KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Additional Director of Income Tax

292 ITR 49High Court2007#1455 most cited

What is KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Additional Director of Income Tax authority for?

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 cannot be initiated based on a mere change of opinion or reappraisal of existing facts, but require new or fresh tangible material or information indicating escapement of income.

78

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. ADIT · Section 147 · Section 148 · initiation of reassessment · fresh tangible material · mere change of opinion · escapement of income · full and true disclosure · reappraisal of existing facts · Kelvinator principle · 292 ITR 49

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 143(2)Section 142(1)Section 139Section 139(4)Section 237
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 237section 55(2)assistant directorsection 139(9)section 49section 44bbfresh tangible materialsection 44bsection 114kelvinatormere change of opinionfull and true disclosure

Judgments citing KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Additional Director of Income Tax

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. V.K. Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee and revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 3200/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2378/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Vinod Gupta, Vs Dcit, C/O Raj Kumar & Associates, Central Circle-7, Cas, 4435/7, Ansari Road, Jhandewalan, Daryaganj, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaopg8867H Ita No. 3200/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs V.K. Gupta Central Circle-7, 119, Fie Indl. Area, Patparganj, Jhandewalan, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaopg8867H Assessee By : Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.08.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 127Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)Section 251Section 292B

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. H. S. Sidhu, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 2378/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Vinod Gupta, Vs DCIT, C/o Raj Kumar & Associates, Central Circle-7, CAs, 4435/7, Ansari Road, Jhandewalan, Daryaganj, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAOPG8867H ITA No. 3200/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 ACIT, Vs V.K. Gupta Central Circle-7, 119, FIE Indl. Area, Patparganj, Jhandewalan, Delhi-110092 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAOPG8867H Assessee by : Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CA Revenue…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dsl Software Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3723/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 80HSection 90

…(Guj) - SLP dismissed by SC • Satnam Overseas Ltd & Anr vs ACIT: 329 ITR 237 (Del) • Jal Hotels Co Ltd vs ADIT: 184 Taxman 1 (Del) • CIT vs Feather Foam Ent (P) Ltd: 296 ITR 342 (Del) • CIT vs Eicher Ltd: 294 ITR 310 (Del) • KLM Royal Dutch Airlines vs ACIT: 292 ITR 49 (Del), SLP there against dismissed: CC 13507 of 2008 • CIT vs Goetze Ltd: 321 ITR 431 (Del) • Carlton Overseas (P) Ltd vs ITO: 318 ITR 295 (Del) • Jindal Photofilms Ltd vs DCIT: 234 ITR 170 (Del) • Northern Strips Ltd vs ITO: WP 8265 of 2008 (Del) • CIT vs Batra Bhatta & Co: 321 ITR 526 (Del) • Shipra Srivastava vs ACIT: 319 ITR 221 (Del) • CIT vs…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dsl Software Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3722/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 80HSection 90

…(Guj) - SLP dismissed by SC • Satnam Overseas Ltd & Anr vs ACIT: 329 ITR 237 (Del) • Jal Hotels Co Ltd vs ADIT: 184 Taxman 1 (Del) • CIT vs Feather Foam Ent (P) Ltd: 296 ITR 342 (Del) • CIT vs Eicher Ltd: 294 ITR 310 (Del) • KLM Royal Dutch Airlines vs ACIT: 292 ITR 49 (Del), SLP there against dismissed: CC 13507 of 2008 • CIT vs Goetze Ltd: 321 ITR 431 (Del) • Carlton Overseas (P) Ltd vs ITO: 318 ITR 295 (Del) • Jindal Photofilms Ltd vs DCIT: 234 ITR 170 (Del) • Northern Strips Ltd vs ITO: WP 8265 of 2008 (Del) • CIT vs Batra Bhatta & Co: 321 ITR 526 (Del) • Shipra Srivastava vs ACIT: 319 ITR 221 (Del) • CIT vs…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dsl Software Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2310/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 80HSection 90

…(Guj) - SLP dismissed by SC • Satnam Overseas Ltd & Anr vs ACIT: 329 ITR 237 (Del) • Jal Hotels Co Ltd vs ADIT: 184 Taxman 1 (Del) • CIT vs Feather Foam Ent (P) Ltd: 296 ITR 342 (Del) • CIT vs Eicher Ltd: 294 ITR 310 (Del) • KLM Royal Dutch Airlines vs ACIT: 292 ITR 49 (Del), SLP there against dismissed: CC 13507 of 2008 • CIT vs Goetze Ltd: 321 ITR 431 (Del) • Carlton Overseas (P) Ltd vs ITO: 318 ITR 295 (Del) • Jindal Photofilms Ltd vs DCIT: 234 ITR 170 (Del) • Northern Strips Ltd vs ITO: WP 8265 of 2008 (Del) • CIT vs Batra Bhatta & Co: 321 ITR 526 (Del) • Shipra Srivastava vs ACIT: 319 ITR 221 (Del) • CIT vs…

Landmark Education India, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) II (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4871/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2008-09 Landmark Education India, Income Tax Officer B-206, Bhaveshwar Plaza, (Exemption)-Ii(1), बनाम/ Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (W), Piramal Chambers, Vs. Mumbai 400086 Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaatl0059L

Section 11Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…CIT [2010] 329 ITR 257 (Bom) (para 26) International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U. K.) Ltd. [2001] 5 SCC 265 (para 30) Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) (paras 9, 33, 34, 35) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asst. Director of I. T. [2007] 292 ITR 49 (Delhi) (para 12) Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) (para 31) Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC) (para 34) Muthukrishna Reddiar v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 503 (Ker) (para 9) New Light Trading Co. v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 391 (Delhi) (para 18) Praful Chunilal Patel v. Makwana (M. J.)/Asst. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 832 (Guj)…

ACIT (E) 20(3), Mumbai vs. Seema Dilip Vora, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 582/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year:2007-08 Acit-20(3), Ms. Seema Dilip Vora, Room No.622, 71/72, Rajkamal Apartment बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Rajkamal Marg, Rajkamal Vs. Mumbai Studio, Near Gandhi Hospital, Parel, Mumbai-400012 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aabpv0816C

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…CIT [2010] 329 ITR 257 (Bom) (para 26) International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U. K.) Ltd. [2001] 5 SCC 265 (para 30) Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) (paras 9, 33, 34, 35) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asst. Director of I. T. [2007] 292 ITR 49 (Delhi) (para 12) Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) (para 31) Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC) (para 34) Muthukrishna Reddiar v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 503 (Ker) (para 9) New Light Trading Co. v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 391 (Delhi) (para 18) Praful Chunilal Patel v. Makwana (M. J.)/Asst. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 832 (Guj)…

ADIT (E), Delhi vs. M/S Asian Centre for Organisation Research & Development., New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3718/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80G

…in opinion reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated unless there is surfacing of fresh fact after completion of original assessment. Such view has come out in the case of CIT vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. 320 ITR 561 (SC) and, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v CIT 292 ITR 49(Del) and M/s. Eicher Ltd. 294 ITR 310 (Del) and several other cases In fact, Apex Court has in the above case held as under: "On going through the changes, quoted above, made to s. 147 of the Act, we find that, prior to Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, reopening could be done under above two conditions and fulfillment of the said conditions…

ITO 22(3)(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Crescent Construction, Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 865/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154

…CIT [2010] 329 ITR 257 (Bom) (para 26) International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U. K.) Ltd. [2001] 5 SCC 265 (para 30) Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) (paras 9, 33, 34, 35) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asst. Director of I. T. [2007] 292 ITR 49 (Delhi) (para 12) Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) (para 31) Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC) (para 34) Muthukrishna Reddiar v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 503 (Ker) (para 9) New Light Trading Co. v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 391 (Delhi) (para 18) M/s Crescent Construction Co. Praful Chunilal Patel v. Makwana (M. J.)/Ass…

Crescent Construction Co., Navi Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 22(3), Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 658/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2005-06

Section 14Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154

…CIT [2010] 329 ITR 257 (Bom) (para 26) International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U. K.) Ltd. [2001] 5 SCC 265 (para 30) Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) (paras 9, 33, 34, 35) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asst. Director of I. T. [2007] 292 ITR 49 (Delhi) (para 12) Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) (para 31) Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC) (para 34) Muthukrishna Reddiar v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 503 (Ker) (para 9) New Light Trading Co. v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 391 (Delhi) (para 18) M/s Crescent Construction Co. Praful Chunilal Patel v. Makwana (M. J.)/Ass…

Director of Income Tax vs. Rolls Royce Industrial Power India Ltd

The appeals are dismissed, but with no order as to costs

ITA/1061/2011HC Delhi18 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 195(3)Section 260A

…ench of this Court in CIT v. Usha International Ltd.(supra), specifically overruled the decision of the DB in Consolidated Photo and Finvest Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax(supra). Even prior thereto, in KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. ADIT [2007] 292 ITR 49, another DB of this Court noticed the anomaly that had resulted from the decision in Consolidated Photo and Finvest Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (supra), which was contrary to other decisions, including the decision of the FB in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.(supra). This was noticed by the DB in KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. A…

Director of Income Tax vs. Rolls Royce Industrial Power India Ltd

The appeals are dismissed, but with no order as to costs

ITA/1058/2011HC Delhi18 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 195(3)Section 260A

…ench of this Court in CIT v. Usha International Ltd.(supra), specifically overruled the decision of the DB in Consolidated Photo and Finvest Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax(supra). Even prior thereto, in KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. ADIT [2007] 292 ITR 49, another DB of this Court noticed the anomaly that had resulted from the decision in Consolidated Photo and Finvest Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (supra), which was contrary to other decisions, including the decision of the FB in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.(supra). This was noticed by the DB in KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. A…

DCIT, Hassan vs. M/S Sujatha Narayan & Associates, Hassan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 71/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)(ITAT)-1
Section 148Section 234BSection 30Section 40Section 40A(3)

…eedings pending on the basis of return already filed are not terminated. Similar view was expressed by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. v. ACIT, 266 ITR 664 (All) and in the case of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. ADIT, 292 ITR 49 (Del). Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court have again reiterated that since returns of income had been filed and no order for assessment has been finalised by the AO, there was no scope for invoking section 147 of the Act. ITA Nos. 51 to 53/Bang/2011 & 71 to 73/Bang/2011 Page 10 of 26 Therefore initiation of assessment proceedings…

M/S. Sujatha Narayanan & Associates, Hassan vs. ACIT, Hassan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 51/BANG/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)(ITAT)-1
Section 148Section 234BSection 30Section 40Section 40A(3)

…eedings pending on the basis of return already filed are not terminated. Similar view was expressed by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. v. ACIT, 266 ITR 664 (All) and in the case of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. ADIT, 292 ITR 49 (Del). Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court have again reiterated that since returns of income had been filed and no order for assessment has been finalised by the AO, there was no scope for invoking section 147 of the Act. ITA Nos. 51 to 53/Bang/2011 & 71 to 73/Bang/2011 Page 10 of 26 Therefore initiation of assessment proceedings…

DCIT 1(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Intelnet Global Services P. Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7428/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-1(2)(1), M/S Intelnet Global Services R. No.535, 5Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Intelnet Towers, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Mindspace, Malad West, Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaaci7387P C.O. No.99/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.7428/Mum/2014) Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Intelnet Global Services Dcit-1(2)(1), Pvt. Ltd. Intelnet Towers, R. No.535, 5Th Floor, बनाम/ Mindspace, Malad West, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400064 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaaci7387P

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

…CIT [2010] 329 ITR 257 (Bom) (para 26) International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U. K.) Ltd. [2001] 5 SCC 265 (para 30) Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) (paras 9, 33, 34, 35) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asst. Director of I. T. [2007] 292 ITR 49 (Delhi) (para 12) Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) (para 31) Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC) (para 34) Muthukrishna Reddiar v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 503 (Ker) (para 9) New Light Trading Co. v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 391 (Delhi) (para 18) Praful Chunilal Patel v. Makwana (M. J.)/Asst. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 832 (Guj)…

Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai vs. Muimbai Stock Brokers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed”

ITA 6369/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2006-07 Acit-4(3), M/S Mumbai Stock 6Th Floor, R. No.649, बनाम/ Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, R No.10A, 1St Floor, 7/10, Vs. M.K. Road, Botwala Building, Mumbai-4020 Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumbai-400023 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aabcm4133A

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 88E

…CIT [2010] 329 ITR 257 (Bom) (para 26) International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U. K.) Ltd. [2001] 5 SCC 265 (para 30) Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) (paras 9, 33, 34, 35) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asst. Director of I. T. [2007] 292 ITR 49 (Delhi) (para 12) Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) (para 31) Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC) (para 34) Muthukrishna Reddiar v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 503 (Ker) (para 9) 9 M/s Mumbai Stock Broker Pvt. Ltd. C.O. No.39/Mum/2016 New Light Trading Co. v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 391 (Delhi) (para 18) Praful Chunilal…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Canon India Private Ltd., Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4040/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4040/Del/2010 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs M/S Canon India Pvt. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Tower A & B, Cyber Income Tax, Circle-3(1), New Delhi Green, Dlf Phase-Iii, Gurgaon , Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacc4175D Assessee By : Sh. S. K. Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.07.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.10.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 10.06.2010 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Vi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Neeraj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…re was no justification for the reassessment 5 Canon India Pvt. Ltd. proceedings. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Eicher Ltd. 294 ITR 310 (Del) " CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. 256 ITR 1 (Del) " KLM Royal Dutch Air Lines Vs ACIT 292 ITR 49 (Del) 6. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the only reason for reopening of the case was that the amount of Rs.53,15,240/- had not be credited in the subsequent year. The ld. CIT(A) categorically stated that once the AO had accepted the accounting entries of the assessee that the amount pertained to the…

Jayant Manilal Gandhy, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 16(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4504/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2005-06 Jayant Manilal Gandhy, Acit, Delux Apartment, Circle-16(2), बनाम/ Altamount Road, Matru Mandir Bldg. Vs. Mumbai-400026 Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007 Pan No. Afupg3313H ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 53ESection 54ESection 56

…T [2010] 329 ITR 257 (Bom) (para 26) International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (U. K.) Ltd. [2001] 5 SCC 265 (para 30) Kalyanji Mavji and Co. v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC) (paras 9, 33, 34, 35) KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asst. Director of I. T. [2007] 292 ITR 49 (Delhi) (para 12) Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] 245 ITR 360 (SC) (para 31) Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 1 (SC) (para 34) Muthukrishna Reddiar v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 503 (Ker) (para 9) New Light Trading Co. v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 391 (Delhi) (para 18) Praful Chunilal Patel v. Makwana (M. J.)/Asst. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 832…

M/S. Cj International Hotels Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 386/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Senior Advocate and Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR

…vations have been rightly held to be contrary to the Full Bench 35 ITA No.771, 787 & 1107/Del./2012 ITA No.218 & 386/Del./2013 (supra). The said decision in Eicher Ltd. (supra ) makes reference to the decision of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asstt. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 49/ 159 Taxman 191 (Delhi). KLM Royal Dutch Airlines case (supra) deals with some other issues on which we do not express or make any observation approving or disapproving. Some of these aspects have been considered and explained in other decisions in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (su…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. C.J. International Hotels Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 218/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Senior Advocate and Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR

…vations have been rightly held to be contrary to the Full Bench 35 ITA No.771, 787 & 1107/Del./2012 ITA No.218 & 386/Del./2013 (supra). The said decision in Eicher Ltd. (supra ) makes reference to the decision of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asstt. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 49/ 159 Taxman 191 (Delhi). KLM Royal Dutch Airlines case (supra) deals with some other issues on which we do not express or make any observation approving or disapproving. Some of these aspects have been considered and explained in other decisions in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (su…

M/S. Cj International Hotels Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 787/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Senior Advocate and Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR

…vations have been rightly held to be contrary to the Full Bench 35 ITA No.771, 787 & 1107/Del./2012 ITA No.218 & 386/Del./2013 (supra). The said decision in Eicher Ltd. (supra ) makes reference to the decision of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Asstt. CIT [2007] 292 ITR 49/ 159 Taxman 191 (Delhi). KLM Royal Dutch Airlines case (supra) deals with some other issues on which we do not express or make any observation approving or disapproving. Some of these aspects have been considered and explained in other decisions in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (su…