NYK Lime (India) Ltd. v. DCIT (No.2)

346 ITR 361High Court2012#1598 most cited

What is NYK Lime (India) Ltd. v. DCIT (No.2) authority for?

Reopening a concluded assessment is invalid if based solely on a change of opinion and not on fresh tangible material, especially when the reassessment notice is issued after four years without evidence of failure by the assessee to disclose material facts.

71

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

NYK Lime (India) Ltd. v. DCIT · Section 147 · Section 143(3) · reassessment · change of opinion · fresh tangible material · full and true disclosure · first proviso to Section 147

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 142(1)Section 115JBSection 143(2)Section 10(38)Section 139

Issues it is cited on

section 40(1)section 102section 2(9)material facts necessary for assessmentfirst proviso to section 147section 114fresh tangible materialwithin four yearsfull and true disclosurekelvinatormere change of opinionsection 195(2)

Judgments citing NYK Lime (India) Ltd. v. DCIT (No.2)

The Income Tax Officer Ward, 2, Raigarh(Cg) vs. Shri Shri Bishambhar Dayal Agrawal, Jashpur (C.G.)

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 223/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 223/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer-2, Raigarh (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 41(4)Section 69

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). 23. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, are of the considered view that as the case of the assessee had been reopened by the A.O merely on the basis of “change of opinion” and not on the basis of any fresh tangible material coming to his notice after…

Nalini Parwani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 249/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 249/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Nalini Parwani C/O. G.K Automobiles P. Ltd. Opp. Kabir Nagar, Gate No.2. Ring Road-2, Sondongri, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aeqpp5635N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Chawda, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 28Section 57

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). 12. Adverting to the claim of the Ld. A.R that reopening of the concluded assessment after the lapse of a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, i.e., A.Y.2013-14, is not permissible in the absence of failure on the part of the assessee…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-1), Raipur vs. M/S Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd., Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 73/RPR/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.73/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. H. No.11, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aahcs7999A ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri, Sakshi Gopal Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(2)(b)

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). 15. Alternatively, we concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) that the reopening of the concluded assessment of the assessee company is also hit by the “1st proviso” to Sec. 147 of the Act. Admittedly, the original assessment was framed in the case of the as…

Eci Engineering & Construction Company Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 968/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…s bad in law and void. i. CIT v. Chaitanya Properties (P.) Ltd (240 Taxman 659 (Kar.HC) ii. Jal Hotels Co. Limited v. ACIT (184 Taxman 1) (Del.HC) iii. Legato Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd v. DCIT (187 Taxman 294) (Del.HC) iv. Purity Techtextile (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (325 ITR 459/189 Taxman 21) (Bom.HC) v. Asteroids Trading & Investment P. Ltd. v. DCIT (308 ITR 190), (Bom.HC) vi. Heavy Metal and Tubes Ltd. v. DCIT 364 ITR 609) (Guj.HC) vii. Gowri Gopal Hospital (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer [2015] 55 taxmann.com 335 (Hyderabad - Trib.) viii. CIT, Patiala v. State Bank of Patiala [2016] 70 taxmann.com 36 (SC) 14. Referri…

DCIT, Circle-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Eci Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…s bad in law and void. i. CIT v. Chaitanya Properties (P.) Ltd (240 Taxman 659 (Kar.HC) ii. Jal Hotels Co. Limited v. ACIT (184 Taxman 1) (Del.HC) iii. Legato Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd v. DCIT (187 Taxman 294) (Del.HC) iv. Purity Techtextile (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (325 ITR 459/189 Taxman 21) (Bom.HC) v. Asteroids Trading & Investment P. Ltd. v. DCIT (308 ITR 190), (Bom.HC) vi. Heavy Metal and Tubes Ltd. v. DCIT 364 ITR 609) (Guj.HC) vii. Gowri Gopal Hospital (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer [2015] 55 taxmann.com 335 (Hyderabad - Trib.) viii. CIT, Patiala v. State Bank of Patiala [2016] 70 taxmann.com 36 (SC) 14. Referri…

Gmr Air Cargo & Aerospace Engineering Ltd(Successor to Gmr Hyderabad Air Cargo & Logistics Pvt Ltd), Shamshabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 183/HYD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Gmr Air Cargo & Vs. Ito,Ward-2(3) Aerospace Engineering Signature Towers Ltd.(Successor To Gmr Kondapur, Kothaguda Hyderabad Air Cargo & Opp. Botanical Gardens Logistics Pvt Ltd.) R.R.District Rajiv Gandhi International Hyderabad-500 084 Airport, Samshabad Hyderabad-500 409

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

…bad in law and void. i. CIT v. Chaitanya Properties (P.) Ltd (240 Taxman 659 (Kar.HC) ii. Jal Hotels Co. Limited v. ACIT (184 Taxman 1) (Del.HC) iii. Legato Systems (India) Pvt. Ltd v. DCIT (187 Taxman 294) (Del.HC) iv. Purity Techtextile (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (325 ITR 459/189 Taxman 21) (Bom.HC) v. Asteroids Trading & Investment P. Ltd. v. DCIT (308 ITR 190), (Bom.HC) vi. Heavy Metal and Tubes Ltd. v. DCIT 364 ITR 609) (Guj.HC) vii. Gowri Gopal Hospital (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer [2015] 55 taxmann.com 335 (Hyderabad - Trib.) viii. CIT, Patiala v. State Bank of Patiala [2016] 70 taxmann.com 36 (SC) 14. Referr…

The Income Tax Officer -1, Raigarh, Raigarh(Cg) vs. Shri Shri Parmanand Gupta, Raigarh, Raigarh(Cg)

ITA 82/BIL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 82/Rpr/2017 Co. No. 02/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 The Income Tax Officer-1, Raigarh (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Parmanand Gupta, Alochan Agrawal, L/H. Of Late Shri Parmanand Gupta, Prop. M/S. Balaji Handloom, 19/48, Palace Road, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan : Afdpg4961L ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT &Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). 18. We, thus, in the backdrop of our aforesaid multi-facet observations qua the invalid assumption of jurisdiction by the AO for reopening the concluded assessment of the assessee, quash the assessment framed by him vide his order passed u/ss. 143(3)/147 of the Act,…

ACIT 4 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kotak Securities Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 7357/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Farrokh IraniFor Respondent: Smt. Neelam Shukla
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 73

…objections, the AO has failed to controvert the objections of the Assessee in this regard. The Assessee placed reliance on the following judgments in support of his contentions - CIT v. Kelvinator of India: 320 ITR 561 (SC), NYK Lines (India) Limited Vs DCIT: 346 ITR 361 (Bom), Purity Textiles (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT: 325 ITR 459 (Bom) and Asian Paints Ltd. vs. DCIT308 ITR 195 (Bom). 10. Per Contra, Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the order passed by CIT(A) rejecting the contention of the Assessee relating 6 ITA. No. 7357/Mum/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 to invalidity of re-assessment proceedings. She ve…

Shri Abhay Kumar Jain, Raipur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 23/RPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 23/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Abhay Kumar Jain, Prop. M/S. Jain Fabrics, Mahalaxmi Market, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Achpj5173C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shravankumar Meena, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40Section 69

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR (Through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAMLAPPA D BATTULL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 23/RPR/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Abhay Kumar Jain, Prop. M/s. Jain Fabrics, Mahalaxmi Market, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) PAN : ACHPJ5173C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Bikram Jain, AR Revenue by : Shri Shravankumar Meena, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hea…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax-Central Circle-1, Raipur, Raipur (Cg) vs. Shri Shri Rakesh Pandey, Raipur, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 8/BIL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos. 08 & 09/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR (Through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAMLAPPA D BATTULL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA Nos. 08 & 09/RPR/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Shri Rakesh Pandey H. No.5, Shankar Nagar Ward, Anupam Nagar, Raipur (C.G.). PAN : AESPP2836D ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri G.S. Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri G.N Singh, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date o…

M/S Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, 3(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 350/BIL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 348, 349 & 350/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited House No.382, Sunder Nagar, Raipur-492 013 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc4374P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer 3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). 15. We, thus, in the backdrop of our aforesaid observations not being able to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the order passed by the CIT(Appeals), who had upheld the jurisdiction assumed by the A.O u/s. 147 of the Act, set-aside his order and quash the assessme…

M/S Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, 3(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 349/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 348, 349 & 350/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited House No.382, Sunder Nagar, Raipur-492 013 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc4374P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer 3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). 15. We, thus, in the backdrop of our aforesaid observations not being able to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the order passed by the CIT(Appeals), who had upheld the jurisdiction assumed by the A.O u/s. 147 of the Act, set-aside his order and quash the assessme…

M/S Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, 3(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 348/BIL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 348, 349 & 350/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited House No.382, Sunder Nagar, Raipur-492 013 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc4374P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer 3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). 15. We, thus, in the backdrop of our aforesaid observations not being able to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the order passed by the CIT(Appeals), who had upheld the jurisdiction assumed by the A.O u/s. 147 of the Act, set-aside his order and quash the assessme…

Hsbc Asset Management (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no.1 raised by assessee is allowed and assessment order framed found to be without jurisdiction

ITA 7292/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalhsbc Asset Management (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Mercantile Bank Chamber, 16 Veer Nariman, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aabch0007N ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-1(1)(2) Mumbai. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Niraj Sheth, Ar Respondent By : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit (A)’] Vide Order Dated 13.10.2017 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Distinct & Separate & Without Prejudice To Each Other. 1. On The Facts & In Law, The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) - 6, Mumbai [‘Cit(A)’] Erred In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Under Section 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Initiated After Four Years From The End Of Relevant Assessment Year, Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessment Under Section 143(3) Was Made & The Appellant Had Disclosed Fully & Truly All Material Facts Necessary

For Appellant: Sh. Niraj Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Anand, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 37(1)Section 40A(9)

…was the case where the AO had reopened the assessment within four years from the end of the Assessment Year under appeal. d) The Hon’ble Bombay High Court, being the jurisdictional High Court in our case, in the case of Purity Tec textile (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT (325 ITR 459/189 Taxman 21) has been held that when the AO did not have any additional material at all to form belief that income had escaped assessment then the reopening of assessment is bad and quash. The extract of the decision are as under: “Insofar as the assessment year 2004-05 was concerned, though the reopening of the assessment had taken place with…

ACIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. National Bank for Agriculature and Rural Developement, Mumbai

ITA 4277/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () A.C.I.T-3(2)(2) National Bank For Agriculture & R. No. 674, 6Th Floor, Vs. Rural Development, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, C-24, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai -400 020 Complex,Bandra, Mumbai – 400 051 Pan No. Aaact4020G (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Jehangir Mistri, Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman, Cit D.R Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36

…s/workings/computation and other material that was made available to the Assessing Officer at the time of the original assessment in which the impugned deduction was allowed in the order passed u/s. 143(3). 5.1.12 I find that in NYK Line (India) Ltd. v. DCIT (346 ITR 361)(BOM), the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has held that where the assessee has disclosed all material facts relating to a particular item, mere fact that the Assessing Officer had come to a different conclusion in respect of the said item in subsequent assessment year would not justify reopening of assessment. Relevant paragraph of the said de…

M.S Mahindra Cie Automotive Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Circle-6(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1575/MUM/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Mahindra Cie Automotive Ltd The Deputy Commissioner Of (As A Successor Of Hinoday Industries Ltd.) Vs. Income Tax, Circle 6(3) Mahindra Towers, 1St Floor, Room No. 515, Aayakar Bhavan, P.K. Kurne Chowk, Worli M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai - 400 018 Pan No. Aabcm6632J (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri H.P. Mahajani, A.R Revenue By : Shri Mahendra Ahuja, D.R Date Of Hearing : 22/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/11/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: Shri H.P. Mahajani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mahendra Ahuja, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). As regards the view taken by the CIT(A) that as the issue in question i.e entitlement of the assessee company for claim of depreciation on electrical installations was not looked into by the A.O in the course of the original assessment proceedings, therefore, in the…

Chandra Financial Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1524/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Chandra Financial Services Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., Achal Building, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Income Tax-2(1)(1), 21, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Sahu, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 73

…d to the formation of belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom) and Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). Backed by the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that as the A.O for the reasons discussed at length hereinabove had wrongly assumed jurisdiction and reopened the concluded assessment of the assessee company without satisfying the manda…

Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy.C.I.T., Cent.Cir.10(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2344/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income D-2, Medley Houses, 16Th Road, Tax-10(2)(2), Vs. Midc Area, Andheri (East), Mumbai Mumbai – 400 093 Pan – Aaacm2764J (Appellant) (Respondent) Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, D-2, Medley House, 16Th Road, Central Circle – 44, Vs. Midc Area, Andheri (East), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai Mumbai Pan – Aaacm2764J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jothwani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri. H.N. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147

…ITA No.2344/Mum/2018 & 1 ITA No.1212/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2012-13 M/s Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. DCIT-10(2)(2) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member M/s Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of Income D-2, Medley Houses, 16th Road, Tax-10(2)(2), Vs. MIDC Area, Andheri (East), Mumbai Mumbai – 400 093 PAN – AAACM2764J (Appellant) (Respondent) Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, D-2, Medley House, 16th Road, Central Circle – 44, Vs. MIDC Area, Andheri (East), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road,…

Standard Chartered Investments & Loans (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(3), Mumbai

ITA 7068/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7068/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna & MsFor Respondent: Mrs. Snita Billa, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…f belief on his part that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The aforesaid contention of the Ld. A.R is duly supported by the judgments of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay viz. (i) NYK Lime (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (No.2) [2012] 346 ITR 361 (Bom); and (ii) Purity Tech Textile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT & Anr. [2010] 325 ITR 459 (Bom). In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, we are of the considered view that as the reopening of the case of the assessee had been resorted to by the A.O merely on the basis of a „change of opinion‟ as regards the allowability of the ESOP expense of Rs. 2…

Sgdc India P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 24(2), Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 405/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.V. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…t on the basis of change of opinion which is impermissible. For the above proposition, the ld. counsel for the assessee relied on the following decisions:- i) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC); ii) NYK Line (India) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2012) 346 ITR 361 (Bom); iii) Bharti Infratel Ltd. vs. DCIT (2019) 101 taxmann.com 285 (Delhi); iv) Pr. CIT v. Tupperware India P. Ltd. (2016) 284 CTR 68 (Del); v) Mahendra Mills Ltd. vs. AAC (1975) 99 ITR 135 (SC); 11. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the reasons to believe must be based on tangible material or information extraneous to record. He…