(P.) Ltd. v. ITO

221 ITR 538Supreme Court of India1996#829 most cited

What is (P.) Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

The sanction of a specified authority under Section 151 is a mandatory procedural check before issuing a notice under Section 148. This procedural safeguard aims to prevent mechanical reopening of assessments and harassment of the assessee.

125

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sri Krishna (P.) Ltd. v. ITO · Section 148 notice · Section 151 sanction · specified authority approval · mechanical reopening of assessment · harassment of assessee · income escaping assessment · procedural check · old regime Section 151 · within four years

Also reported as

87 Taxmann 3159 SCC 534

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 151Section 147Section 148ASection 143(3)Section 144BSection 149Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 151(i)section 148a(a)within four yearssection 151(ii)section 148 noticesection 3(1)section 151(2)section 151(1)sanctioning authorityorder under section 148a(d)specified authorityincome escaping assessment

Judgments citing (P.) Ltd. v. ITO

Khangaram K. Dewasi, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal

ITA 2805/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys, Mumbai-21 Shop No. 5, Sultan Market, Opp. Vs. Ash Krishna Bldg. Andheri Ghatkoper Road, Sakinaka, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400072. Pan No. Aeepd 8897 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ajeya Kumar Ojha, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…as (SC) 103 ITR 437 c. Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another vs ITO & Anr. (SC)203 Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another vs ITO & Anr. (SC)203 Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another vs ITO & Anr. (SC)203 ITR 456 ITR 456 d. Sri Krishna Sri Krishna (P) Ltd. ys CIT (SC)221 ITR 538 e. Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. vs ITO (SC) 191 ITR Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. vs ITO (SC) 191 ITR Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. vs ITO (SC) 191 ITR ITA Nos. 2805 to 2807/M/2018 21 Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. Of Shreenathji Mr. Khangaram K. Dewasi, Prop. Of Shreenathji Metal & Alloys (ii) A close reading o…

Hitesh Chhatwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC -5(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed while for the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6418/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: Vinay Sinha
Section 54F

…examined nor was any view formed regarding any of issues. The appellant has not shown that the Arbitration Award was brought to the specific attention of the assessing officer. Full and true disclosure is necessary as held in Sri Krishna P.Ltd.Vs. ITO (1996) 221 ITR 538 (SC). Full and true disclosure of material facts means specific disclosure of each fact as held in The Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. v ACIT 348 ITR 439 (Bom). A perusal of the reasons recorded clearly show that the A.O. has applied his mind on the information received from the investigation wing containing results of investigation. 11 Appeals Shri H…

Raoof R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 409/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…nuineness of the gifts of above said amount cannot be established. 4. It is mandatory part of the assessee to primarily disclose all facts for arriving at its correct income of any previous year. It was held in the case of Sri Krishna Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (1996) 221 ITR 538 (SC) that every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. what is required is a full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for making assessment for that year. It was also decided in the case of KP Arthanariswamy Chettlar Vs. First ITO 84 ITR 61(Mad) and in the case of Sujir Ganesh Naik & Co. Vs. ITO…

Raoof R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 408/AHD/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…nuineness of the gifts of above said amount cannot be established. 4. It is mandatory part of the assessee to primarily disclose all facts for arriving at its correct income of any previous year. It was held in the case of Sri Krishna Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (1996) 221 ITR 538 (SC) that every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. what is required is a full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for making assessment for that year. It was also decided in the case of KP Arthanariswamy Chettlar Vs. First ITO 84 ITR 61(Mad) and in the case of Sujir Ganesh Naik & Co. Vs. ITO…

Raoof R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 407/AHD/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…nuineness of the gifts of above said amount cannot be established. 4. It is mandatory part of the assessee to primarily disclose all facts for arriving at its correct income of any previous year. It was held in the case of Sri Krishna Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (1996) 221 ITR 538 (SC) that every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. what is required is a full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for making assessment for that year. It was also decided in the case of KP Arthanariswamy Chettlar Vs. First ITO 84 ITR 61(Mad) and in the case of Sujir Ganesh Naik & Co. Vs. ITO…

Anisha R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 406/AHD/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 406/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2005-2006 Anisha R. Dhanani, A.C.I.T., 281, 28Th Floor, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Kalpatru Heights, Vadodara. Dr. A.R. Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. Pan: Actpd3111C

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…nuineness of the gifts of above said amount cannot be established. 4. It is mandatory part of the assessee to primarily disclose all facts for arriving at its correct income of any previous year. It was held in the case of Sri Krishna Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (1996) 221 ITR 538 (SC) that every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. what is required is a full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for making assessment for that year. It was also decided in the case of KP Arthanariswamy Chettlar Vs. First ITO 84 ITR 61(Mad) and in the case of Sujir Ganesh Naik & Co. Vs. ITO…

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

…held that reopening on basis of actual error pointed out by the audit party was permissible under law. 5.1.8 Regarding the objection pertaining to "change of opinion", the Assessing Officer has relied on certain case laws such as 117 Taxman 12, 87 Taxman 306, 221 ITR 538, amongst others. 5.1.9 In the instant case the following facts are not in dispute:  There was initiation of rectification proceedings under section 154 which included the issue of excess claim of deduction under section 36(1)(viii) to which the appellant had responded and subsequently, the AO did not take any further action in the matter.  The…

Mirah Dekor Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 14, Mumbai

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6809/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2021AY 2009-10
Section 133ASection 14ASection 234A

…nce is placed on following case laws of the Apex Court. a Kalyanji Mavji & Co vs CIT (Supreme Court) 102 ITR 23 b ITO vs Lakhmani Mewal Das (Supreme Court) c. Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another vs ITO & Anr (SQ203 ITR 456 d. Shri Krishna (P) Ltd, vs CIT (SC)221 ITR 538 e. Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co Ltd vs ITO (SC) 191 ITR 6 9 Mirah Dekor Pvt. Ltd. ix) Not a case of change of opinion It is not a case of change of opinion as no opinion was formed in earlier assessment about genuineness of bills & parties It was not a case of definite and specific opinion made by AO regarding original bills being genuin…

Jsk Industries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-8(1), Mumbai

ITA 5891/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 147Section 68

…ending for such assessment. 8.16 Further, it is the duty of the assessee to disclose full and true materials to the A.O. but for which the A.O. could initiate the reassessment proceedings. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shri Krishna P. Ltd. 221 ITR 538, 549 that every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. A disclosure may be a false one or a true one. It may be a full disclosure or it may not be. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a partial disclosure may very often be a misleading one. Therefore, what is required is a full and true disclosure of all materia…

Sunita Madhok, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 555/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. Kabila, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 234BSection 69

…eason to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income. Sufficiency of the reason is not open to question by the assessee. For the purpose, the ld. DR relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sri Krishna Pvt. v. ITO (1996)221 ITR 538 (SC). 42. Regarding non-disposal of the objections raised by the assessee for reopening the assessment, it was submitted by the ld. DR that the AO duly addressed the issue during the assessment proceedings. There was failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts about the bank account at HSBC, Geneva. The require…

Sunita Madhok, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 554/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. Kabila, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 234BSection 69

…eason to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income. Sufficiency of the reason is not open to question by the assessee. For the purpose, the ld. DR relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sri Krishna Pvt. v. ITO (1996)221 ITR 538 (SC). 42. Regarding non-disposal of the objections raised by the assessee for reopening the assessment, it was submitted by the ld. DR that the AO duly addressed the issue during the assessment proceedings. There was failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts about the bank account at HSBC, Geneva. The require…

Dy CIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Leena Poower Tech Engineers P Ltd., Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1313/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Us Is A Private Limited Company Stated To Be Engaged In The Business As 'Investment Company' In Column 10, Page 1, Of The Impugned Assessment Order. Its Assessment Under Section 143(3)

Section 143(3)Section 68

…losure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. A disclosure may be a false one or true one. It may be a full disclosure or it may not be. A partial disclosure may very often be a misleading one. In Shri Krishna (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO [(1996) 221 ITR 538 (SC)], Their Lordships have observed that “Now, what needs to be emphasised is that the obligation on the assessee to disclose the material facts - or what are called, primary facts - is not a mere disclosure but a disclosure which is full and true. A false disclosure is not a true disclosure. The disclosure must not only be true but must be full…

J.D. Sons Steel Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1061/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr.D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1060 & 1061/DEL/2015 Assessment Year 2007-08 & 2009-10 J.D. Sons Steel Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT, B-17, First Floor, Circle-II, Nehru Ground, NIT, Faridabad. Faridabad. TAN/PAN: AAACJ9814A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Rajesh Jain, CA Respondent by: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing: 05 07 2021 Date of pronouncement: 31 08 2021 O R D E R PER, AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against separate impugned ord…

Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 6, Mumbai

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2062/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri D.C.Bothra & Shri R. K. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet S Duggal
Section 132(1)

…pending for such assessment. 8.9 Further, it is the duty of the assessee to disclose full and true materials to the A.O. but for which the A.O. could initiate the reassessment proceedings. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shri Krishna P. Ltd. 221 ITR 538, 549 that 11 Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd. every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. A disclosure may be a false one or a true one. It may be a full disclosure or it may not be. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a partial disclosure may very often be a misleading one. Therefore, what is required is a full and t…

DCIT Cen Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3968/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri D.C.Bothra & Shri R. K. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet S Duggal
Section 132(1)

…pending for such assessment. 8.9 Further, it is the duty of the assessee to disclose full and true materials to the A.O. but for which the A.O. could initiate the reassessment proceedings. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shri Krishna P. Ltd. 221 ITR 538, 549 that 11 Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd. every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. A disclosure may be a false one or a true one. It may be a full disclosure or it may not be. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a partial disclosure may very often be a misleading one. Therefore, what is required is a full and t…

Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 6 (Old), Mumbai

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3245/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri D.C.Bothra & Shri R. K. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet S Duggal
Section 132(1)

…pending for such assessment. 8.9 Further, it is the duty of the assessee to disclose full and true materials to the A.O. but for which the A.O. could initiate the reassessment proceedings. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shri Krishna P. Ltd. 221 ITR 538, 549 that 11 Sikkim Ferro Alloys Ltd. every disclosure is not and cannot be treated to be a true and full disclosure. A disclosure may be a false one or a true one. It may be a full disclosure or it may not be. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a partial disclosure may very often be a misleading one. Therefore, what is required is a full and t…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 30/CHANDI/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…count Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax Vs. Rolls Royce Industrial Power India Ltd. has held as under: 8. That in case proceedings under Section 147 are initiated after expiry of four years from the Assessment Year which is subject to scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3} of the Income Tax Act, then the e…

M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…count Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax Vs. Rolls Royce Industrial Power India Ltd. has held as under: 8. That in case proceedings under Section 147 are initiated after expiry of four years from the Assessment Year which is subject to scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3} of the Income Tax Act, then the e…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 29/CHANDI/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…count Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax Vs. Rolls Royce Industrial Power India Ltd. has held as under: 8. That in case proceedings under Section 147 are initiated after expiry of four years from the Assessment Year which is subject to scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3} of the Income Tax Act, then the e…

DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh vs. M/S Manav Mangal Society, Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 28/CHANDI/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

…count Co. Ltd. vs. ITO [1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC). iii). S. Narayanappa Vs CIT[1967] 63 ITR 219 (SC) iv). ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Dass [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) v). S. Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. Vs ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1(SC) vi). Sri Krishna P. Ltd. V. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538 (SC). b). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax Vs. Rolls Royce Industrial Power India Ltd. has held as under: 8. That in case proceedings under Section 147 are initiated after expiry of four years from the Assessment Year which is subject to scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3} of the Income Tax Act, then the e…