How many judgments cite Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT?

11 judgments on BharatTax cite Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (397 ITR 480), spanning 2012 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 139, Section 142, Section 142(1), Section 143(1), Section 143(3).

Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT

397 ITR 480High Court2017#9987 most cited

What is Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Reopening under Section 147 requires tangible material and cannot be based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer. The first proviso to Section 147 must be considered when reassessing income.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Oracle India Pvt Ltd v ACIT · 397 ITR 480 · section 147 · reopening assessment · change of opinion · tangible material · first proviso to section 147 · income escaping assessment · reassessment · assessment procedure

Also reported as

2017 SCC OnLine DEL 9360

Sections most often in play

Section 115JB Section 139 Section 142 Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148

Issues it is cited on

true and full disclosure material facts necessary for assessment first proviso to section 147 full and true disclosure kelvinator change of opinion live link tangible material income escaping assessment section 36(1)(iii)escapement of income reopening of assessment

Judgments citing Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT

Winsome Textile Industries Limited, Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 528/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी िव"म िसंह यादव, लेखा सद" एवं "ी परेश म. जोशी, "ाियक सद" BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM & SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI, JM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO. 528/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Winsome Textiles Industries Limited बनाम The Asst. CIT C/o Tejmohan Singh, Advocate Circle-4(1), Chandigarh # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACW1910G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate राज"…

Ramanathan Adaikalavan, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu vs. The Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 557/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.557/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2014-15 Ramanathan Adaikalavan, Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.80, Ansari Street, Ram Nagar, Non-Corporate Circle-2, Coimbatore-641009. Coimbatore [Pan: Aanpa6846P] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri P.M.Kathir, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.11.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri P.M.Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 55A

…8 ITR 561 (SC) :- 7 -: DSC Limited Vs DD IT(E) 365 ITR 160 (Bombay) Global Signal Cables India Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT 368 ITR 609 (Delhi) CIT Vs CWC Corporation 371 ITR 81 (Delhi) HCL Technologies Limited Vs DCIT 397 ITR 469 (Delhi) Oracle India (P) Limited Vs ACIT 397 ITR 480(Delhi) Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit Vs DCIT 416 ITR 89 (Bombay) Anand Developers Vs ACIT 425 ITR 261 (Bombay) BPTP Limited Vs PCIT 421 ITR 59 (Delhi) Dell India (P) Limited Vs JCIT 432 ITR 212 (Karnataka) ITO Vs Ramachandra Raman – Co > No. 58/Chny/2018 (ITA No.124/Ch ny/2018) M/s. Star Plastics Vs DCIT – ITA No. 707/Chny/2023. 6.0 The central them…

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 54/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)Section 80I

…s no escapement of income and issues raised in the reasons do not affect the Book Profit which has remained unchanged. The Ld. AR further submitted that Explanation 1 to Section 147 does not apply and relied upon the decisions in case of Oracle India (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 480 (Del) and Vodafone Idea Ltd. (2022) 135 taxmann.com 169 (Bom.) 7. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and submits that the reopening was valid and the Assessing Officer has followed the procedure as per Income Tax Act, 1961. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. The Hon’ble Jurisdict…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1867/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)Section 80I

Rajeev Educational Trust, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Circle- Exemption, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4047/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Moninder Kaur, Sr.D.R

Section 11(2)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…of Income Tax, (2020) 113 taxmann.com 587 (Del). The SLP filed against which was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as reported in (2021) 125 taxmann.com 81 (SC). The Hon’ble I.T.A. No.4047/DEL/2018 6 Delhi High Court in Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 397 ITR 480 (2017) also echoed the same view earlier. 9. The Assessing Officer has plainly overlooked the jurisdictional requirement in terms of 1st proviso to Section 147 of the Act. The jurisdiction assumed under Section 147 in this backdrop is ex facie vitiated and thus requires to be struck down at the threshold. The sanction granted by the CIT also can…

Addl. CIT, Special Range-7, New Delhi vs. Rites Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 680/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CA and Shri ShriFor Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.59/DEL/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Rites Ltd., Vs. Addl. CIT, Scope Building, Scope Minar, Special Range-7, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACR0830Q (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.680/DEL/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Addl. CIT, Vs. Rites Ltd., Special Range-7, Scope Building, Scope New Delhi. Minar, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACR0830Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CA and Shri Shri Satyajit Goel,…

Rites Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Spl. Range- 7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 59/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CA and Shri ShriFor Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37Section 37(1)

DCIT, Circle- 62(1), New Delhi vs. Paveljeet Singh Ruppal, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1449/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Goel, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(iii)

…ial facts been satisfied, the Tribunal correctly held that the notice of reopening of assessment was invalid. No question of law arises.” 9. Further, Hon’ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, as reported in (2017) 397 ITR 480 (Del), held that where audited accounts were already available with the Assessing Officer and form part of the assessment record, then merely suggesting that there was failure on the part of the assessee to compute and declare the true taxable income without further clarification would not justify reopening of the assessment after the limitation…

Lionbridge Technologies P. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 610/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Butani, Shreyash ShahFor Respondent: 08.01.2020

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 195Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT& Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 610/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Lionbridge Technologies P. Vs. Asst. CIT. 15(2)(1), Ltd. 3rd Floor, Reliable Tech Mumbai, R. No. 357, 3rd Floor, Park, Off Thane Belapur Rd, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Rd, Airoli, Navi Mumbai Mumbai, Maharashtra Pin- 400708 Pin:400020 [PAN No. AAB CT3 380 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : Shri Mukesh Butani, Shreyash Shah AR Shri Sanjay Singh, CIT D.R. Respondent by : 08.01.2020 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 27.05…

Peethambra Buildcon Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 19(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 637/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 148

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘D+SMC’, New Delhi Before : Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 Peethambra Buildcon Ltd., vs. Income-tax Officer, D-46, East of Kailash, New Ward 19(3), New Delhi Delhi.(PAN- AADCP 5251R) (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Shri Sunil Jain, FCA Respondent by Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement 23 .10.2018 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)- VII, New Delhi dated 16.10.2017 for the asse…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. K.C.P.Limited

ITTA/433/2011HC Telangana13 Mar 2012