KMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School v. ITO

163 ITD 653Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#10487 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 145(3)Section 69C

Issues it is cited on

beyond four yearsnon application of mindsection 10(38)rejection of books of accountprincipal commissioner of income-taxnon-application of mindaddition under section 68section 145(3)escapement of incomeentry operatortangible materialreopening of assessment

Judgments citing KMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School v. ITO

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MOHALI PUNJAB vs. TAJ LAND DEVELOPEFRS AND PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED , SECTOR MOHALI PUNJAB

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 606/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: \nShri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nSmt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ore assessment\nframed consequent thereto was obviously illegal and void ab initio and liable\nto be quashed. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside and re-\nassessment proceedings held bad in law.\"\n\nKMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School v. ITO (2017) 163 ITD 653 (Asr.) (Trib)\nFrom the above discussion, it is evident that both the reasons recorded by the\nAO for reopening the completed assessments of the assessee are based on\nfactual errors, rendering the notice issued u/s 147, finding its basis in the\naforesaid reasons, to be an invalid notice, in keeping with the decision of the\nHon'ble Supreme Cour…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections\nare dismissed

ITA 993/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…deserved to be quashed-Assessee's appeal allowed.\"\n• Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335 (Gujarat High Court)\n• Harjeet Singh vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi), order dated 12.11.2018, in ITA No.\n2013/DEL/2015\n• KMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School vs. ITO (2017) 163 ITD 653 (Asr.) (Trib.)\n• Fortune Metaliks Limited vs. DCIT, ITA No. 1090/Chd/2019 dated 12.01.2021\nCHD Trib.\nThus AO recorded reasons which were not found to incorrect/non-existing on\nrecord, therefore, reassessment framed deserved to be quashed.\nOn the issue of Books of Account not rejected\n4. Our contention is that firstly, that the AO & CIT (A)…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. MALBROS INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD, FARIDKOT

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections are dismissed

ITA 992/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2016-17 The Dcit, Vs Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Ludhiana. Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. Nos. 46 & 45/Chd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2016-17 Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Vs Central Circle-2, Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Ludhiana. Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…HD/2024 & CO 46 & 45/CHD/2024 A.Y.2017-18 & 2016-17 20  Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335 (Gujarat High Court)  Harjeet Singh vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi), order dated 12.11.2018, in ITA No. 2013/DEL/2015  KMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School vs. ITO (2017) 163 ITD 653 (Asr.) (Trib.)  Fortune Metaliks Limited vs. DCIT, ITA No. 1090/Chd/2019 dated 12.01.2021 – CHD Trib. Thus AO recorded reasons which were not found to incorrect/non-existing on record, therefore, reassessment framed deserved to be quashed. On the issue of Books of Account not rejected 4. Our contention is that firstly, that the AO & CIT (A) hav…

SMT..ANURADHA,PATHANKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6(1), PATHANKOT

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 437/ASR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250

…10 Assessment Year: 2012-13 14. It is well settled that reopening based on wrong reasons to believe is bad in law: (i) ITO vs Sunbarg TradeLink Pvt Ltd [2016] 74taxmann.com16 (Gujrat HC), (ii) ITO vs KMV Collegiate Sr Secondary School (Amritsar Bench [2017] 163 ITD 653 ( Asr ) (iii) ITO vs Sukhvir Singh [2024] 165taxmann.com 197(Asr), (iv) Smt Monika Rani as reported in ITA No. 582/Chd/ 2019 (ITAT Chandigarh), (v) DCIT vs Kissan Fats Ltd ITA NO 407/Chd/2023 (Chandigarh). 15. Moreover, in the instant case the approval granting authority has issued the approval on incorrect factual figure of Rs. 47.77 lakhs, when…

AVI AGGARWAL, H.NO. 171-R, MODEL TOWN, LUDHIANA,PUNJAB vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT NFAC, DELHI, JAO ITO WARD6(1), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, RISHI NAGAR, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

ITA 971/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…f Gujarat High Court, ITAT, Chandigarh Bench, Amritsar Bench on this wrong reason to believe as under:- i). Sunbare Tradelink (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer. Ward-4(1)(2) [20161 74 taxmann.com 16 (Gujarat) ii). KMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School vs. ITO (2017) 163 ITD 653 (Asr.) (Trib.) iii). [2024]165 taxmann.com 197 (Amritsar - Trib.) IN THE ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH Sukhvir Singh v. Income-tax Officer iv) Smt. Monika Rani in ITA no. 582/CHD/2019 dated 28.02.2020 6 v). Fortune Metaliks Limited vs. DCIT. ITA No. 1090/Chd/2019 dated 12.01.2021 – CHD Trib. vi). Gaurav Joshi vs. ITO as reported at (2019) 55 CCH 0083 (Jal…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. DMR BUILDERS PVT LTD, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 293/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (HYBRID HEARING) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 and 2017-18 DCIT, Circle -1, Vs. DMR Builders Pvt. Ltd. Bathinda. Civil Lines Bathinda, Punjab. [PAN:-AABCD3380L] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 01 & 02/Asr/2025 (In I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024) Assessment Years: 2016-17 and 2017-18 DMR Builders Pvt. Ltd. Civil Vs. DCIT, Circle -1, Lines Bathinda, Punjab. Bathinda. [PAN:-AABCD3380L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by S…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. DMR BUILDERS PVT LTD, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 292/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (HYBRID HEARING) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 and 2017-18 DCIT, Circle -1, Vs. DMR Builders Pvt. Ltd. Bathinda. Civil Lines Bathinda, Punjab. [PAN:-AABCD3380L] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos. 01 & 02/Asr/2025 (In I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024) Assessment Years: 2016-17 and 2017-18 DMR Builders Pvt. Ltd. Civil Vs. DCIT, Circle -1, Lines Bathinda, Punjab. Bathinda. [PAN:-AABCD3380L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by S…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, FARIDKOT, BSNL BUILDING vs. M/S VOHRA SOLVEX PVT. LTD, SADIQ ROAD

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 588/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69C

…reported in (2019) 55 CCH 0083 (Jalndhar Camp) iv). Sagar Enterprises Vs ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335 (Gujarat High Court) v). Harjeet Singh Vs ITO (ITAT) Delhi), order dated 12.11.2018, in ITA No. 2013/Del.2015. vi). KMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School Vs ITO (2017) 163 ITD 653 (Asr.) (Trib.) vii). Fortune Metaliks Limited. Vs DCI, ITA No. 1090/Chd/2019, dated 12.01.2021-Chd. Trib” 21. The ld. DR relied upon the findings of the Assessing Officer and relied upon the order of the ld. CIT(A) and argued that the tangible materials where there before the AO for reopening of the assessment proceedings and refer to the obse…

MALKIAT AGRO INDUSTRIES 01, CANTT ROAD, NABHA 147201, PUNJAB,PUNJAB vs. LOVISH SHELLEY THE DCIT CIRCLE MANDIGOBIND GARH JAO INCOME TAX OFFICER NABHA, PUNJAB

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 485/CHANDI/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri K.K. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV, VP & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 485/Chd/ 2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Malkiat Agro Industries 01 बनाम The DCIT Cantt Road, Nabha 147201 Circle Mandi Gobindgarh Punjab "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABFM3457E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri K.K. Singla, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum…

SIMAR KAUR,KURUKSHETRA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, KURUKSHETRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 220/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 282

…gs. Monika Rani vs ITO in ITA No.582/Chd/2019 dated 28.02.2020 Sagar Enterprises vs. ACIT (2002) 257 ITR 335 (Gujarat High Court) Harjeet Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi), order dated 12.11.2018, in ITA No. 2013/DEL/2015 KMV Collegiate Sr. Sec. School v. ITO (2017) 163 ITD 653(Asr.) (Trib.): From the above discussion, it is evident that both the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening the completed assessments of the assessee are based on factual errors, rendering the notice issued u/s 147, finding its basis in the aforesaid reasons, to be an invalid notice, in keeping with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court i…