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 366,470 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.

Juliet Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 5452/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5452/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Juliet Industries Limited Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Lower Parel M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5975/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Juliet Industries Limited Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Vs. M.K.Road Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Vijay Mehta, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Vidhyadhar, Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…3 The Ld. AR has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer [338 ITR Assessment Year 2009-10 51] which has subsequently been followed by same court in PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. [395 ITR 677]. However, we note that both the cases addressed a situation where reassessment proceedings were triggered after four years from the end of relevant AY. Further, in those cases, independent investigation of alleged facts by Ld. AO was missing. Further, a perusal of judgment rendered in Signatures Hotels Pvt. Ltd. [supra] shows that there the Hon’…

Leela Bhanji Gada, Mumbai vs. It 16(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, Ground of appeal No

ITA 2801/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 4Section 69

…hat the reasons recorded therein are similarly worded as are in the present case. Apart there-from, the Ld. Representative for the assessee has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677(Delhi) to point out that where there was an absence of link between tangible material and formation of belief 7 ITA No.2801&2798/Mum/2014, (A.Y. 2005-06) of escapement of income, the initiation of proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act is untenable in law. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Departmental Representative has not contested the factu…

Kastur H .Gada, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, Ground of appeal No

ITA 2798/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 4Section 69

…hat the reasons recorded therein are similarly worded as are in the present case. Apart there-from, the Ld. Representative for the assessee has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677(Delhi) to point out that where there was an absence of link between tangible material and formation of belief 7 ITA No.2801&2798/Mum/2014, (A.Y. 2005-06) of escapement of income, the initiation of proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act is untenable in law. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Departmental Representative has not contested the factu…

Siya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 865/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 865/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Siya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, Up-12, Pitampura, Ward-8(4), New Delhi-110034 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaics7889N Assessee By : Smt. Rano Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Chadha, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2017 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.12.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…dent finding to the effect that the assessee had failed to disclose true and full material facts or regarding the fact that any income had escaped assessment. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Pr. CIT Vs Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 " Pr. CIT Vs RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. (2017) 396 ITR 5 " Pr. CIT Vs G & G Pharma India Ltd. (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Del.) " Sabharwal Properties Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (2016) 382 ITR 547 (Del.) " CIT Vs Independent Media Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 108/2015 order dated 19.11.2015 " ITO Vs Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 4613/Del/2010 order dated 24…

Madan Lal Chadhary, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2002-03

Section 147Section 148Section 69ASection 69C

…sidering the material produced by assessee before the AO. Reliance is further placed on the following decisions : (i). CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd., 325 ITR 285 (ii). ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das, 103 ITR 437 (iii). Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Del.) 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the impugned order and submitted that since the assessee could not prove the creditworthiness of donor and genuineness of the transactions coupled with the statements of the donor admitting their bank account to have been used only for the purpose of providing accommodation entries, the ld. CIT(A…

Anil Bihani, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 24(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 20/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Anil Bihani Acit-24(1), 12, Kakkad Comm. 6Th Floor, Lalbaug, Vs. Complex, Below Sun- Mumbai. N-Sheel, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aadpb1860C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Mittal, Dr Date Of Hearing : 21/08/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2017

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Anil Bihani ACIT-24(1), 12, Kakkad Comm. 6th floor, Lalbaug, Vs. Complex, Below Sun- Mumbai. N-Sheel, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400059. PAN No. AADPB1860C Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta, AR Revenue by : Shri Rajat Mittal, DR Date of Hearing : 21/08/2017 Date of pronouncement : 03/11/2017 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2009-10. The appeal is d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Mrs Jagjit Kaur, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5994/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. Vasanthan Sr. DR
Section 148

…T decision in case of Thandi Ram Jai Narain (order dated 27/06/2017) for maintainability of application filed under rule 27. As far as invalidity of reopening is concerned, for non application of mind, recent decision in case of Meenakshi overseas reported at 395 ITR 677, RMG Polyvinyl reported at 396 ITR 5, and similar fact -based order passed by Hyderabad bench of ITAT in case of Madhucon order dated 15/07/2015 is strongly relied, the paragraph 10 thereof which is squarely applicable in present facts is reproduced below for sake of ready reference: “...10. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the As…

Shri Mahavir Prasad, Haryana vs. ITO, Rewari

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 924/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T. Vasanthan Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 54B

…nfractuous. 13. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 12. Apart from the above, the reliance placed by Ld. counsel for the assessee Sh. Goel on the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in case of Meenakshi Overseas reported at 395 ITR 677 is also supportive to the proposition that reasons recorded without independent application of mind, without tangible material, where link between the tangible material and formation of belief is missing, cannot be sustained. Following all these decisions to maintain consistency I have no hesitation in questioning the action of reopening under se…

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1162/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1162/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Trent Ltd., Dcit-Range-2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai. Mumbai-400 001. Pan:Aaacl 1838 J आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1725/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 वष" Dcit-Range-2(3) Trent Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri Sathya Moorthy-Dr Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Joshi सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:24.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 06/12/2010 Of The Cit (A)-6,Mumbai The Assessing Officer(Ao) & The Assessee Have Filed The Cross-Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Retailing For Ready- Made Garments Etc.Filed Its Original Return Of Income On 27.10.2005,Declaring Total Income At Rs. 12.75 Crores.The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3)Of The Act, On 05.10.2007,Determining Its Income At Rs. Nil,After Setting Off Loss Of The Earlier Years.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23Section 24Section 254(1)

…n the absence of any such circumstances, namely, any material leading to a different conclusion or change in the legal position, the consistency on the part of the Revenue should be adhered to.” We would also like to refer to the case of Jyoti Prakash Dutta (367 ITR 568) of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.Facts of the case were that the Tribunal had disallowed the claim in the case of the assessee in prior years saying that a film production unit or a company was not an industrial undertaking within the meaning of section 80-IB of the Act,but the disallowance was set aside by the High Court.The Department,in spite…

M/S. Goodluck Commercial Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 3365/DEL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Mody, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Jiwani, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 68

…of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd., (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Del.) and decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677. He has, therefore, submitted that reopening of the assessment is bad in law in this case. 4. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that at the stage of reopening of the assessment, only prima facie case is to be seen which is the basis for reopening of the assessment but sufficiency or correc…

M/S. Goodluck Commercial Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 3364/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2015AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Mody, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Jiwani, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 68

…of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. G&G Pharma India Ltd., (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Del.) and decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd., 395 ITR 677. He has, therefore, submitted that reopening of the assessment is bad in law in this case. 4. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that at the stage of reopening of the assessment, only prima facie case is to be seen which is the basis for reopening of the assessment but sufficiency or correc…