issues it is cited on

kelvinatorchange of opinionreopening of assessmentsection 147section 148section 14indiacompanysection 143(3)document

Judgments citing ITO v. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. As

Bses Yamuna Power Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-5(1), New Del;Hi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4853/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

…[2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) ACIT v. ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd: [2012] 348 ITR 299 (SC) CIT v. Kelvinator of India: [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) [affirming CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.: [2002] 256 ITR 1 (Del) (FB)] ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd. [2018] 302 CTR 74 (SC) CIT v. Usha International Limited: [2012] 348 ITR 485 (Del) (FB) 43. In the following cases it has been held that reassessment cannot be initiated unless some new/ additional fact/material/ information comes on record leading to the belief of escapement of income: BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors vs. ACIT KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. ADIT: [20…

Bses Yamuna Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4852/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

…[2003] 264 ITR 566 (SC) ACIT v. ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd: [2012] 348 ITR 299 (SC) CIT v. Kelvinator of India: [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) [affirming CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.: [2002] 256 ITR 1 (Del) (FB)] ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd. [2018] 302 CTR 74 (SC) CIT v. Usha International Limited: [2012] 348 ITR 485 (Del) (FB) 43. In the following cases it has been held that reassessment cannot be initiated unless some new/ additional fact/material/ information comes on record leading to the belief of escapement of income: BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors vs. ACIT KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. ADIT: [20…

Bharti Telemedia Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 9622/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Vinay Meena, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR
Section 147

…Assessing Officer/ CIT(A) have erred both on facts and in law in disregarding the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) and in ITO vs Techspan India Private Ltd. & Anr. (2018) 404 ITR 101 302 CTR 74 (SC). 4) That the Assessing Officer/ CIT(A) have erred both on facts and in law in not appreciating that a detailed factual and legal submission was submitted by the Appellant before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings on January 31, 2014 wherein the Appellant had made full disclosure. 5) That the Assessing Officer…

ITO Wa, Tiruchengode vs. C.Gopalan, Namakkal

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 941/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, CITFor Respondent: Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate for Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,‘बी’ "यायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 941/CHNY/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Income Tax Officer, Shri C. Gopalan, Ward-2, Vs. M.K. Palayam, Tiruchengode. Vadugapalayam PO, Mallasamudram, Tiruchengode Taluk, Namakkal District – 637 503. PAN: AFQPG 0559M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, CIT ""यथ" क" ओर से/Re…

DCIT Khandwa, Khandwa vs. M/S Rajrajeshwar Cotton Corporation, Sendhwa

In the result, Revenue’s appeal as well as Assessee’s Cross-

ITA 573/IND/2019[2011`-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) & C.O. No. 9/Ind/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit M/S Raj Rajeshwar Cotton Khandwa Corporation, बनाम/ Warla Road, Sendhwa, Vs. District - Khandwa (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aagfr 6243 N Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21.10.2022

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

…n upon the AO to reopen the proceedings without anything further, the same would amount to giving premium to an authority exercising quasi- judicial function to take benefit of its own wrong. 4.12 In the case of ITO vs Techspan India (P) Ltd (2018) 404 ITR 10/302 CTR 74 (SC), it was held that Deduction was allowed in the original assessment, on the same facts to hold that the excess deduction was allowed will be change of opinion therefore reassessment was held to be bad in law. 4.13 No new material brought on records - reassessment on change of opinion of officer not valid. Page 8 of 17 M/s Raj Rajeshwar Cotto…

ITO Ward 3(2), Trichy vs. Ramanathan Vasantha Priya, Trichy

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1979/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Mr. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 41

…inquiry has been made earlier and in absence of any new information which clearly amounts to a change of opinion. In view of the submissions made by the assessee and in view of the decisions reported in the case of a) ITO v. Tech Span India Private Limited 302 CTR 74 (SC) b) CIT, Salem v. P. Nithilan 403 ITR 154 (Madras) c) PCIT-VI, Chennai v. Santech Solutions P. Ltd. 97 taxmann.com 179 (Madras) and d) ACIT v. Lambda Therapeutic Research Limited 100 taxmann.com 81 (SC) Ld. CIT(A) held that the re-assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) rws 147 of the Act are bad in law and accordingly annulled the assessment.…

DCIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 262/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G.Manjunathadcit-2(2)(1) Vs. M/S Larsen & Toubro Room No.545, 5Th Floor Limited Aaykar Bhawan L& T House, N.M.Marg M.K.Road Ballard Estate Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaacl0140P Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…sment. Therefore, this is a classic case of change of opinion, and hence, the ld.CIT(A) was right in quashing reassessment proceedings. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs TechSpan India (P.) Ltd.(2018) 302 CTR 74 (SC) and also the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of 7 Larsen & Toubro Limited SBI vs ACIT (2019) 103 taxmann.com 164 (Bom.). The Ld. AR had also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Pr.CIT vs M/s. L&T in ITA No. 135 of 2016. 8. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 3327/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…GIL were held to be at arm’s length in the successive transfer pricing assessments concluded by the TPO, both, in the case of LGIL as well as the Appellant. P. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Techspan India (P.) Ltd. : [2018] 302 CTR 74 (SC)(supra) relied upon by the Department relates to the validity of reassessment proceedings. While dismissing the appeal of the Revenue, the Supreme Court observed as under: “12. Before interfering with the proposed re-opening of the assessment on the ground that the same is based only on a change in opinion, the court ought to verify whether th…

M/S. Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT (International Taxation), Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 1946/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…GIL were held to be at arm’s length in the successive transfer pricing assessments concluded by the TPO, both, in the case of LGIL as well as the Appellant. P. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Techspan India (P.) Ltd. : [2018] 302 CTR 74 (SC)(supra) relied upon by the Department relates to the validity of reassessment proceedings. While dismissing the appeal of the Revenue, the Supreme Court observed as under: “12. Before interfering with the proposed re-opening of the assessment on the ground that the same is based only on a change in opinion, the court ought to verify whether th…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- Noida, International Taxation, Noida

In the result all the 9 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed with above direction for statistical purposes

ITA 6916/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri G. K. Dhall, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…GIL were held to be at arm’s length in the successive transfer pricing assessments concluded by the TPO, both, in the case of LGIL as well as the Appellant. P. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Techspan India (P.) Ltd. : [2018] 302 CTR 74 (SC)(supra) relied upon by the Department relates to the validity of reassessment proceedings. While dismissing the appeal of the Revenue, the Supreme Court observed as under: “12. Before interfering with the proposed re-opening of the assessment on the ground that the same is based only on a change in opinion, the court ought to verify whether th…

Epsilon Advisors P. Ltd., Bangalore vs. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1608/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

…rticular, our attention was drawn to Para 5.4.2 of this tribunal order. He also placed reliance on a judgment of Hon’ble apex court rendered in the ITA Nos.1569, 1600, 1607 & 1608/Bang/2014 Page 4 of 26 case of ITO vs. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. As reported in 302 CTR 74. In particular, our attention was drawn to Paras 7 to 12 of this judgment. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce Para 3 of the assessment order because the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening are reproduced by the AO in this Para. “3. A detailed reference dated 1-02-2012, had been received from the O/o. JCIT(…

Epsilon Advisors P. Ltd., Bangalore vs. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1607/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

…rticular, our attention was drawn to Para 5.4.2 of this tribunal order. He also placed reliance on a judgment of Hon’ble apex court rendered in the ITA Nos.1569, 1600, 1607 & 1608/Bang/2014 Page 4 of 26 case of ITO vs. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. As reported in 302 CTR 74. In particular, our attention was drawn to Paras 7 to 12 of this judgment. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce Para 3 of the assessment order because the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening are reproduced by the AO in this Para. “3. A detailed reference dated 1-02-2012, had been received from the O/o. JCIT(…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Epsilon Advisors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1600/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

…rticular, our attention was drawn to Para 5.4.2 of this tribunal order. He also placed reliance on a judgment of Hon’ble apex court rendered in the ITA Nos.1569, 1600, 1607 & 1608/Bang/2014 Page 4 of 26 case of ITO vs. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. As reported in 302 CTR 74. In particular, our attention was drawn to Paras 7 to 12 of this judgment. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce Para 3 of the assessment order because the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening are reproduced by the AO in this Para. “3. A detailed reference dated 1-02-2012, had been received from the O/o. JCIT(…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Epsilon Advisors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1569/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

…rticular, our attention was drawn to Para 5.4.2 of this tribunal order. He also placed reliance on a judgment of Hon’ble apex court rendered in the ITA Nos.1569, 1600, 1607 & 1608/Bang/2014 Page 4 of 26 case of ITO vs. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. As reported in 302 CTR 74. In particular, our attention was drawn to Paras 7 to 12 of this judgment. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. First of all, we reproduce Para 3 of the assessment order because the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening are reproduced by the AO in this Para. “3. A detailed reference dated 1-02-2012, had been received from the O/o. JCIT(…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. K.C.P.Limited

ITTA/433/2011HC Telangana13 Mar 2012
ITO v. TechSpan India Pvt. Ltd. As (302 CTR 74) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax