Praful Chunnilal Patel v. M.J. Makwana

258 ITR 126High Court2002#6324 most cited

What is Praful Chunnilal Patel v. M.J. Makwana authority for?

An Assessing Officer must make independent inquiries to form a belief that income has escaped assessment; initiating reassessment based solely on information from another officer without independent verification or forming their own opinion is not permissible.

18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Praful Chunnilal Patel v. M.J. Makwana · reassessment · reason to believe · section 147 · independent enquiry · assessing officer · full and true disclosure · change of opinion · George Williamson (Assam) Ltd.

Issues it is cited on

section 13personcompanyindiabusinessdocumentinterest

Judgments citing Praful Chunnilal Patel v. M.J. Makwana

SHAHNAJ,NEAR BHERUDANJI WELL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 712/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Dr Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Shanaj Vs The Ito W/O Shri Aslam Khan Ward-2, Churu, Near Bherudan Ji Well,Ward No. 22 Churu Sardarshahar,Churu – 331 403 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Fpmps 3570 D

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 50CSection 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Smt. Shanaj Vs The ITO W/o Shri Aslam Khan Ward-2, Churu, Near Bherudan Ji Well,Ward No. 22 Churu Sardarshahar,Churu – 331 403 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. FPMPS 3570 D Assessee By Shri Aman Saxena Advocate Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT-DR Revenue By Date of hearing 05/10/2024 Date of 01/01/2025 Pronouncement O R D E R PER: DR S. SEETHALAKSHMI , JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 23-08-2024, National Faceless App…

KAILASH CHAND YADAV,100, KALU BABA KI DHANI, SHEOSHINGHPUR, AKODA, PHULERA-303338 vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, WARD - 1(2), JAIPUR

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

ITA 82/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar(Adv.)&For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Addl.CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

…is opened to an assessee to establish that there in fact existed no belief of that the belief was not bonafide one or was based on vague irrelevant and not specific information. (iii) JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS. vs. GEORGE WILLIAMSON (ASSAM) LTD. 258 ITR 126 (Gau) Reassessment—Full and true disclosure—Reason to believe—For exercising powers under s. 147 the assessing authority must have reason to believe that any income 14 Kailash Chand Yadav vs. ITO chargeable to tax has escaped assessment—Reason given by the assessing authority must have a rational connection or relevance for formation of that be…

BANSAL RICE TRADERS,SANGRUR vs. ITO-WARD, SANGRUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jan 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148

…he Act and as such the reasons recorded itself is defective as such the assessment based on the defective reason is not sustainable in eye of law. Your kind attention is invited to the judgment in the case of Jt. CIT vs. George Williamsons (Assam) Ltd. (2003) 258 ITR 126 in which it was held that "Assessing Officer must make independent enquiries for arriving at the prime face conclusion that income of the assessee had escaped assessment. The assessing officer acted merely on the basis of information received from another officer by result of a survey conducted by such officer. The assessing officer without formi…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. ANDHRA BANK , HYDERABAD

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

ITA 315/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Union Bank Of India, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Erstwhile Andhra Income-Tax, Bank), Hyderabad. Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aabca 7375C (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Union Bank Of India, Income-Tax, (Erstwhile Andhra Circle – 1(1), Bank), Hyderabad. Hyderabad Pan – Aabca 7375C

For Appellant: Shri S. AnanthamFor Respondent: Smt. Amisha S. Gupt
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Union Bank of India, Vs. Dy. Commissioner of (Erstwhile Andhra Income-tax, Bank), Hyderabad. Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. PAN – AABCA 7375C (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner of Vs. Union Bank of India, Income-tax, (Erstwhile Andhra Circle – 1(1), Bank), Hyderabad. Hyderabad PAN – AABCA 7375C (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S. Anantham Revenue by: Smt. Amisha S. Gupt Date of hearing…

UNION BANK OF INDIA (ERSTWHILE-ANDHRA BANK),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 192/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Union Bank Of India, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of (Erstwhile Andhra Income-Tax, Bank), Hyderabad. Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aabca 7375C (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Union Bank Of India, Income-Tax, (Erstwhile Andhra Circle – 1(1), Bank), Hyderabad. Hyderabad Pan – Aabca 7375C

For Appellant: Shri S. AnanthamFor Respondent: Smt. Amisha S. Gupt
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Union Bank of India, Vs. Dy. Commissioner of (Erstwhile Andhra Income-tax, Bank), Hyderabad. Circle – 1(1), Hyderabad. PAN – AABCA 7375C (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner of Vs. Union Bank of India, Income-tax, (Erstwhile Andhra Circle – 1(1), Bank), Hyderabad. Hyderabad PAN – AABCA 7375C (Appellants) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S. Anantham Revenue by: Smt. Amisha S. Gupt Date of hearing…

THE A C I T CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL vs. S V INFRA DEVELOPERS, BHOPAL

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 657/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…eld that in absence of cross-examination of parties, the assessment proceedings to be quashed. Further, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Praful Chunilal Patel Vs. M.J. Makwana [236 ITR 832 (Guj)] and JCIT & Ors. Vs. George Willimson (Assam) Ltd. [258 ITR 126 (Guj)] has held that statement of third party cannot be relied upon without having any corroborative evidence. 61 Shri Nitin Agrawal & S.V. Infra Developers IT(SS)A No.182/Ind/2019,ITA No.657/Ind/2019 Similarly, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram V/So CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) has held that adverse inference cannot be drawn ag…

THE ACIT (CENTRAL), UJJAIN vs. M/S. VYANKTESH PLASTICS & PACKAGING (P) LTD., UJJAIN

ITA 737/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon'Ble & Hon'Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Ariba Foods Pvt. Acit (Central), Vs. Ltd, 101, Gold Star Building, Ujjain Opp. Treasure Island, 5767 M.G. Road, Indore (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aalca7223M Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Vyanktesh Plastics Acit (Central), Vs. & Packaging Pvt. Ltd, 75/7-B, Industrial Area, Ujjain Maxi Road, Ujjain (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaacv6547J Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…ment proceedings are required to be quashed. The Ld. CIT(A) further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Praful Chunnilal Patel vs. M.J. Makwana [236 ITR 832 (Guj.)] and JCIT & Ors. vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. 258 ITR 126 (Guj.) for holding that the statement of third party cannot be relied upon without having any corroborative evidence. The CIT(A) also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) in which the Apex Court held that adverse inference cannot be drawn against the assessee from…

ACIT (CENTRAL) , UJJAIN vs. M/S. ARIBA FOODS (P) LTD., INDORE

ITA 736/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon'Ble & Hon'Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Ariba Foods Pvt. Acit (Central), Vs. Ltd, 101, Gold Star Building, Ujjain Opp. Treasure Island, 5767 M.G. Road, Indore (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aalca7223M Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Vyanktesh Plastics Acit (Central), Vs. & Packaging Pvt. Ltd, 75/7-B, Industrial Area, Ujjain Maxi Road, Ujjain (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaacv6547J Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…ment proceedings are required to be quashed. The Ld. CIT(A) further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Praful Chunnilal Patel vs. M.J. Makwana [236 ITR 832 (Guj.)] and JCIT & Ors. vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. 258 ITR 126 (Guj.) for holding that the statement of third party cannot be relied upon without having any corroborative evidence. The CIT(A) also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) in which the Apex Court held that adverse inference cannot be drawn against the assessee from…

THE ACIT (CENTRAL), UJJAIN vs. M/S. FAMOUS VANIJYA (P) LTD. , UJJAIN

ITA 773/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon'Ble & Hon'Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Ariba Foods Pvt. Acit (Central), Vs. Ltd, 101, Gold Star Building, Ujjain Opp. Treasure Island, 5767 M.G. Road, Indore (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aalca7223M Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Vyanktesh Plastics Acit (Central), Vs. & Packaging Pvt. Ltd, 75/7-B, Industrial Area, Ujjain Maxi Road, Ujjain (Revenue ) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaacv6547J Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…ment proceedings are required to be quashed. The Ld. CIT(A) further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Praful Chunnilal Patel vs. M.J. Makwana [236 ITR 832 (Guj.)] and JCIT & Ors. vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. 258 ITR 126 (Guj.) for holding that the statement of third party cannot be relied upon without having any corroborative evidence. The CIT(A) also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) in which the Apex Court held that adverse inference cannot be drawn against the assessee from…

NAVA BHARAT VENTURES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 384/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhassessment Year:2009-10

For Appellant: Sri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 50C

…ITA No 384 of 2018 Nav Bharat Ventures Ltd IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri D.S.Sunder Singh, Accountant Member Assessment Year:2009-10 Nava Bharat Ventures Ltd Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 16(1) PAN:AAACN7327C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri V. Shiva Kumar Revenue by: Smt. N. Swapna, DR Date of hearing: 01/09/2020 Date of pronouncement: 04/09/2020 ORDER Per D.S. Sunder Singh, A.M. This is assessee’s appeal for the A.Y 2009-10 against the o…

DINESH KUMAR GUPTA,AGRA vs. ITO, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 283/AGR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

…Officer to change his view. For this proposition, the ld. AR has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India, 320 ITR 561 (SC) , ICICI Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT, 268 ITR 203, CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd., 258 ITR 126 (Gau), Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. vs. ITO, 114 ITR 404 (AP), CIT vs. Simon Carves Ltd., 105 ITR 212 (SC) and several other legal pronouncements. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR had submitted that the present case is not of change of opinion and was not based only on audit report and there was independent application of mind by the Assessing Offi…

URVISH B. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 25 (3)(4), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2259/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sashi TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2259/MUM/2016(A.Y: 2009-10) Shri Urvish B. Mehta v. I.T.O., Ward – 25(3)(4) C-201, Mahu Vihar, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Behind Patel Nagar, M.G.Road, Kandivali (W) Mumbai – 400 067 PAN NO: AEYPM 0416 N (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No. 1352/MUM/2016 (A.Y: 2009-10) I.T.O., Ward – 33(3)(3) v. Shri Urvish B. Mehta R.No. 603, C-12, C-201, Mahu Vihar, Pratyakshkar Bhavan Behind Patel Nagar, Bandra Kurla Complex, M.G. Road, Kandivali (…

ITO 33(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. URVISH B. MEHTA, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1352/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sashi TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2259/MUM/2016(A.Y: 2009-10) Shri Urvish B. Mehta v. I.T.O., Ward – 25(3)(4) C-201, Mahu Vihar, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Behind Patel Nagar, M.G.Road, Kandivali (W) Mumbai – 400 067 PAN NO: AEYPM 0416 N (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No. 1352/MUM/2016 (A.Y: 2009-10) I.T.O., Ward – 33(3)(3) v. Shri Urvish B. Mehta R.No. 603, C-12, C-201, Mahu Vihar, Pratyakshkar Bhavan Behind Patel Nagar, Bandra Kurla Complex, M.G. Road, Kandivali (…

PRABHA GOYAL,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-5(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1139/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2007-08 Smt. Prabha Goyal, Vs The Ito, Scf-71, Grain Market, Ward 5(1), Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan No. :Ajmpg2545B & Assessment Year: 2007-08 Poonam Goyal, Vs The Ito, Scf-44, Grain Market, Ward 5(1), Sector 26, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan No. :Aaypg0402C

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Smt. Sukhwinder Sharma, Addl. CIT
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)

…. 649/ASR/2015, ITAT, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar 5. Signature Hotels (P) Ltd V/s Income Tax Officer | 338 ITR 51 DEL-HC 6. United Electrical Company (P) Ltd V/s Commissioner of Income Tax J 258 !TR 317 DEL- High Court 7. JCIT V/s George Williamson (Assam) Ltd \ 258 ITR 126 GAU-HC 8. Commissioner of income fax V/s Orient Craft Ltd I 354 iTR 536 DEL-HC 2.3 Referring to the facts in ITA 1140/CHD/2017, attention was invited to the copy of the reasons recorded available in the Paper Book at page 3 which it was shown is also identical to the reasons recorded in the case of Prabha Goyal. It was submitted that on earlier o…

ITO, WD-41(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S EPKON ASSOCIATES, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1425/KOL/2014[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Mrs. Madhumita Roy, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1425/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Ito, Ward 41(2), Kolkata..............................…………………………..............................Appellant 4Th Floor, Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata – 700 001. M/S. Epkon Associates.....................……....................................................................Respondent 10/2, Canal Circular Road, Kolkata – 700 067 [Pan: Aabfe 8374 Q] Appearances By: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 23, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 30 , 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(Appeals) – 19, Kolkata Dated 05.03.2014 & In The Solitary Ground Raised Therein, The Revenue Has Challenged The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Cancelling The Assessment Made By The A.O. Under Section 143(3) / 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Holding The Same To Be Invalid.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 154

…ntertain the facts or new version which they present as to what should be the inference or proper inference either of the facts disclosed or the weight of the circumstances.  It was held in the case of CIT vs George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. (2002) reported in 258 ITR 126 (Gau) that – ‘the duty of the assessee does not extend beyond making a full and true disclosure of primary facts. Once he has done so, his duty ends. It is not the responsibility of the assessee to advise the assessing authority. If the assessing authority draws an interference which appears to him subsequently to be erroneous, then in such a cas…

ACIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. NEELACHAL GRAMYA BANK, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection

ITA 58/CTK/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jul 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mohapatra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 22Section 36Section 44ASection 80PSection 80P(4)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.58 /CTK/2015 Assessment Year:2008-09 ACIT, Circle -2(1), Vs. M/s. Neelachal Gramya Bhubaneswar Bank, 190/702, Kokila Residency, Ananta Vihar, Airport Area Post Office, Pokhariput, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No. AAALN 0450 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) C.O.No.13/ctk/2015 (arising out of ITA No.58/CTK/2015) Assessment Year:2008-09 M/s. Neelachal Gramya Vs. ACIT, Circle -2(1), Bank, 190/702, Kokila Bhubaneswar Residency, Ananta Vihar, Airport Area Post Office, Pokharipu…

SHAPOORJI PALLANJI AND COMPANY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3053/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Shapporji Pallonji Centre, Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Vs. 41/44 Minoo Desai Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Colaba Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaacs6994C

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…kson & Dadajee Ltd. (1980) 121 ITR 368 (Born.) 6) Jindal Photo Films Ltd. vs DCIT (1998) 234 ITR 170 (Del.) 7) Garden Silk Mills vs DCIT (1996) 222 ITR 68 (Guj.) 8) Mercury Travels DCIT (2002) 258 ITR 533 (Cal.) 9)JCIT vs George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. (2002) 258 ITR 126 (Gauhati) 33 M/s Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Pvt. Ltd. 10) CIT vs Sambhar Salt ltd. (2003) 262 ITR 675 (Raj.) We find that there was no new tangible material with the Assessing Officer to form a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment, thus, in view of the decision from Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court (supra) reopening is not…

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-42,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SWATI INTERNATIONAL, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2566/KOL/2013[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, J.M. &Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri SallongYaden, Addl.CITFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147

…ertain the facts or new version which they present as to what should be the inference or proper inference either of the facts disclosed or the weight of the circumstances.” • It was held in the case of CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. [2002] reported in 258 ITR 126 (Gau) that - 'the duty of the assessee does not extend 'beyond making' a full and true disclosure of primary facts. Once he has done so, his duty ends. It is for the assessing authority to draw the correct inference from the primary facts. It is not the responsibility of the assessee to advise the Assessing authority. If the assessing authority d…

Praful Chunnilal Patel v. M.J. Makwana (258 ITR 126) — Cited in 18 Judgments | BharatTax