J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

105 ITR 344High Court1976#7615 most cited

What is J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Addl. CIT authority for?

When an assessment comes before an Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC), their jurisdiction extends to the entire assessment, not just the issues raised by the assessee. The AAC can correct errors made by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) even on matters not appealed by the assessee.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Addl. CIT · 105 ITR 344 · Assessment Procedure · Appellate Assistant Commissioner · AAC jurisdiction · Income Tax Officer · ITO error correction · scope of appeal

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 195Section 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 40A(2)(b)

Issues it is cited on

section 5(2)(b)doctrine of mergersection 5(2)section 35dinterest free advancesmaximum marginal ratesection 40a(2)(b)section 40a(2)written down valuebusiness expediencysection 80hhcrejection of books of account

Judgments citing J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

The South Indian Bank, Thrissur vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1) & Tps, Thrissur

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 284/COCH/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2025AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri Sandeep Singh Karhailthe South Indian Bank Limited, Head Office, Mission Quarters, Tb Road, Thrissur Kerala - 680001 ............... Appellant Pan : Aabct0022F V/S Dcit, Circle – 1(1) & Tps ……………… Respondent Thrissur, Kerala

For Appellant: Shri Naresh C, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234BSection 234DSection 250

…part remains open for rectification by the Assessing Officer under section 154. On this there was some judicial controversy. See Karsandas Bhagwandas Patel's case [1975] 98 ITR 255 (Guj.), (which was dissented from in J. K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 (All.)), Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 407 (Cal.), Premchand Sitanath Roy v. Addl. CIT [1977] 109 ITR 751 (Cal.). But the conflict of judicial opinion is now resolved as the principle of partial merger is now given statutory effect by sub-section (1A) of section 154 introduced by the Direct Taxes (Amendment) Act, 1964. In the…

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham-Kutch vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham-Kutch

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/RJT/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

…jurisdiction over not only the subject matter of appeal but over the subject matter of assessment for which reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon. Supreme Court reported in 66 ITR 443 quoting the judgment of the Hon. Allahabad High reported in 105 ITR 344 that "the statute provides that, once an assessment comes before the AAC, his competence is not restricted to examining those aspects of the assessment which are complained of by the assessee; his competence ranges over the whole assessment and it is open to him to correct the ITO not only with regard to a matter raised by the assessee but also w…

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 236/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

…jurisdiction over not only the subject matter of appeal but over the subject matter of assessment for which reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon. Supreme Court reported in 66 ITR 443 quoting the judgment of the Hon. Allahabad High reported in 105 ITR 344 that "the statute provides that, once an assessment comes before the AAC, his competence is not restricted to examining those aspects of the assessment which are complained of by the assessee; his competence ranges over the whole assessment and it is open to him to correct the ITO not only with regard to a matter raised by the assessee but also w…

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 235/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

…jurisdiction over not only the subject matter of appeal but over the subject matter of assessment for which reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon. Supreme Court reported in 66 ITR 443 quoting the judgment of the Hon. Allahabad High reported in 105 ITR 344 that "the statute provides that, once an assessment comes before the AAC, his competence is not restricted to examining those aspects of the assessment which are complained of by the assessee; his competence ranges over the whole assessment and it is open to him to correct the ITO not only with regard to a matter raised by the assessee but also w…

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 234/RJT/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

…jurisdiction over not only the subject matter of appeal but over the subject matter of assessment for which reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon. Supreme Court reported in 66 ITR 443 quoting the judgment of the Hon. Allahabad High reported in 105 ITR 344 that "the statute provides that, once an assessment comes before the AAC, his competence is not restricted to examining those aspects of the assessment which are complained of by the assessee; his competence ranges over the whole assessment and it is open to him to correct the ITO not only with regard to a matter raised by the assessee but also w…

The Assistant Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S Kutch Salt & Allied Industries Ltd., Gandhidham

In the result, cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 233/RJT/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhait (Ss)A No.233& 234 & 235 & 236 /Rjt/2016 Assessment Year: (2009-10 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S. Kutch Salt & Allied Gandhidham Circle, Industries Ltd., Gandhidham - Kutch Maitri Bhavan, Plot No.-18, Sector-8, Gandhidham - Kutch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaact1769L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia,Ld.CIT (DR)
Section 36(1)(iii)

…jurisdiction over not only the subject matter of appeal but over the subject matter of assessment for which reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon. Supreme Court reported in 66 ITR 443 quoting the judgment of the Hon. Allahabad High reported in 105 ITR 344 that "the statute provides that, once an assessment comes before the AAC, his competence is not restricted to examining those aspects of the assessment which are complained of by the assessee; his competence ranges over the whole assessment and it is open to him to correct the ITO not only with regard to a matter raised by the assessee but also w…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 211/PAN/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…eld that, an appellate authority can deal with any matter covered by the order appealed against, irrespective of the fact whether any matter/issue is raised in appeal or not. The decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in ‘J.K. Synthetics Vs Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 and ‘Tel Utpadak Kendra Vs Dy. CST [1981] 48 STC 248 was pressed and reiterated that, when an appeal is filed against the order of assessment, the appellate authority is seized of the entire order and not only that part of it which is challenged before it. Therefore, since the original assessment order is replaced by the consequential order passe…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 210/PAN/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…eld that, an appellate authority can deal with any matter covered by the order appealed against, irrespective of the fact whether any matter/issue is raised in appeal or not. The decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in ‘J.K. Synthetics Vs Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 and ‘Tel Utpadak Kendra Vs Dy. CST [1981] 48 STC 248 was pressed and reiterated that, when an appeal is filed against the order of assessment, the appellate authority is seized of the entire order and not only that part of it which is challenged before it. Therefore, since the original assessment order is replaced by the consequential order passe…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (1), Panaji vs. M/S V. M. Salgaocar & Brothers (P) Ltd., Vasco

Appeals of the Revenue are DISMISSED

ITA 209/PAN/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Oct 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos. 209 To 211/Pan/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2005-06 To 2007-08 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Ketan Ved [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr N. Shrikanth [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 80H

…eld that, an appellate authority can deal with any matter covered by the order appealed against, irrespective of the fact whether any matter/issue is raised in appeal or not. The decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in ‘J.K. Synthetics Vs Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 and ‘Tel Utpadak Kendra Vs Dy. CST [1981] 48 STC 248 was pressed and reiterated that, when an appeal is filed against the order of assessment, the appellate authority is seized of the entire order and not only that part of it which is challenged before it. Therefore, since the original assessment order is replaced by the consequential order passe…

M/S Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Pr. CIT-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 274/JPR/2021[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur14 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.274/JPR/2021 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years :2014-15 M/s Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd. 3, Amrapali Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. cuke Vs. Pr.CIT-2, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ 0763 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Manish Agarwal(C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. Ajey Malik (CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 15/02/2

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

…. Hence, the entire order of assessment should be deemed to merge in the appellate order subject only to any other enabling statutory provision, as in the Explanation below section 251 of the Income-tax Act mentioned above. J.K. Synthetics v. Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344, (Alld) upholds this view. The ratio of the decision in Tel Utpadak Kendra's case [Tel Utpadak Kendra v. Dy. CST [1981] 48 STC 248.] is also that when an appeal is filed, the appellate authority is seized of the entire order and not only that part of it which is challenged before it. 20 M/S Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd. 231 ITR 50 CIT vs. Shri Arbud…

Smt. Nirmala Goyal, Ajmer vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 920/JPR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Apr 2019AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Nikhalesh Kataria (CA)For Respondent: Shri A. K. Mahala (JCIT)
Section 154Section 154(2)Section 154(7)Section 155Section 54F

…r that could be rectified was the order of the Tribunal and the Income- tax Officer had no jurisdiction to rectify his own order, which had ultimately merged in the order of the Tribunal. In J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [1976] 105 ITR 344 , the Allahabad High Court also held that where the assessment order was appealed against then that order was merged in the appellate order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the only operative decision in law, which is effective and can be enforced, is the decision of the appellate authority. In Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd. v. Additiona…

Sri Govind Lal Rathi, Kolkata vs. Pr. CIT-15, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 525/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 525/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sri Govind Lal Rathi -Vs.- Pr. C.I.T., Kol-15, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Adipr 0507 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Sunil Surana, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri R.S.Biswas, Cit Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.S.Biswas, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(14)Section 263

…nlal (1929) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 407 (Cal) and the decision in the case of Premchand Sitanath Roy v. Addl. CIT [1977] 109 ITR 751 (Cal). The Allahabad High Court reiterated the same principle in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 (All). Therefore, it appears to us that as the quantum of depreciation was the subject-matter of appeal the Commissioner had no jurisdiction, in the facts and circumstances of this case, to issue the notice under section 263 and to pass any order on this aspect of the matter. Question No. 1 therefore, in our opinion, must be answered in the negat…

M/S Ab (Wines) Stores, Kolkata vs. PCIT, Kolkata-14, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 901/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.901/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Ab (Wines) Stores -Vs.- Pr. C.I.T., Kolkata-14 Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aajfa 6312 L] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate For The Respondent : Shri R.S.Biswas, Cit Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2017 Order

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.S.Biswas, CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

…nlal (1929) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 407 (Cal) and the decision in the case of Premchand Sitanath Roy v. Addl. CIT [1977] 109 ITR 751 (Cal). The Allahabad High Court reiterated the same principle in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1976] 105 ITR 344 (All). Therefore, it appears to us that as the quantum of depreciation was the subject-matter of appeal the Commissioner had no jurisdiction, in the facts and circumstances of this case, to issue the notice under section 263 and to pass any order on this aspect of the matter. Question No. 1 therefore, in our opinion, must be answered in the negat…

Nhpc Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 433/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu, Judicialmember & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 115JSection 154Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: „E‟: NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIALMEMBER AND SH. PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 433, 434 & 435/Del/2013 Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06 &2006-07 M/s. NHPC Ltd., Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, NHPC Complex, Circle-II, Faridabad Sector-33, Faridabad (PAN: AAACN0149C) (Appellant) (Respondent) And ITA Nos. 422 & 423/Del/2013 Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. M/s. NHPC Ltd., Circle-II, Block –B, New CGO Complex, NHPC Complex, Faridabad Sector-33, Faridabad (PAN: AAACN0149C) (Appellant) (Re…

J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (105 ITR 344) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax