KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Assistant Director of Income Tax

304 ITR 264High Court2008#3367 most cited

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

Reassessment proceedings under Section 148 cannot be initiated if the original assessment proceedings, initiated based on a filed return, are still pending. This includes situations where the time for issuing a notice under Section 143(2) has not expired.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

K.M. Pachayappan · Section 148 · Section 143(2) · reassessment proceedings · pending assessment · income escaping assessment · Section 139(4) · notice under Section 148

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 237assistant directorsection 139(4)section 132(4a)section 292binterest under section 234asection 139(5)interest u/s 234asection 127childincome escaping assessmentsection 251

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

The ACIT Cent. Cir -5(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Nitan Chhatwal, Mumbai

In the result, the both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2244/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2022AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…31-3-1997. 9.4. In the case of CIT v. Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd. (308 ITR 249), the Madras High Court held that reopening is improper when the time limit is available to issue notice (xi) 143(2). As seen from the above, in the case of K M Pachayappan (304 ITR 264) and Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd. (308 ITR 249) Madras HC by placing reliance on the judgment of SC in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri (supra) held that the assessing officer was barred from initiating reassessment proceedings under section 147 when the time for issuance of notice under section 143(2) had not expired. However, taken a different…

ACIT Cent. Cir -5(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Nitan Chhatwal, Mumbai

In the result, the both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2243/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…31-3-1997. 9.4. In the case of CIT v. Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd. (308 ITR 249), the Madras High Court held that reopening is improper when the time limit is available to issue notice (xi) 143(2). As seen from the above, in the case of K M Pachayappan (304 ITR 264) and Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd. (308 ITR 249) Madras HC by placing reliance on the judgment of SC in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri (supra) held that the assessing officer was barred from initiating reassessment proceedings under section 147 when the time for issuance of notice under section 143(2) had not expired. However, taken a different…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Sri C Gangadhara Murthy, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2400/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Shri C. Gangadhara Murthy Income-Tax, No. 322, 3Rd A Corss, 2Nd Block Circle - 6(2)(1) 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore . Bangalore 560079. Pan – Agipg 2668 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2

…s of Nizam Supplementary Family trust vs CIT 242 ITR 381 (Supreme Court); (ii) CIT vs Ram Chettiar 55 ITR 630 (SC); (iii) CIT vs Krishna Kutty Menon 181 ITR 237 (Kerala HC); (iv) Indian Tube Co. Ltd vs ITO 272 ITR 439 (Calcutta HC); (v) CIT vs K.M.Pachayappan 304 ITR 264 {Madras HC); (vi) CIT vs Abad Fisheries 246 CTR 513 (Kerala HC); (vii) CIT vs Qatalys Software Software Technologies 308 ITR 249 (Madras HC); (viii) CIT vs TCP Ltd 323 ITR 346 (Madras HC); 10. In the case of Abad Fisheries 246 CTR 513 (Kerala),(2011) 16 taxman.com 398 (Kerala) 2012) 204 Taxman 267 (Kerala), the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in its…

The ITO, Ward-3(3)(11), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Rupal Bhupendrasingh Sandhu, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for ITA

ITA 2953/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hearing Of An Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 234ASection 271

…of issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act on 14-09-2014, which is impermissible in law. The counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the case of CIT v Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd 308 ITR 249 (Madras) and on the case of CIT v. KM Panchayappan 304 ITR 264 (Madras), in which it has been held that the assessing officer was barred from initiating proceedings under section 148 of the Act where time-limit for issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act has not expired. In response, the Ld. DR has submitted that even though the above judicial precedents were before the assessee during the course…

Shri Rupal Bhupendrasingh Sandhu, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(11), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for ITA

ITA 2626/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hearing Of An Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 234ASection 271

…of issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act on 14-09-2014, which is impermissible in law. The counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the case of CIT v Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd 308 ITR 249 (Madras) and on the case of CIT v. KM Panchayappan 304 ITR 264 (Madras), in which it has been held that the assessing officer was barred from initiating proceedings under section 148 of the Act where time-limit for issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act has not expired. In response, the Ld. DR has submitted that even though the above judicial precedents were before the assessee during the course…

ITO, Ward-17(1), New Delhi vs. Momentum Technologies P.Ltd, New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5803/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 5803/Del/2017 (A.Y 2012-13) (Through Video Conferencing) Vs Momentum Technologies P. Ito Ward-17(1) Ltd. B-21, Moti Nagar, Room No. 323A, C. R. Building, New Delhi New Delhi Aaccm6467C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 131Section 68

…Such is also held by Honourable Madras High court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V QATALYS SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD. [2009] 308 ITR 249 (Madras) where in following the decision of the Honourable High court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v. K. M. PACHAYAPPAN in 304 ITR 264 ( Madras) held that “7. Applying the principles enunciated in the judgments of the Supreme Court as well as the Delhi High Court, cited supra, the Tribunal is right in coming to a conclusion that no action could be initiated under section 147 of the Act, when there is a pendency of the return before the Assessing Officer. The reasons given by the…

ITO, Ward-17(1), New Delhi vs. Momentum Technologies P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result ground number 1, 2 of the appeal are dismissed

ITA 5802/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Aman Preet, Sr. D.R
Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI] BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No.5802/Del/2017 (Assessment Year:2011-12) The Income tax Officer Momentum Technologies Ward 17 91) Vs. Pvt Ltd New Delhi B-21 Moti Nagar New Delhi. PAN AACCM6467C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate Revenue by: Ms. Aman Preet, Sr. D.R.; Date of Hearing 25/03/2021 Date of pronouncement 31/03/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 01 This appeal is filed by The Income Tax Officer , Ward 17 (1), New…

Kamlesh Shantilal Jain, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 3335/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Respondent: 10.02.2021
Section 147

…8 is not valid and hence, whole proceedings is null and void. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs M/s.Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd.(2009) 308 ITR 249 and in the case of CIT vs. K.M Pachayappan 304 ITR 264. The assessee has also relied upon the decision of ITAT, Chennai Third Member decision in the case of M/s. Super Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. Addl.CIT (2010) 129 TTJ 305. 10. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting order of learned CIT(A) submitted that there is no merit in the arguments taken by assessee in light of decision of Hon’…

Manda Builders vs. I.T.O.Ward-21, Bikaner

ITA/69/2009HC Rajasthan02 Jan 2020

Bench: INDRAJIT MAHANTY,PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Vinod Gupta, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2378/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

…s case, we can take the shelter of the decisions, as relied upon by the learned DR, which have been pronounced in the cases of section 148 proceedings viz. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Assistant Director of Income Tax; 292 ITR 49 and CIT vs. K.M. Panchayappan; 304 ITR 264. The judgments relied upon by the learned AR are not applicable to the facts of the case. In these judgments only one notice was issued and the same also was not as per the procedure prescribed under the Act whereas in the present case there is no defect in the first notice and the assessment has been completed on the basis of the first notice. W…

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

…s case, we can take the shelter of the decisions, as relied upon by the learned DR, which have been pronounced in the cases of section 148 proceedings viz. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Assistant Director of Income Tax; 292 ITR 49 and CIT vs. K.M. Panchayappan; 304 ITR 264. The judgments relied upon by the learned AR are not applicable to the facts of the case. In these judgments only one notice was issued and the same also was not as per the procedure prescribed under the Act whereas in the present case there is no defect in the first notice and the assessment has been completed on the basis of the first notice. W…

Venu Gopal Karavadi, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-4(2), Hyderabad

In the result appeal filed by Assessee is allowed

ITA 202/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiahassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Venu Gopal Karavadi, Vs. Ito, Hyderabad. Ward – 4(2), Hyderabad. Pan- Bdbpk1736J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.A Sai Prasad Shri B. Suresh Babu Revenue By : Date Of Hearing : 25-04-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-04-2018 Order Per Shri B. Ramakotaiah, Am: This Is An Appeal By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Hyderabad Dated 06.10.2016. Apart From The Issues Originally Contested In Appeal I.E Addition U/S Sec. 68 Of The It Act Of Two Deposits Of Rs. 4.45 Lakhs & Rs. 7.5 Laksh In Two Banks, Assessee Also Raised The Additional Grounds That Initiation Of Proceedings U/S 147 Of The It Act Ceased To Survive As The Officer Has Not Made Any Additions On The Issue On Which The Reasons For Reopening Are Based, Hence, A.O Is Not Justified In Making The Addition On Other Issues. We Have Heard Ld. Counsel & Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.A Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 50CSection 54Section 68

…yderabad. 9.4. In the case of CIT Vs. Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd. (308 ITR 249), the Madras High Court held that reopening is improper when the time limit is available to issue notice xi]» 143(2). As seen from the above, in the case of K M Pachayappan (304 ITR 264) and Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd. (308 ITR 249) Madras HC by placing reliance on the judgement of SC in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri (supra) held that the assessing officer was barred from initiating reassessment proceedings u/s 147 when the time for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) had not expired. However, taken a different view in the case of…

P. Divagar, Puducherry vs. ITO, Puducherry

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2120/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54Section 54F

…oming to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer was barred from initiating reassessment proceedings under section 147 when the time for 5 issuance of notice under section 143(2) had not expired and also in the case of CIT Vs. K. M. PACHAYAPPAN [2008] in 304 ITR 264 (Mad) wherein held that the Assessing Officer had issued notice under section 148 when a valid return was filed and was pending. In such a situation the Revenue could not have issued notice for the purpose of reopening under section 147 of the Act. 5. On the other hand, ld.D.R relied on the order of Ld.CIT(A). 6. I have heard both the parties…

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)

…liance on the following judgments:- (1) Trustees of HEH the Nizam’s Supplementary Family Trust v. CIT, 242 ITR 381 (SC) (2) CIT v. Sambhudayal Dwarkadas, 218 ITR 123 (MP) (3) Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. v. ACIT, 266 ITR 664 (All) (4) CIT v. K.M. Pachayappan, 304 ITR 264 (Mad) (5) CIT v. Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd., 308 ITR 249 (Mad) (6) Renuka Industries v. ITO in ITA No.187 of 2003, order dated 28.11.2007 (Karnataka High Court) (7) Super Spinning Mills Ltd. v. ACIT, 3 ITR [Trib] 258 (Chennai) (8) L.T. Karle & Co. in ITA No.364/Bang/2010, order dated 11.02.2011. (9) CIT v. Abad Fisheries, 65 DTR 370 (Kera…

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)

…liance on the following judgments:- (1) Trustees of HEH the Nizam’s Supplementary Family Trust v. CIT, 242 ITR 381 (SC) (2) CIT v. Sambhudayal Dwarkadas, 218 ITR 123 (MP) (3) Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd. v. ACIT, 266 ITR 664 (All) (4) CIT v. K.M. Pachayappan, 304 ITR 264 (Mad) (5) CIT v. Qatalys Software Technologies Ltd., 308 ITR 249 (Mad) (6) Renuka Industries v. ITO in ITA No.187 of 2003, order dated 28.11.2007 (Karnataka High Court) (7) Super Spinning Mills Ltd. v. ACIT, 3 ITR [Trib] 258 (Chennai) (8) L.T. Karle & Co. in ITA No.364/Bang/2010, order dated 11.02.2011. (9) CIT v. Abad Fisheries, 65 DTR 370 (Kera…