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

422 ITR 337High Court2020#1361 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 366,339 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.

Dharmil Anil Bodani, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-19(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 648/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dharmil Anil Bodani Vs. ACIT Circle 19(1) 51, 5th Floor Matru Mandir, ELCID CHS Ltd., Tardeo Road Ridge Road Mumbai- 400 007 Walkeshwar Mumbai – 400 006 PAN/GIR No.AACPB3387K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajiv Khandelwal (virtual) Revenue by Shri R.R. Makwana, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing 22/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement 25/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 15/12/2023 passed…

Cyrus Patel, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 23(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 4350/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Vajani,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani, (Sr. DR)
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 68

…ither initiated or completed on the basis of borrowed satisfaction without independent application of mind. The appellant in this connection relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Shodhiman Investments P. Ltd. (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bombay). In view of all the above alternate contentions, the appellant submits that the reassessment in his case is invalid and the same deserves to be quashed. The appellant prays that the same may please be accordingly quashed.” 6. We have carefully considered the facts of the case and find that on legality of the notice u/s 148 vis-a-vis sa…

Rakesh Mulchand Kothari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-26(2)(5), Mumbai

ITA 6598/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Due Date For Filing The Return Of Income U/S 139(4) Viz. 31/03/2017, Thereby The Notice U/S.148 & Consequential Reassessment Order Passed U/S.147 Is Bad In Law;

For Respondent: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…f mind by the Learned Assessing Officer. In this regard reliance was placed by the CIT(A) on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Prashant S Joshi V ITO 324 ITR 154 [BOM] and Principal Commissioner of Income tax Shodiman Investments P Ltd [422 ITR 337] which were followed in the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Reena Rakesh Kothari (supra). 7. In response, the Learned Departmental Representative supported the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment and placed reliance on the order passed by the CIT(A).It was submitted that there was tangible material for reopening the assessment…

Winsome Textile Industries Limited, Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Chandigarh

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

ITA 528/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the Investigation Wing without carrying out necessary examination and independent application of mind, the reopening was held to be bad in law and in this regard, reliance was placed on the following decisions:  PCIT v. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bom.)(HC)  PCIT v. SNG Developers Ltd. [2018] 404 ITR 312 (Delhi)(HC)  PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 (Delhi) (HC)  PCIT vs RMG Polyvinyl Ltd ITA 29/2017 & CM 1009/2017 DATED 07/07/2017  PCIT v. G & G Pharma India Ltd. [2017] 384 ITR 147 (Delhi)(HC)  CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. (2016) 378 ITR 35…

Babulal Roshanlal Patni, Nagpur vs. DCIT, Cencir 1(2), Nagpur

In the result, appeals of the assessee’s are allowed

ITA 196/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…making any independent enquiry by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of assessment u/sec.147 and issuance of notice u/sec.148 is bad in law by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd., [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bom.) and South Yarra Holdings vs. ITO [2019] 104 taxmann.com 216 (Bom.). He further submitted that the ‘dumb documents’ being rough scribblings and has no legal evidence to show that ‘on-money’ was received by these assessees. He submitted that Assessing Officer had not made verification before recording reasons for issue of notice u/sec.148 ev…

Patni Housing Private Limited, Nagpur vs. DCIT, Cencir 1(2), Nagpur

In the result, appeals of the assessee’s are allowed

ITA 194/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…making any independent enquiry by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of assessment u/sec.147 and issuance of notice u/sec.148 is bad in law by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd., [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bom.) and South Yarra Holdings vs. ITO [2019] 104 taxmann.com 216 (Bom.). He further submitted that the ‘dumb documents’ being rough scribblings and has no legal evidence to show that ‘on-money’ was received by these assessees. He submitted that Assessing Officer had not made verification before recording reasons for issue of notice u/sec.148 ev…

Taradevi Babulal Patni, Nagpur vs. DCIT, Circle-3, Nagpur

In the result, appeals of the assessee’s are allowed

ITA 193/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…making any independent enquiry by the Assessing Officer, the reopening of assessment u/sec.147 and issuance of notice u/sec.148 is bad in law by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd., [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bom.) and South Yarra Holdings vs. ITO [2019] 104 taxmann.com 216 (Bom.). He further submitted that the ‘dumb documents’ being rough scribblings and has no legal evidence to show that ‘on-money’ was received by these assessees. He submitted that Assessing Officer had not made verification before recording reasons for issue of notice u/sec.148 ev…

Dayal Cotspin Limited, Akola vs. ACIT, Akola Circle, Akola

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 87/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.87/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Dayal Cotspin Ltd. New Radhakishan Plots ……………. Appellant Akola 444 001 PAN – AACCD4041K v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Akola Circle, Akola Assessee by : Shri Kishore P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 26/11/2024 Date of Order – 12/12/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 04/01/2024, passed by the learned Commissio…

Chaitalee Sachin Deokar, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, -It -2, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2806/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69Section 69BSection 69C

…sessee has ever taken place with Bhagawati Developers and as per assessee he even do not know this party i.e. Bhagawati Developers and in this regard assessee has also relied upon decision in the following cases: Pr. CIT Vs. Shodiman Investments P Ltd, [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bom) IT: Where Assessing Officer had issued a reassessment notice on basis of intimation from DDIT (Inv.) about a particular entity entering into suspicious transactions, this was clearly in breach of settled position in law that re-opening notice has to be issued by Assessing Officer on his own satisfaction and not on borrowed satisfaction Sect…

Chandrakumar Madhusudanji Jajodia, Thane vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Amravati Circle

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 399/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.399/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Chandrakumar Madhusudanji Jajodia SA 10 to 13, 2nd Floor, Chitalsar ……………. Appellant Manpada B.O. 400 607 PAN–AAPPJ3021M v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Amravati Circle, Amravati Assessee by : Shri Kishore P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 07/11/2024 Date of Order – 28/11/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The assessee has filed the captioned appeal challenging the impugned…

Dcitcc6.2, Mumbai vs. Top Class Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee i

ITA 974/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, Ld. A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Ld. CIT DR
Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…failed to provide the same and the Assessee came to know about the complete/full reasons recorded for reopening of the Assessment, from the assessment order only and therefore in view of the decision in the case of PCIT vs. Shodiman Investment (P) Ltd. (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bombay) and other various judgments as filed by the Assessee in the paper book, entire re-assessment made by the AO is bad in law and thus the Assessment order based on the reasons provided to the Assessee, being void-ab-initio, is liable to be quashed. 14. On the contrary, the Ld. D.R. vehemently submitted that the reasons for reopening the ca…

Top Class Capital Markets Private Limited, Bombay Mutual Building, Fort vs. ACIT Central Circle 6 (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee i

ITA 709/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…failed to provide the same and the Assessee came to know about the complete/full reasons recorded for reopening of the Assessment, from the assessment order only and therefore in view of the decision in the case of PCIT vs. Shodiman Investment (P) Ltd. (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bombay) and other various judgments as filed by the Assessee in the paper book, entire re-assessment made by the AO is bad in law and thus the Assessment order based on the reasons provided to the Assessee, being void-ab-initio, is liable to be quashed. 14. On the contrary, the Ld. D.R. vehemently submitted that the reasons for reopening the cas…

Quadeye Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 792/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.792/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Quadeye Securities Pvt. Ltd..………...........………………....Appellant 184, Harish Mukherjee Road, 1St Floor, Kolkata-700026. [Pan: Aabce7790H] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata….………….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 07, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.02.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Disallowance Of Loss Of Rs.2,47,48,393/- Incurred By The Assessee In Commodities Dealing In National Multi Commodity Exchange Of India Limited (‘Nmce’) Platform & Further Making Addition Of Rs.4,92,263/- U/S 69C Of The Act On Account Of Alleged Commission That Might Have Been Paid By The Assessee In Booking The Aforesaid Bogus Loss In Commodity Trading.

Section 147Section 250Section 69C

…s (P.) Ltd [2017] 82 taxmann.com 300 (Delhi) / [2017] 395 ITR677 (Delhi) 3. PCIT -Vs- G &G Pharma India Ltd [2017] 81 taxmann.com 109 (Delhi) / (2016] 384 ITR 147 (Delhi) 4. PCIT -vs- Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd [2018] 93 taxmann.com 153 (Bombay) / [2020] 422 ITR 337 (Bombay) 5. Balaji Mines and Minerals (P.) Ltd -vs- ACIT - [2024] 163 taxmann. com 37 (Bombay) 6. Reynolds Shirting Ltd -vs- ACIT - 135 taxmann.com 78 (Bombay) / [2022] 285 Taxman 554 (Bombay) 7. PCIT -vs- Eastern Coalfields Ltd. - ITAT/98/2018, judgment dated 04.01.2022 (Cal HC) 8. PCIT -vs- Sambuddha Tracon Pvt. Ltd. - ITAT/90/2022, judgmen…

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO Circle-6(2)(1) Mumabi, Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2536, 2537 &

ITA 2542/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…t the name of the assessee in any of the information / statement / material, if any, relied on by Ld. AO. Such a reassessment deserves to be quashed and it is prayed accordingly.The ld. AR respectfully relied on the orderPCIT v/s Shodiman Investments – (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bombay), Reynolds Shirting Ltd. v/s ACIT – (2022) 285 Taxman 554 (Bombay), et. al. holding that re-assessment simply based on borrowed satisfaction of another officer / Investigation Wing and without any independent enquiry deserves to be quashed. 6.1. The ld. AR argued on the merits of addition u/s 68 are concerned and submits that it had furn…

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle 6(1)(1), Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2536, 2537 &

ITA 2538/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…t the name of the assessee in any of the information / statement / material, if any, relied on by Ld. AO. Such a reassessment deserves to be quashed and it is prayed accordingly.The ld. AR respectfully relied on the orderPCIT v/s Shodiman Investments – (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bombay), Reynolds Shirting Ltd. v/s ACIT – (2022) 285 Taxman 554 (Bombay), et. al. holding that re-assessment simply based on borrowed satisfaction of another officer / Investigation Wing and without any independent enquiry deserves to be quashed. 6.1. The ld. AR argued on the merits of addition u/s 68 are concerned and submits that it had furn…

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle -6(1)(1)-Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

ITA 2537/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…the name of the assessee in any of the information / statement / material, if any, relied on by Ld. AO. Such a reassessment deserves to be quashed and it is prayed accordingly. The Id. AR respectfully relied on the orderPCIT v/s Shodiman Investments – (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bombay), Reynolds Shirting Ltd. v/s ACIT (2022) 285 Taxman 554 (Bombay), et. al. holding that re-assessment simply based on borrowed satisfaction of another officer / Investigation Wing and without any independent enquiry deserves to be quashed. 6.1. The Id. AR argued on the merits of addition u/s 68 are concerned and submits that it had furnish…

Asg Capital Service Pvt Ltd(Now Known As M/S. Asg Capital Service LLP, Having PAN No. Abcfa2143B), Matunga S.O vs. ITO- Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos 2536, 2537 &

ITA 2536/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjeeand Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SR. DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…t the name of the assessee in any of the information / statement / material, if any, relied on by Ld. AO. Such a reassessment deserves to be quashed and it is prayed accordingly.The ld. AR respectfully relied on the orderPCIT v/s Shodiman Investments – (2020) 422 ITR 337 (Bombay), Reynolds Shirting Ltd. v/s ACIT – (2022) 285 Taxman 554 (Bombay), et. al. holding that re-assessment simply based on borrowed satisfaction of another officer / Investigation Wing and without any independent enquiry deserves to be quashed. 6.1. The ld. AR argued on the merits of addition u/s 68 are concerned and submits that it had furn…

Goyal Vegoils Limited, Kasar, Kota vs. DCIT, Circle -2, Kota

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

ITA 243/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…rlier decision in the cases of Nishant Kantilal Patel & Muktaben Nishantbhai Patel has quashed the reassessment proceedings. 1.16The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case Principal Commissioner of Income- tax-5 v. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd. reported in 422 ITR 337 holding that reopening notice on the basis of intimation from DDIT (Investigation) about a particular entity entering into suspicious transactions, was clearly in breach of the settled position of law that reopening notice has to be issued by the Assessing Officer on his own satisfaction and not on borrowed satisfaction. 16 Goyal Vegoils Ltd. v…

Decent Industries P. Ltd., Bhopal vs. ITO-1(2), Bhopal

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 356/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Decent Industries Ito-1(2), Private Ltd, Bhopal 5Th Floor, Corporate Park, बनाम/ Db City Area Hills, Vs. Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone I, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaeca6271G Assessee By Ms. Shilpa Gupta & Shri N.K. Gupta Revenue By Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

…h that the AO has merely adopted the report shared by Investigation Wing and initiated re-assessment proceeding against assessee without application of his own mind. Relying upon Meenakshi Overseas (P) Ltd. 395 ITR 677 (Delhi), Shodiman Investment Pvt. Ltd. 422 ITR 337 Page 4 of 44 M/s Decent Industries Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 356/Ind/2023 – AY 2012-13 (Bombay), NuPower Renewables (P) Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 307 (Bombay), Singnature Hotels (P) Ltd. 338 ITR 51 (Delhi) and Fair Investment Ltd. 357 ITR 146 (Delhi), Ld. AR prayed that the re-opening in such a manner is invalid liable to annulled. 6. Per contra, Ld. DR…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad vs. Vista Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1340/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…rial to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment; reasons must have a live link with formation of belief.’ 25. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd., 422 ITR 337 (Bom), he submitted that the assessment cannot be reopened on borrowed satisfaction without verification of alleged information / statements given by the third parties. 20 CO No.21/PUN/2024 26. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Kartik Sureshchandra Gandhi v. ACIT, 154 taxmann.com 193, he submitted that sa…