Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 v. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd.

422 ITR 337High Court2020#1369 most cited

What is Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 v. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Reassessment cannot be initiated on "borrowed satisfaction"; the Assessing Officer must independently apply their mind to tangible material to form a reasonable belief that income has escaped assessment. The sanctioning authority under Section 151 must also apply its mind to the recorded reasons before granting approval.

84

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Shodiman Investments · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 151 · reassessment · borrowed satisfaction · application of mind · tangible material · reasons to believe · sanctioning authority · Kelvinator principle

Also reported as

55 Taxmann.com 181

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 143(3)Section 68Section 153CSection 151Section 142(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 147(1)section 147(b)borrowed satisfactionlive linksection 147(a)section 148(2)sanctioning authoritysection 151(1)bogus share capitalkelvinatortangible materialsection 151(2)

Judgments citing Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 v. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd.

SUNRISE STRUCTURALS & ENGINEERING PVT LTD,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4 NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 167/NAG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roysunrise Structural & Acit/Dcit, Circle-4, Engineering P. Ltd., A10, Vs Nagpur Hingna Midc, Nagpur (Urban), Nagpur-440016 Pan : Aaccs 3220 M Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234BSection 250Section 69C

…orrowed satisfaction. Reliance on: i) (2023) (156 taxmann.com 221) (Bombay HC) Gandhibag Sahakari Bank Ltd vs. DCIT/ACIT (P- 280 – 288) (286) [Vol.- IV] ii) 178 taxmann.com 259) (SC) DCIT vs. GandhibagSahakari Bank Ltd (P- 289 – 290) (290) [Vol.- IV] 5 iii) 422 ITR 337 (Bom.) CIT vs Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd. (P- 108 – 115) [Vol.- III] iv) 422 ITR 520 (Bom) PCIT vs. Vaman International Pvt. Ltd. (P- 116 – 123) (123) [Vol.- III] v) (2019) 104 taxmann.com 216 (Bom.) South Yarra Holdings vs. ITO (P- 167 – 170) (170) [Vol.- II] F) Invocation of section 147 of I.T. Act 1961 (amended) is strictly contingent upo…

BORA AGRO FOODS,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIR-5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly\nallowed

ITA 2362/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2026AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…s appears. Thus, prima facia there was no\nevidence in the possession of the AO to allege cash receipts by\nAssessee Bora Agro Foods, leading to escapement of income.\n6.4 Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs Shodiman\nInvestments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay) [16-04-2018]\nhas observed as under :\nQuote, “11. Further, a reading of the entire decision, it is clear that\nthe reasonable belief on the basis of tangible material could be, prima\nfacie, formed to conclude that income chargeable to tax has escaped\nassessment. Mr.Mohanty, learned Counsel is ignoring the fact that the\nwords 'whateve…

BORA AGRO FOODS,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIR-5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly\nallowed

ITA 2361/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…s appears. Thus, prima facia there was no\nevidence in the possession of the AO to allege cash receipts by\nAssessee Bora Agro Foods, leading to escapement of income.\n6.4 Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs Shodiman\nInvestments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay) [16-04-2018]\nhas observed as under :\nQuote, “11. Further, a reading of the entire decision, it is clear that\nthe reasonable belief on the basis of tangible material could be, prima\nfacie, formed to conclude that income chargeable to tax has escaped\nassessment. Mr.Mohanty, learned Counsel is ignoring the fact that the\nwords 'whateve…

BORA AGRO FOODS,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIR-5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are partly\nallowed

ITA 2360/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2026AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…s appears. Thus, prima facia there was no\nevidence in the possession of the AO to allege cash receipts by\nAssessee Bora Agro Foods, leading to escapement of income.\n6.4 Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs Shodiman\nInvestments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay) [16-04-2018]\nhas observed as under :\nQuote, “11. Further, a reading of the entire decision, it is clear that\nthe reasonable belief on the basis of tangible material could be, prima\nfacie, formed to conclude that income chargeable to tax has escaped\nassessment. Mr.Mohanty, learned Counsel is ignoring the fact that the\nwords 'whateve…

DCIT-19(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NIMESH PRAVINCHANDRA MEHTA, MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 8102/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

…re-opened on the basis of inputs of the Investigation Wing. Even if the contention of the appellant that the case was re-opened on borrowed satisfaction and the judgement of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the cases of Pr. CIT vsShodiman Investments 422 ITR 337 (Bom); Reynolds Shirtings Ltd. vs ACIT 135 taxmann.com 78 (Bom); Sociedade de Formonto Industrial P. Ltd. vs ACIT 464 ITR 261 (Bom.) are squarely applicable to the present case is not accepted, it is an undisputed fact that there was no fresh material for re-opening of the case and whatever material was available was considered during the course…

JASMINE ZUBIN SHROFF,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2380/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2380/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mrs.Jasmine Zubin Shroff V The Income Tax (Through Legal Heir Zubin K S Officer, Shroff), Ward-7(1), Pune. 826/C No.5, Anklesharia Blocks, Dastur Meher Road, Camp, Pune - 411001. Pan:Basps7144E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B C Malakar Revenue By Shri Sandeep Sathe - Jcit Date Of Hearing 08/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Legal Heir Of Late Jasmine Z. Shroff Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2012-13 Dated 19.12.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The

Section 144Section 250

…22.03.2018 issuedunder Section 148 of the IT Act and further proceedings, if any, initiated pursuant to the said notice dated22.03.2018 are set aside.” Unquote 5.4 Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the decision of Pr.CIT Vs. Shodiman Investment Pvt. Ltd., [2018] 422 ITR 337 vide order dated 16.04.2018 has held as under : “14. Further, the reasons clearly shows that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind to the informationreceived by him from the DDIT (Inv.). The Assessing Officer has merely issued a re-opening notice on thebasis of intimation regarding re-opening notice from the DDIT (Inv.) This is clearly i…

SHREE KRISHNA GYANODAYA FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2179/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Shree Krishna Gyanodaya Acit, Central Circle 4(3) Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Poorva 15Th Floor, 46C, Chowringhee 110, Kolkata-700107, Vs. Road, Everest House, Kolkata- West Bengal 700071, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcs8774P Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 153ASection 68

…te the link between the tangible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment.” 4.5. Similarly, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)[16-04-2018], has held as under:- “13. In this case, the reasons as made available to the Respondent- Assessee as produced before the Tribunal merely indicates information received from the DIT (Investigation) about a particular entity, entering into suspicious transactions. However, that material is not further linked by any reason to c…

SUSHIL MITRUKA,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

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

ITA 2178/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…te the link between the tangible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment.” 2.5. Similarly, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)[16-04-2018], has held as under:- “13. In this case, the reasons as made available to the Respondent- Assessee as produced before the Tribunal merely indicates information received from the DIT (Investigation) about a particular entity, entering into suspicious transactions. However, that material is not further linked by any reason to c…

SUSHIL MITRUKA,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

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

ITA 1631/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…te the link between the tangible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment.” 2.5. Similarly, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)[16-04-2018], has held as under:- “13. In this case, the reasons as made available to the Respondent- Assessee as produced before the Tribunal merely indicates information received from the DIT (Investigation) about a particular entity, entering into suspicious transactions. However, that material is not further linked by any reason to c…

SUSHIL MITRUKA,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals\nof the assessee are allowed

ITA 1630/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita Nos.2178, 1630 & 1631/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17)\Nsushil Mitruka\Ng208, City Centre, Office Block,\Np.O. Matigara, Siliguri,\Ndarjeeling, Siliguri-734010,\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Ndcit, Circle 1,\Naaykar Bhawan, Matigara,\Nsiliguri-734004,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Accpa9340F\Nita No. 1613/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2017-18)\Ndcit, Circle 1,\Naaykar Bhawan, Matigara,\Nsiliguri-734004,\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Nsushil Mitruka\Ng208, City Centre, Office Block,\Np.O. Matigara, Siliguri,\Ndarjeeling, Siliguri-734010,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Nassessee By\Nshri Sk Tulsian, Ar\Nrevenue By\Nshri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr\Ndate Of Hearing:\N03.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement:\N18.12.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\Nthese Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & Revenue Against\Nthe Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter\Nreferred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.08.2025, 27.05.2025 For A.Y.\N2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since The Appeals Are Relating\Nto Same Assessee & Involves Commons Issues, Therefore All These\Nappeals Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity.\Npage 2\Nita Nos.2178,1630,1630 & 1631/Kol/2025\Nsushil Mitruka; Ays 2014-15, 15-16, 16-17 & 17-18\Nfirst Of All We Shall Take Ita No. 2178/Kol/2025 A.Y. 214-15 For\Nadjudication.\Nα.Υ. 2014-15\Nita No. 2178/Kol/2025\N2.\Nthe Issue Raised In Ground No.1 Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A)\Nupholding The Reopening Of Assessment, Which Was Based Upon\Nborrowed Satisfaction Without Examining The Records & Without\Napplication Of Mind & Accordingly, The Reopening Of Assessment Bas\Nbad In Law.\N2.

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…ink between the tangible\nmaterial and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped\nassessment.\"\n2. 5. Similarly, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal\nCommissioner of Income-tax-5 vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd.\n[2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)[16-04-2018], has held as under:-\n"13. In this case, the reasons as made available to the Respondent- Assessee as\nproduced before the Tribunal merely indicates information received from the DIT\n(Investigation) about a particular entity, entering into suspicious transactions. However,\nthat material is not further linked by any reason t…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI vs. SUSHIL MITRUKA, SILIGURI

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

ITA 1613/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…te the link between the tangible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment.” 2.5. Similarly, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)[16-04-2018], has held as under:- “13. In this case, the reasons as made available to the Respondent- Assessee as produced before the Tribunal merely indicates information received from the DIT (Investigation) about a particular entity, entering into suspicious transactions. However, that material is not further linked by any reason to c…

SUMANGAL JEWELS P. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC-4(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2357/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2025AY 2009-2010
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…rate the link between the tangible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income has escaped assessment.” 7. Similarly, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-5 vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)[16-04-2018], has held as under:- “13. In this case, the reasons as made available to the Respondent- Assessee as produced before the Tribunal merely indicates information received from the DIT (Investigation) about a particular entity, entering into suspicious transactions. However, that material is not further linked by any reason to c…

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 246/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 147Section 250

…ion of jurisdiction u/s.147 has no legal basis and resultant reassessment proceedings\ndeserve to be set-aside. [S.143(1), 148 ]\"\n3.3.6 The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd. [2018]\n93 taxmann.com 153 / 167 DTR 290 / (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bom.) held that\n\"S. 147: Reassessment-Intimation-The AO cannot reopen on the basis of info received from DIT (Inv.)\nthat a particular entity has entered into suspicious transactions without linking it to the assessee having\nindulged in activity which could give rise to reason to believe that income has escaped assessment- Such\nreopening amo…

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 245/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 147Section 250

…ion of jurisdiction u/s.147 has no legal basis and resultant reassessment proceedings\ndeserve to be set-aside. [S.143(1), 148 ]\"\n3.3.6 The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd. [2018]\n93 taxmann.com 153 / 167 DTR 290 / (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bom.) held that\n\"S. 147: Reassessment-Intimation-The AO cannot reopen on the basis of info received from DIT (Inv.)\nthat a particular entity has entered into suspicious transactions without linking it to the assessee having\nindulged in activity which could give rise to reason to believe that income has escaped assessment- Such\nreopening amo…

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 244/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 147Section 250

…ion of jurisdiction u/s.147 has no legal basis and resultant reassessment proceedings\ndeserve to be set-aside. [S.143(1), 148 ]\"\n3.3.6 The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd. [2018]\n93 taxmann.com 153 / 167 DTR 290 / (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bom.) held that\n\"S. 147: Reassessment-Intimation-The AO cannot reopen on the basis of info received from DIT (Inv.)\nthat a particular entity has entered into suspicious transactions without linking it to the assessee having\nindulged in activity which could give rise to reason to believe that income has escaped assessment- Such\nreopening amo…

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 243/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 147Section 250

…n of jurisdiction u/s.147 has no legal basis and resultant reassessment proceedings\ndeserve to be set-aside. [S.143(1), 148 ]\"\n\n3.3.6 The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT v. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd. [2018]\n93 taxmann.com 153 / 167 DTR 290 / (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bom.) held that\n\n\"S. 147: Reassessment-Intimation-The AO cannot reopen on the basis of info received from DIT (Inv.)\nthat a particular entity has entered into suspicious transactions without linking it to the assessee having\nindulged in activity which could give rise to reason to believe that income has escaped assessment- Such\nreopening a…

NARENDRA KACHRULAL ABAD,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, JALNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee partly allowed

ITA 866/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.866/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Narendra Kachrulal Abad, V The Income Tax Officer, Abad House, Nal Galli, S Ward-1, Jalna. Kadrabad, Jalna – 431203. Maharashtra. Pan: Acspa9531C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hari Krishan – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Renge –Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Aurangabadpassed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2009-10 Dated 30.03.2019, Emanating From Order U/S.143(3) R.W.S 147Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 03.11.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Concise Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…pening order from invalidity. 14. In the circumstances, the conclusion reached by the ITAT cannot be saidto be erroneous. No substantial question of law arises.” 10. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT-5 Vs. Shodiman Investment Private Limited 422 ITR 337 (Bom) vide order dated 16.04.2018 has held as under : “Further, the reasons clearly shows that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind to the informationreceived by him from the DDIT (Inv.). The Assessing Officer has merely issued a re-opening notice on thebasis of intimation regarding re-opening notice from the DDIT (Inv.) This is clearly…

AAKASH DEVELOPERS,THANE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, THANE, THANE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1767/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2010-11
Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

…lation of principle of\nnatural justice in the present facts of the case.\n4.3 He placed reliance on following decision in support of this\ncontention:\n“i) ITO-vs-Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) [1976]\nii)\nPCIT-vs-Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd., 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)\n[2018]\niii)\nPCIT-vs-Meenakshi Overseas (P.) Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Delhi) [2017]”\n4.4 On the contrary, the Ld.DR relied on the orders passed by\nthe authorities below.\nWe have perused the submissions advance by both sides in the\nlight of record placed before us.\n5. Perusal of the reasons recorded reveals that the assessing\nofficer re…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 850/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(4)

…y taking recourse to the provisions under section 148 and\n143(2) of the Income-tax Act.\"\nIt held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner\nof Income-tax-5 v. Shodiman Investments (P) Ltd. (2018) 93 taxmann.com 153\n(Bombay)/(2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bombay)(16.04.2018) as under :-\n“12. The re-opening of an Assessment is an exercise of extra-ordinary\npower on the part of the Assessing Officer, as it leads to unsettling the\nsettled issue/assessments. Therefore, the reasons to believe have to be\nnecessarily recorded in terms of Section 148 of the Act, before re-opening\nnotice, is issued.…

AMBAJI AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 9(1) (2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 5216/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Ambaji Avenues Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Ward-9(1)(2), A-109, Akshay Mittal Indl. Aaykar Bhawan, Premises, M.V. Road, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Sanjay Building No.5, Churchgate, Andheri (W), Maharashtra – 400 020 Maharashtra – 400 059 PAN: AAJCA8264G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ld. A.R. Revenue by : Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 16 . 01 .2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28 . 03 .2025 O R D E…

Showing 1–20 of 84 · Page 1 of 5