PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.

395 ITR 677High Court2017#149 most cited

What is PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Reassessment proceedings initiated solely based on an investigation wing/appraisal report, without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment, are beyond jurisdiction, bad in law, and void ab initio.

471

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. · Section 148 · Section 147 · reopening of assessment · reason to believe · independent application of mind · borrowed satisfaction · investigation report · reassessment proceedings invalid · non application of mind · escapement of income

Also reported as

82 Taxmann.com 300

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 143(3)Section 68Section 151Section 142(1)Section 132Section 143(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

borrowed satisfactionlive linksection 151(1)tangible materialmaterial facts necessary for assessmentsection 148(2)kelvinatornon application of mindreason to believereopening of assessmentescapement of incomemere change of opinion

Judgments citing PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.

ACIT Circle-65(1), New Delhi vs. Sanjay Pratap Singh, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 4492/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(8)Section 271(1)(c)

…led to verify the reasons for difference which is the main basis of reopening the assessment. This shows that the conduct of AO has been very casual and arbitrary. As held by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High court in the case Pr. CIT vs Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd 395 ITR 677, the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of IT Act is a potent power not to be lightly exercised. It cannot be evoked casually or mechanically. The reasons recorded have to be based on some tangible material and that should be evident from a reading of the observations and the reasons must be self evident and must speak for themselves and the reasons…

ACIT Circle-65(1), New Delhi vs. Sanjay Pratap Singh, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 4491/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(8)Section 271(1)(c)

…led to verify the reasons for difference which is the main basis of reopening the assessment. This shows that the conduct of AO has been very casual and arbitrary. As held by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High court in the case Pr. CIT vs Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd 395 ITR 677, the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of IT Act is a potent power not to be lightly exercised. It cannot be evoked casually or mechanically. The reasons recorded have to be based on some tangible material and that should be evident from a reading of the observations and the reasons must be self evident and must speak for themselves and the reasons…

Rani Goenka, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 44(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1414/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी संजय शमा" "या"यक सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1414/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rani Goenka Vs. ITO, Ward-44(2), Kolkata (PAN: ADTPG 6619 F) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / ( !यथ") Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 21.02.2024 क$ "त&थ Date of Pronouncement/ 11.03.2024 आदेश उ)घोषणा क$ "त&थ For the Appellant/ Shri Manoj Katatuka, A.R "नधा"/रती क$ ओर से For the Respondent/ Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT रा…

Snr Electronics Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 24(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 937/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Deepti Chandola, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292CSection 68Section 69C

…tiny, the AO would have considerable latitude in issuing notice for reopening if it was found that he had tangible material to form a belief that income chargeable tax have escaped assessment. However, in the recent cases, Meenakshi Overseas P. Ltd. Vs. PCIT, 395 ITR 677 and PCIT Vs. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd., 396 ITR 5, Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has extended their opinion by holding that the reasons recorded by AO have to be based on some tangible material and that should be evident from reading of the reasons. It is also opined by the Court that the reasons to be believed must demonstrate the link between…

G.J. Holding Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1171/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1171/Chandi/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 G.J. Holding Pvt. Ltd. बनाम Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Ludhiana C/O G.S. Auto International Limited, G.S. Estate, G.T. Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacg6664K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri P.K. Goel & Sunil Arora, C.As राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2023 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2024 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.07.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana[Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following 2. Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Goel & Sunil Arora, C.AsFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “A” CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.1171/CHANDI/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 G.J. Holding Pvt. Ltd. बनाम ACIT, Central Circle-II, Ludhiana C/o G.S. Auto International Limited, G.S. Estate, G.T. Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACG6664K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri P.K. Goel & Sunil Arora, C.As राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Da…

ITO Ward - 4, Rohtak vs. Surender Dalal, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 7714/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7714/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Ito, Surender Dalal, Ward-4, Vs. Dalal Bhawan, Aayakar Bhawan, Rohtak, Haryana Near Petrol Pump, Gohana Road, Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aqlps2166C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7490/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Surender Dalal, Ito, Dalal Bhawan, Vs. Ward-4, Near Petrol Pump, Aayakar Bhawan, Gohana Road, Rohtak, Haryana Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aqlps2166C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

…nt. Therefore, on this reason alone, the reopening of the assessment is illegal and bad in law. We rely upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. GANDG Pharma India Ltd., 384 ITR 147 and Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677. The A.O. had based his belief on the fact that assessee had not filed any return, due to which, there were escapement of income on account of sale of immovable property. The assessee, however, filed original return within time and produced the Certificate from Tehsildar to show that it was not a capital asset liable for capital gain. The A.O. in…

Surender Dalal, Rohtak vs. ITO Ward - 4, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 7490/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7714/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Ito, Surender Dalal, Ward-4, Vs. Dalal Bhawan, Aayakar Bhawan, Rohtak, Haryana Near Petrol Pump, Gohana Road, Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aqlps2166C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7490/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Surender Dalal, Ito, Dalal Bhawan, Vs. Ward-4, Near Petrol Pump, Aayakar Bhawan, Gohana Road, Rohtak, Haryana Rohtak, Haryana. Pan No.Aqlps2166C अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69

…nt. Therefore, on this reason alone, the reopening of the assessment is illegal and bad in law. We rely upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. GANDG Pharma India Ltd., 384 ITR 147 and Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677. The A.O. had based his belief on the fact that assessee had not filed any return, due to which, there were escapement of income on account of sale of immovable property. The assessee, however, filed original return within time and produced the Certificate from Tehsildar to show that it was not a capital asset liable for capital gain. The A.O. in…

Akik Marketing India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 2(1), New Delhi

ITA 4559/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2010-11 Akik Marketing India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, N-39, Ground Floor, Ward 2(1), Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110048 Pan : Aaaca6579K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gurjeet Singh, Ca & Shri Shantanu Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, CA &For Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 68

…that cannot be made as valid basis to infer income escaping assessment u/s 148 of the Act. Ld. AR placed reliance upon following mentioned judgments: - i) Hon/ble Delhi High Court in G & G Pharma 384 ITR 147 ii) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Meenakshi Overseas 395 ITR 677 iii) CIT vs. Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 231 (Raj.) iv) Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 47 DTR 201 (Delhi) v) Hon’ble Delhi high Court Sabh Infrastructure 398 ITR 198 5 4559/Del/2019 7. As with regard to ground no. 4, Ld. AR has submitted that Section 151 of the Act clearly stipulates that the Pr.CIT, who is the c…

Reena Jain, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-37(1), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 503/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…ithout recording his own satisfaction and belief that income of the assessee has escaped assessment. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd. reported in (2017) 395 ITR 677 (Delhi). 6. In view of the above and the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court, we are inclined to quash the assessment framed by the AO as the same lacks of any independent application of mind and is based upon the borrowed satisfaction of the Investigation Wing. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed. Order pronou…

Ujjala Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Darjeeling vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Siliguri

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 741/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Rajesh Kumar

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री राजपाल यादव, उपाध्यक्ष (कोलकाता क्षेत्र) एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT & SRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.: 733 & 741/KOL/2023 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Ujjala Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. (Presently known as Anubhav Hardware Pvt. Ltd.)...………………………………………..Appellant [PAN: AABCU 0256 C] Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Siliguri........................................Respondent Appearances: Assessee represented by – Sh. Soumitra Choudhury, Adv. &…

Ujjala Suppliers (P) Ltd., Darjeeling vs. ITO, WD-2(1), Siliguri, Matigara

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 733/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Rajesh Kumar

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री राजपाल यादव, उपाध्यक्ष (कोलकाता क्षेत्र) एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT & SRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.: 733 & 741/KOL/2023 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Ujjala Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. (Presently known as Anubhav Hardware Pvt. Ltd.)...………………………………………..Appellant [PAN: AABCU 0256 C] Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Siliguri........................................Respondent Appearances: Assessee represented by – Sh. Soumitra Choudhury, Adv. &…

M/S Ankur Power Projects Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 15(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3291/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “A” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 3291/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2011-12) Vs. ITO-15(1)(1) M/s. Ankur Power Projects Pvt. Ltd. B-60, Station Plaza, Station Road Room No. 456 Bhandup West, Mumbai-400 078. 4th Floor Aayakar Bhavan PAN : AAICA9913H M.K. Road Mumbai-400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal & Shri Aakash Kumar Department by Ms. N.V. Nadkarni & Shri Ujjawal Kumar Chavan Date of Hearing 13.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 23.11.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assesse…

M/S. Vinayak Agro Industries, Rourkela vs. ITO Ward-4, Rourkela

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 166/CTK/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Nov 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri N.K.Rout, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA Nos.107&166/CTK/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010 & 2012-2013) M/s Vinayak Agro Industries, Vs ITO, Ward-4, Rourkela Ratakhand, Bisra, Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh-770036 PAN No. :AAGFV 6324 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri N.K.Rout, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 22/11/2023 घोषणा…

M/S. Vinayak Agro Industries, Rourkela vs. ITO Ward-4, Rourkela

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 107/CTK/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Nov 2023AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri N.K.Rout, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA Nos.107&166/CTK/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010 & 2012-2013) M/s Vinayak Agro Industries, Vs ITO, Ward-4, Rourkela Ratakhand, Bisra, Rourkela, Dist: Sundargarh-770036 PAN No. :AAGFV 6324 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri N.K.Rout, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 22/11/2023 घोषणा…

Madhuban Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Presently Known As Madhuban Dealers LLP, Kolkata vs. PCIT-13, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee allowed

ITA 273/KOL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 273/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Madhuban Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, (presently known as Madhuban Dealers Kolkata-13, 3, Govt. Place, Kolkata- LLP) 700001. 113B, Manohar Das Katra, Shop No. 118, Durga Gate, Ground Floor, Kolkata-700007. (PAN: ABCFM1259J) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 03.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement 07.11.2023 For the Appellant Shri Akkal Dudhewala, AR For the Respondent Shri Sunil Kr. Agarwala, CIT, DR ORD…

Anand Kumar Padia, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-5(1), Kolkata.

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

ITA 871/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…support from the Page 4 of 5 I.T.A. No.: 871/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Anand Kumar Padia. decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (in short ld. 'Pr. CIT') vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P.) Ltd. reported in [2017] 395 ITR 677 (Delhi). 6. In view of the above facts and circumstances and the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Court, we are inclined to quash the assessment framed by the AO as the same lacks any independent application of mind and is based upon the borrowed satisfaction of the Investigation wing. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.…

Chheda Specialities Foods Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-12(1)-4, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2305/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhchheda Specialities Vs. Ito-12(1)(4) Foods Pvt. Ltd. 145A, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. 7, Bmc Ind M. K. Road, Estate, Sai Nagar, Churchgate, Mg Road No. 1, Mumbai-400020 Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400067 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccc6221G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri. Ajay Singh
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 37

…held that reopening notice has to be issued by the AO on his own satisfaction and not on borrowed satisfaction. As per the aforesaid decision, the AO is required to link material with the reason recorded. In the case of PCIT v/s Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. [395 ITR 677] in this order the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi held that where the reason failed to demonstrate link between the tangible material and form of reason to believe income of escaped assessment then consequently reassessment is unjustified. Following the decision of Hon‟ble High Courts we consider that in the case of the assessee the AO had reopened…

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbaicircle-32(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 979/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…t is not valid. In support of his contention the ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the various judicial pronouncements placed in the paper book referred as follows: “1. Judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd (395 ITR 677) for AY 2004-05 dated 26-05- 2017 2. Order of Cuttack Bench, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Cuttack in case of Madan Mohan Pradhan, M/s. MaaGouri Enterprises Vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Bhubaneswar (ITA No. 491/CTK/2017) for AY 2008-09 dated 07- 09-2018. 3. Judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT-5 Vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd for…

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt CIT, Circle-32(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 981/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…t is not valid. In support of his contention the ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the various judicial pronouncements placed in the paper book referred as follows: “1. Judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd (395 ITR 677) for AY 2004-05 dated 26-05- 2017 2. Order of Cuttack Bench, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Cuttack in case of Madan Mohan Pradhan, M/s. MaaGouri Enterprises Vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Bhubaneswar (ITA No. 491/CTK/2017) for AY 2008-09 dated 07- 09-2018. 3. Judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT-5 Vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd for…

Vivek Raghu Shetty, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commisssioner of Income Tax, Circle-32(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 980/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.975 To 978 & 979 To 981/Mum/2022 (A.Ys. 2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: AnujKisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ujjawal Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…t is not valid. In support of his contention the ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the various judicial pronouncements placed in the paper book referred as follows: “1. Judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd (395 ITR 677) for AY 2004-05 dated 26-05- 2017 2. Order of Cuttack Bench, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Cuttack in case of Madan Mohan Pradhan, M/s. MaaGouri Enterprises Vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Bhubaneswar (ITA No. 491/CTK/2017) for AY 2008-09 dated 07- 09-2018. 3. Judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT-5 Vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd for…