Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT

191 ITR 634Supreme Court of India1991#818 most cited

What is Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT authority for?

Assessment is an integrated process that includes both the determination of the assessee's total income or loss and the calculation of the tax payable, as required by Section 143(3). This process culminates with the issuance of a notice of demand under Section 156.

126

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT · Section 143(3) · Section 156 · assessment procedure · definition of assessment · determination of income · determination of tax payable · completion of assessment · notice of demand · integrated assessment process

Also reported as

60 Taxmann.com 334

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 144Section 153ASection 115BBESection 292CSection 132Section 153D

Issues it is cited on

section 158bdincome tax settlement commissionsection 144asection 269ssspecified authorityblock periodsection 292csection 158bsection 156section 158section 292section 153a(1)

Judgments citing Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Fortune Industrial Resources Ltd., Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 119/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…3(3) of the Act being mechanical in nature and granted without due application of mind, makes the assessment invalid and the same should be quashed. For the above proposition, the ld. Counsel also relied on the following decisions: i) Kalyankumar Ray vs. CIT, 191 ITR 634 (SC); ii) Sahara India F(rim) vs. CIT, 300 ITR 403 (SC); iii) Bentrly Nevadia LLC vs. ITO, WP(C) 774/2019 (Del); iv) PCIT vs. Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd., 252 Taxman 407 (Guj); v) CIT vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi, 144 ITR 954 (All); vi) M/s M3M India Holdings vs. DCIT, 71 ITR (Trib) 451 (Del); CO Nos.73 to 76, 86 & 87, 79 to 82, 88, 90, 71, 72 & 70, 84…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Moon Beverages Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 115/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…3(3) of the Act being mechanical in nature and granted without due application of mind, makes the assessment invalid and the same should be quashed. For the above proposition, the ld. Counsel also relied on the following decisions: i) Kalyankumar Ray vs. CIT, 191 ITR 634 (SC); ii) Sahara India F(rim) vs. CIT, 300 ITR 403 (SC); iii) Bentrly Nevadia LLC vs. ITO, WP(C) 774/2019 (Del); iv) PCIT vs. Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd., 252 Taxman 407 (Guj); v) CIT vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi, 144 ITR 954 (All); vi) M/s M3M India Holdings vs. DCIT, 71 ITR (Trib) 451 (Del); CO Nos.73 to 76, 86 & 87, 79 to 82, 88, 90, 71, 72 & 70, 84…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Hal Offshore Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 111/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…3(3) of the Act being mechanical in nature and granted without due application of mind, makes the assessment invalid and the same should be quashed. For the above proposition, the ld. Counsel also relied on the following decisions: i) Kalyankumar Ray vs. CIT, 191 ITR 634 (SC); ii) Sahara India F(rim) vs. CIT, 300 ITR 403 (SC); iii) Bentrly Nevadia LLC vs. ITO, WP(C) 774/2019 (Del); iv) PCIT vs. Sunrise Finlease (P) Ltd., 252 Taxman 407 (Guj); v) CIT vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi, 144 ITR 954 (All); vi) M/s M3M India Holdings vs. DCIT, 71 ITR (Trib) 451 (Del); CO Nos.73 to 76, 86 & 87, 79 to 82, 88, 90, 71, 72 & 70, 84…

Mavenir India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Comverse Network System India Pvt. Ltd.), Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1), Gurgoan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 203/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 12Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156

…the assessment order has been answered by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Purshottam Das T Patel 209 ITR 52 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kalyan Kumar Ray Vs. CIT 191 ITR 634. The relevant findings of Hon'ble High Court read as under: "'Assessment’ is one integrated process involving not only the assessment of the total income but also the determination of the tax. The latter is as crucial as the former. The Income tax Officer has to determine, by an order in writing, not only the total income but also the net sum w…

M/S Nam Estates Pvt. Ltd vs. The Income Tax Officer

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/32/2013HC Karnataka07 Sept 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 260Section 260ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

…O’, (2003) 260 ITR 470 (KER.), ‘CIT VS. SMT.SHELLY PASSI IN ITA 179/2012 DATED 06.10.2012 (P& H), ‘CIT VS. R.S.SURIYA’, (2015) 232 TAXMAN 126 (MAD), ‘CIT VS. ARTHUR ANDERSEN & CO.’, (2009) 318 ITR 7 229 (BOM), ‘KALYANKUMAR RAY VS. CIT’, (1991) 191 ITR 634 (SC), ‘CIT VS. KHEMCHAND RAMDAS’, (1938) 6 ITR 414 (PRIVY COUNCIL). 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue has submitted that Section 40A(3) provides for disallowance of cash expenditure incurred in excess of Rs.20,000/- and that the aforesaid provision cannot be made applicable only if the case of the assessee falls with…

Olympus Medical Systems India Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1), Gurugram

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8892/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Ys 2015-16]

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153BSection 156Section 274

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘I-2’ BENCH, NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Ys 2015-16] Olympus Medical Systems India Vs. DCIT, Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 3(1), Ground Floor, Tower-C, SAS Gurugram Tower, The Medicity Complex, Sector- 38, Gurgaon – 122 001 PAN No. AABCO 2131 L [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 24.08.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2020 Assessee by : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Adv. Ms. Deepika Aggarwal, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-D.R ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTAN…

Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon

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

ITA 9116/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 153B

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘I-2’ BENCH, NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Perfetti Van Melle (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T Global Business Park, Tower A Circle 3(1) First Floor, Mehrauli Gurgaon Road Gurgaon Gurgaon, Haryana PAN: AAACP 2626 A [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 04.08.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 11.08.2020 Assessee by : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Adv Ms. Deepika Aggarwal, Adv Revenue by : Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, A…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - Agartala, Agartala vs. Shri Subhajit Paul, Agartala

In the result, cross-objection nos

ITA 116/GTY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.116/Gau/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rockein Saikia, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Modi, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153D

…be served on the assessee in the prescribed form and would be accompanied by an assessment as held in the case of CIT Vs. Kailasho Devi Burman (1978) 115 ITR 732 (Cal.,) SivalingamChettiar (VS) Vs. CIT (1966) 62 ITR 678 (Mad.), Kalyankumar Ray Vs. CIT (1991) 191 ITR 634 (SC), Arrah Sasaram Light Railway Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1993) 204 ITR 807 (Cal), Shahdara (Delhi) Saharanpur Light Railway Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1994) 208 ITR 882 (Cal), etc. The limitation period prescribed in section 153 is the period within which the AO has to complete one stage of the proceedings, that is, the assessment of the income and the determi…

Venkatesh K I, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1168/BANG/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri G. Manjunathaita No.1168 (Bang)/2018 (Assessment Year: 2001-02) Shri Venkatesh, K.I. No.323, 14Th Cross, 2Nd Block, R.T.Nagar, Bangalore-560 032 Panno.Aacpi3934R Appellant Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-6(3)(1), Bangalore Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R. Chandrashekar AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 68Section 69

…Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the order of assessment in part, though the order of assessment is opposed to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Kalyan Kumar Ray V/s. Commissioner of Income tax, reported in 191 ITR 634. ITA No.1168(Bang/2018 2 2. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.500,000/-, the demand draft purchased by the M/s. Sangameshwara Enterprises, Gulbarga in the name of Excise Commissioner, on the ground that, no PAN number is quoted in the confirmation letter, though copy of the assessment order of…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -6 vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd

ITA/995/2019HC Delhi02 Mar 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

…y:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:02.09.2024 17:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Page 14 of 74 was also issued on 18.09.2021.  On the basis of Supreme Court decision in Kalyan Kumar Ray v. CIT [1991] 191 ITR 634 (SC), the process of assessment has culminated 5 Contata Solutions Private Limited v. NFAC W.P.(C) 11949/2021 2010-11  12.10.2010- Petitioner Company filed its original ITR.  29.08.2011- The case was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS.  24.01.2014- On reference of the Assessing Officer, TPO passed an order u/s…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -6 vs. Microsoft India ( R & D) Pvt. Ltd

ITA/993/2019HC Delhi02 Mar 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

…y:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:02.09.2024 17:04:21 Signature Not Verified ITA 52/2023 & other connected matters Page 14 of 74 was also issued on 18.09.2021.  On the basis of Supreme Court decision in Kalyan Kumar Ray v. CIT [1991] 191 ITR 634 (SC), the process of assessment has culminated 5 Contata Solutions Private Limited v. NFAC W.P.(C) 11949/2021 2010-11  12.10.2010- Petitioner Company filed its original ITR.  29.08.2011- The case was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS.  24.01.2014- On reference of the Assessing Officer, TPO passed an order u/s…

Vanderlande Industries B.V. Pune, Pune vs. ADIT, International Taxation-II, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 559/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: S/Shri Aliasger RampurawalaFor Respondent: Smt. Usha Gaikwad
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 274

…e AO passed final assessment order on 27-02-2012 for which the Tribunal held the final assessment order lacked validity and quashed the same. The Tribunal by placing reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Kalyan Kumar Ray reported in 191 ITR 634 (SC) which held that assessment order involves determination of income and tax as well and the assessment is an integrated process involving not only the assessment of the total income but also the determination of the tax. Further, the 4 ITA No. 559/Hyd/2017, A.Y. 2011-12 Tribunal placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble High Court of Madras…

Reuters Transaction Services Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (Internatioal Taxation) - 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5121/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri V. Sreekar
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 292B

…to the assessee was not signed by the Assessing Officer. He submitted, an assessment order not signed or stamped by the Assessing Officer is not a valid order. For such proposition, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) Kalyan Kumar Rai v/s CIT, [2991] 191 ITR 634 (SC); and ii) Vijay Corporation v/s ITO, [2012] 18 taxmann.com 88 (Mum.). 5. Shri V. Sreekar, the learned Departmental Representative submitted, assessee’s objection regarding validity of the assessment order is unsustainable. He submitted, there is no dispute that the final assessment order against which the assessee has preferred the present a…

Dr. Harprit Singh, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 195/ASR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.संसंसंसं././././I.T.A No.195/Asr/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/A.Y.:2011-12 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" Dr. Harprit Singh, C/O M/S. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Orthonova Hospital, Near Nari Income-Tax, Niketan, Nakoddar Road, Central Circle –Ii, Jalandhar Jalandhar(Pb) (Pb) Pan: Acmps 7237 F अपीलाथ"Appellant अपीलाथ" ""यथ"/Respondent ""यथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" ""यथ" ""यथ"

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

…itted, the CIT (A) was not justified in sustaining the addition, when the AO was not certain under which head the addition should be made. Therefore, same may be quashed. 7. Per contra, learned CIT(D.R.) submitted decision in Kalayan Kumar Ray v. CIT [1991] 191 ITR 634 (SC) was given in the context of quantification of tax and interest thereon. In said case, the AO had not quantified interest chargeable to tax and made part of assessment Dr. Harprit Singh v. DCIT-CC-II, Jalandhar/I.T.A. No.195/ASR/2018/A.Y.:11-12 Page 8 of 11 order. Therefore, the Hon`ble Supreme Court held that has advised Department to inc…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Pune

In the result, the Cross objections are partly allowed in so far

ITA 1726/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2013 & 1726/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 Pan : Aaaca4074D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.649/PUN/2013 & 1726/PUN/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 DCIT, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 PAN : AAACA4074D (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos.34 & 35/PUN/2019 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 649/PUN/2013 & 1726/PUN/2014) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Atlas Copco (India) DCIT, Circle-8, Limited, Vs. Pune Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 PAN : AAACA4…

Dy. CIT, Circle-8, Pune vs. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Pune

In the result, the Cross objections are partly allowed in so far

ITA 649/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2013 & 1726/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 Pan : Aaaca4074D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “C”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.649/PUN/2013 & 1726/PUN/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 DCIT, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 PAN : AAACA4074D (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos.34 & 35/PUN/2019 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 649/PUN/2013 & 1726/PUN/2014) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Atlas Copco (India) DCIT, Circle-8, Limited, Vs. Pune Mumbai Pune Road, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 PAN : AAACA4…

DCIT, Circle, Patiala vs. M/S Punjab Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Patiala

ITA 446/CHANDI/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Dec 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.438/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Gupta, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 41(1)

…omputation” it will not change its status as being assessment order ,since all the key ingredients of an assessment order find mention therein. Our attention was drawn to the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kalyan Kumar Ray Vs. CIT reported in 191 ITR 634 (SC) in this regard. Copy of the same was placed before us. The Ld. Counsel for assessee further contended that since the demand after the I.T.A.T. order does not survive that is why the A.O. vide order dated 28.3.2013 had stated the demand as nil, statutory intent being to pass an order giving effect and none of the authorities below had bee…

Punjab Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Patiala vs. DCIT, Circle, Patiala

ITA 438/CHANDI/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Dec 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt.Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.438/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Gupta, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 41(1)

…omputation” it will not change its status as being assessment order ,since all the key ingredients of an assessment order find mention therein. Our attention was drawn to the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kalyan Kumar Ray Vs. CIT reported in 191 ITR 634 (SC) in this regard. Copy of the same was placed before us. The Ld. Counsel for assessee further contended that since the demand after the I.T.A.T. order does not survive that is why the A.O. vide order dated 28.3.2013 had stated the demand as nil, statutory intent being to pass an order giving effect and none of the authorities below had bee…

The Baba Nag Rice & Genral Mills, Amritsar vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 375/ASR/2016[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 375/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 1998-99

For Appellant: Sh. Sudarshan Kapoor (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 234BSection 234B(1)Section 234B(3)Section 244A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 375/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 1998-99 Baba Naga Rice & General Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Mills, Vill. Basarke Bhaini, Tax, Circle-V, Amritsar Chheharta, Amritsar [PAN: AAEFB 8457G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Sudarshan Kapoor (Adv.) Respondent by: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.) Date of Hearing: 04.04.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 24.05.2018 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee agitating the Order by the Co…

Virgo Properties P Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1208/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasan, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 13.07.2017
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(3)

…ing to the assessee’s pleadings before us, the income tax computation form dated 19/3/2014 (copy on record) enclosed along with the assessment order, noted as so therein, forms part of the assessment order itself, as explained in Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT [1991] 191 ITR 634 (SC). The same vide para 17 clearly states of the deemed income by way of book profit at ". 64,64,764/- . It is therefore incorrect to say, as does the assessee before us, that there has been no assessment of book profit in the first instance, i.e., u/s. 143(3) dated 19.03.2014. The reliance by the assessee on the cited decisions is thus misplace…