How many judgments cite Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO?

396 judgments on BharatTax cite Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO (203 ITR 456), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 151, Section 68.

Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO

203 ITR 456Supreme Court of India1993#186 most cited

What is Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO authority for?

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are valid even after a scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3), provided the Assessing Officer forms a reason to believe, based on definite, specific, and reliable information, that income escaped assessment due to the assessee's failure to fully and truly disclose material facts.

396

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Phool Chand Bajrang Lal · Section 147 reassessment · Section 148 notice · reason to believe income escaped · full and true disclosure failure · definite and reliable information · reopening after 143(3) assessment · validity of reassessment proceedings · income escaping assessment reason to believe · SC judgment reopening assessment

Also reported as

69 Taxmann 6274 SCC 7769 Taxmann.com 627

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 151 Section 68 Section 139 Section 133(6)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 147(a)true and full disclosure full and true disclosure beyond four years live link material facts necessary for assessment kelvinator borrowed satisfaction mere change of opinion income escaping assessment reason to believe escapement of income

Judgments citing Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO

M/S. M.D.Packaging Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6198/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishimd Packaging Ltd, Ito, C/O. Sp Jain & Associates, Ward-6(1), Vs. U-17(Lgf), Green Park New Delhi (Extension), New Delhi Pan:Aabcm8236E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…lhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT Vs/ G&G Pharma India Ltd 384 ITR 147 (DEL). 5. Against this the ld AR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Phool Chand Bajranglal Vs. ITO [203 ITR 456]. 6. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and also perused the orders of the lower authorities. The reasons recorded by the ld AO for Page 3 of 6 reopening of the assessment completed beyond 4 years but within 6 years at Page 21 and 22 of the PB are as under:- “The investigation wing of the Income Tax Department had unearthed a huge…

Abb India Ltd, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Ltu), Bangalore

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

ITA 1124/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S. Abb India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Abb Ltd.) 21 Floor, World Trade Centre, Brigade Gateway,No.26/01, Dr.Rajkumar Road Malleswaram West, Bangalore-560055. … Appellant Pan: Aaaca 3834 B Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Ltu), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T.Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…eld by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Multiscreeen Media (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India & another (324 ITR 54). Even the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ess Kay Engineering P.Ltd. vs. CIT (247 ITR 818) Phool Chand Bajrang Law & another vs. CIT(203 ITR 456) held that information obtained in subsequent assessment proceedings could lead to a belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment even though the transaction in question had been examined during the course of original assessment proceedings. Page 8 of 10 Reliance placed by the learned counsel for assessee-company on the decision in…

Ratnakar M. Pujari, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 25(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 995/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.995/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Ratnakar M. Pujari, Income Tax Officer, Ward बनाम/ Shop No. 10, Geeta Sadan, 25(3)(3), V. Iraniwadi No. 3, R. No. 304, Kandivali (W), C-11, Pratyakshakar Mumbai – 400057. Bhavan, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan :Agcpp8410B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Bist (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 148

…ssment order for the assessment year 2005-06 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. He has also relied on the following case laws to support his finding: 1. Mc Dowell and Company Limited v. CTO (1985) 154 ITR 148(SC) 2. Phoolchand Bajrang Lal v. ITO (1992) 203 ITR 456 (SC) 3. Consolidated Photo and Finvest Ltd. v. ACIT (Delhi HC) (2006) 151 Taxmann 41 (Delhi) 4. Indo Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. V. CIT, 159 ITR 624 (SC) 5. Ram Prasad v. ITO (1995) 82 Taxman 199 (All) 6. Consolidated Photo & Finvest Ltd. ACIT (2006) 151 Taxmann 41 (Delhi) 7. Keventer (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2004) 89 ITD 347 (Kol.) Appeal N…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2673/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Saroha, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv

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

…io of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Gurera Gas Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (258 ITR 170) and in case of Swaraj Engine Ltd. Vs. ACIT (260 ITR 202). The ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lai V s. ITO (203 ITR 456) is 7 I.T.A.NO.2673/Del/2011 applicable. Ratio of Hon’ble SC in case of Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd is also applicable. 3. In case of ACIT Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. ,291 ITR 500 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court also held that at the stage of issue of notice under section 148 of the Act, the only question is whether there was relevan…

Epcos India Private Limited, Nadia vs. A.C.I.T Cir - 11, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assesee is allowed

ITA 1921/KOL/2013[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2016AY 1998-99

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 1921/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 1998-99 Epcos India Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-11, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaaci 6950 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Anup Sinha, Ar For The Respondent : Shri Debashis Lahiri, Jcit, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Anup Sinha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Lahiri, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM] I.T.A No. 1921/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 1998-99 Epcos India Pvt. Ltd. -vs.- A.C.I.T., Circle-11, Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AAACI 6950 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant : Shri Anup Sinha, AR For the Respondent : Shri Debashis Lahiri, JCIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 14.07.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 20.07.2016. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 11.03.2013 of C.I.T.(A)-XII., Kolkata relating to A.Y.1998-99. 2. Grounds of appea…

Sri. G.A. Ramaswamy Reddy, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

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

ITA 286/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri G.A.Ramaswamy Reddy, No.173, Gunjur Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore. … Appellant Pan:Aanhr 4650 L Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 7(3), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan , CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT(DR)

Section 139(1)Section 142Section 147Section 234Section 54BSection 54F

…failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts. It is a belief that income has escaped assessment is not subject to the judgment of a court. This has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lai v. ITO 203 ITR 456 and in the case of Raymand Wollen Mills v. ITO 236 ITR 34. Considering the facts and the judicial decisions above, this ground is dismissed.” “4.7 I have carefully considered this issue. The main reason on which the exemption has been denied by the AO is that the sale deed reveals that the property is purchased in the name of the individual Sri G…

M/S Prithvi Granities Pvt. Ltd vs. Addl.C.I.T

In the result, grounds challenging re-assessment proceedings are dismissed

ITA 991/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Prithvi Granites Pvt.Ltd. No.196, 3Rd Phase, Bommasandra Indl. Area, Anekal Taluk Bangalore-560025. … Appellant Pa No.Aadcp 9920 C Vs.

For Appellant: Shri V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153

…te law that at the time of issuing notice, it is not incumbent upon the AO to prove conclusively that there is escapement of income. Reliance can be had to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO Page 7 of 8 (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC) and Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs ITO & others (1999)236 ITR 34. The contention of the assessee- company that re-assessment proceedings were prompted by mere change of opinion cannot be accepted as in the present case, there was no opinion formed by the AO as the original assessment came to be completed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Reliance placed…

M/S Quetzel Designs India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1563/BANG/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri S. Nambirajan, JCIT (D.R)

Section 143Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘ B ’ BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T. A. Nos.1563 & 1684/Bang/2013 (Assessment Year : 2004-05 & 2005-06) M/s. Quetzel Designs India Pvt. Ltd. No.6/2, Kaikondarhalli, Sarjapur Road, Bangalore-560 035. …. Appellant. PAN AAACQ 0488R Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 12(2), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri Sandeep, C.A. Respondent By : Shri S. Nambirajan, JCIT (D.R) Date of Hearing : 17.5.2016. Date of Pronouncement :24.06.2016. O R D E R Per Shri Vijay Pal Rao, J.M. : Thes…

Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 6(3), Mumbai

ITA 3369/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shjoginder Singh & Rajendraआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos./420/Mum/2014 & 3369/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.2005-06 वष" Acit-6(3), 522, 5Th Floor Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited Gsk House, Dr. Annie Besant Road Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Vs. Worli,Mumbai--400 030. Mumbai-400 020. Pan:Aaacg 4414 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Ms. Amrita Misra (Dr) Assessee By: S/Shri Niraj Sheth & Vallabh Gokhale(Ar) सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07.04.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 07.04.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश 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 सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dt.18.3.2015 & 11.11.13 Of Cit(A)-13 & Cit(A)-12 Respectively, Mumbai,The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Raising Various Grounds.As Both The Appeals Are For The Same Ay.S,So We Are Adjudicating Them By Passing A Single Order.

For Appellant: S/Shri Niraj Sheth & Vallabh Gokhale(AR)For Respondent: Ms. Amrita Misra (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण,"जी अिधकरण जी जी” खंडपीठ जी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI-“G”,BENCH सव"ी जोिग"दर "सह, "याियक सद"य एवं राजे"", लेखा सद"य Before S/ShJoginder Singh,Judicial Member & Rajendra,Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं /ITA Nos./420/Mum/2014 & 3369/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /AY.2005-06 वष" ACIT-6(3), 522, 5th Floor Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited GSK House, Dr. Annie Besant Road Aayakar Bhavan, MK Road Vs. Worli,Mumbai--400 030. Mumbai-400 020. PAN:AAACG 4414 B (अपीलाथ…

Glaxo Smith Kline Pharmaceuticals Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT -6(3), Mumbai

ITA 420/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

For Appellant: S/Shri Niraj Sheth & Vallabh Gokhale(AR)For Respondent: Ms. Amrita Misra (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Lahoti Overseas Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee company in ITA

ITA 3812/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3812/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Lahoti Overseas Ltd., बनाम/ Tax , 5(2),Room No. 571, 307, Arun Chambers, V. 5 Th Floor, Tardeo Road, Tardeo, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400034. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacl2578 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare (Sr.DR)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…e notice of the AO subsequent to the framing of the regular assessment vide orders dated 17.12.2009 u/s 143(3) of the Act. In support, the assessee company relied upon the following decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court: (i) Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO , 203 ITR 456,477 (ii) ALA Firm v. CIT 189 ITR 285, 298 (iii) Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT 119 ITR 996, 1004 (iv) ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437, 445 The assessee company submitted that following documents were given to the AO during the course of regular assessment proceedings with respect to the claim u/s 80IA of the Act and no new mat…

Shraddha Jain, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal ground

ITA 3280/DEL/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri G.D. Agarwal, Hon’Blesri C.M.Gargita No. 3280/Del. 2015 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Sh. V.K.Tulsiyan, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. P.Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 270Section 68

…whney, in similar circumstances, the appeal of the Revenue was allowed and the matter was remanded to the ITAT for examination of the case on merits. He also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. Income-tax Officer (1993) 203 ITR 456 SC. The main thrust of the submission of Mr. Sawhney is that, as was in the case of India Terminal Connector System (supra), in the present case as well, there was specific information regarding the name of the entry provider, the date on which the entry was taken, the cheque details as well as the amount credited to the account of the Assessee.…

Marathon Finlease Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed on legal grounds

ITA 4029/DEL/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri G.D. Agarwal, Hon’Blesri C.M.Garg

For Appellant: Sh. V.K.Tulsiyan, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. P.Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148

…y, in similar circumstances, the appeal of the Revenue was 4 allowed and the matter was remanded to the ITAT for examination of the case on merits. He also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. Income- tax Officer (1993) 203 ITR 456 SC. The main thrust of the submission of Mr. Sawhney is that, as was in the case of India Terminal Connector System (supra), in the present case as well, there was specific information regarding the name of the entry provider, the date on which the entry was taken, the cheque details as well as the amount credited to the account of the Assessee.…

Sh. Suresh M. Bajaj, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal grounds

ITA 7/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri G.D. Agarwal, Hon’Blesri C.M.Gargita No. 7/Del./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Sh. P.C.Yadav, J.MFor Respondent: Sh. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

Fibres & Fabrics International P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-11(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 1352/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Fibres & Fabrics International Pvt. Ltd. No.21, E-1, 2Nd Phase, Peenya Industrial Area, Bangalore-560058. … Appellant Pan: Aaacf 6841 M Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(3), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)

Section 147Section 253Section 32(1)(ii)

…o make addition only by inferences drawn, this is very clear from the perusal of the assessment order, as extracted above. (ii) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ess Ess Kay Engg. Co.(P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (247 ITR 818) and Phool Chand Bajrang Lal vs. ITO (203 ITR 456) held that information obtained in the subsequent assessment proceedings could lead to a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped Page 26 of 37 assessment even though the transaction in question had been examined during the course of original assessment proceedings. This ratio was followed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M…

Shri Rajesh Kumar Narang, Meerut vs. ITO, Meerut

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3881/DEL/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 3881/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Shri Rajesh Kumar Narang, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O M/S Rajesh Steel, Baghpat Ward-2(2), Road, Meerut Meerut (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adfpn2097N Assessee By : Sh. Vinod Kumar Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Rasmita Jha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.12.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.02.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Kumar Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Rasmita Jha, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena Pillai, JM ITA No. 3881/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2001-02 Shri Rajesh Kumar Narang, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/o M/s Rajesh Steel, Baghpat Ward-2(2), Road, Meerut Meerut (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ADFPN2097N Assessee by : Sh. Vinod Kumar Goel, Adv. Revenue by : Smt. Rasmita Jha, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 07.12.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 09.02.2016 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 25.03.2013 of ld. CIT(A), Meerut. 2. Following grounds have been rai…

Praveen Kumar Jain, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1331/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raopraveen Kumar Jain, Ito, C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv, Ward-39(3), Vs. F-26/124, Sector-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi Pan:Ahhpk2948R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. Anjula Jain, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-I”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER Praveen Kumar Jain, ITO, C/o. Kapil Goel, Adv, Ward-39(3), Vs. F-26/124, Sector-7, New Delhi Rohini, Delhi PAN:AHHPK2948R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv Respondent by : Dr. Anjula Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.12.2015 Date of pronouncement 22.01.2016 O R D E R This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.12.2014 of ld. CIT(A), New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- “Jurisdictional Grounds on validity…

Prakash Fatandas Jassuja, Thane vs. ITO WD 3(2), Thane

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4933/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh

Section 133ASection 147

…ents by the assessee which had not been disclosed during the original assessment proceedings, such initiation has been upheld. 2.16. In the case of Pal Jain v. ITO, (2004) 267 ITR 540, 544-45, 548, 549 (P & H), applying Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO, (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC), although the transaction of sale of shares was disclosed and accepted in the original assessment, but the subsequent discovery by the DDI (Investigation) revealed that the transaction was not genuine, a reassessment notice after four years has been held to be valid because there was no true disclosure of the material facts. In this regard,…

Naresh Chander Gupta, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5688/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.C. Mohanty, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 234B

…assessment proceedings, we do not find any justification to disturb the conclusion arrived at by the ld. CIT(A) who has rightly held the action as valid laying his hands on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal Vs. ITO, 203 ITR 456. In the present case, the Assessing Officer received information after appellate order in the case of PAN Portfolio (P) Ltd. wherein the CIT(A) has given the direction to take action in the case of the assessee. Therefore, initiation of proceedings u/s. 147 on this count cannot be said to be invalid. Besides, after receipt of reasons recorded, no…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 5611/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CA and Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nandita Kanchan, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 264Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5611/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) DCIT, Central Circle 4, vs. M/s. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., New Delhi. 1711, S.P. Mukherjee Marg, Delhi – 110 006. (PAN No. AAACD0132H) ITA No.5581/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) M/s. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4, 1711, S.P. Mukherjee Marg, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 006. (PAN : AAACD0132H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri R.S. Singhvi, CA and Shri Satyajeet Goel, CA REVE…