Ralson India v. DCIT

366 ITR 103High Court2014#24825 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 250 Section 73

Judgments citing Ralson India v. DCIT

UDAY PUNJ,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-19(1), DELHI

In the result, the reassessment proceedings initiated in this case is bad in law

ITA 3087/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Uday Punj, Vs. Dcit, Circle 19 (1), Chimes, New Delhi. 55, Sultanpur Farms, New Delhi – 110 030. (Pan : Aaapp1309F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rahul Khare, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2025 Date Of Order : 30.10.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 18.03.2025 For Assessment Year 2013-14 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That Learned Cit-A Erred In Fact & In Law In Confirming The Reopening Of The Case U/S 147/148 Without Appreciating The Facts Which Is Not Only Bad In Law But Also Against The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Khare, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 73

…AO has no jurisdiction to reopen the assessment merely because the relevant issue in question was not specifically discussed in the assessment order. In this regard, we rely on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ralsons India Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 103 (Del) wherein Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that where assessment order u/s 143(3) after considering the assessee’s explanation in respect of documents seized in course of search proceedings, initiation of reassessment proceedings on the basis of same material now available on record could not be upheld. Therefore, the relevant notice and consequ…

EASYACCESS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO, COPR WARD 2(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 587/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 587/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Easyaccess Financial Services Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, New No.18, Old No.40, Vs. Corporate Ward 2(1), Mussuri Subramaniam Salai, Chennai. (Oliver Road), Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. Pan: Aabce 4646G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. M. Lavanya, Fca & Shri Shrenik Chordia, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) In Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1060282095(1) Dated 30.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2012-13 U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’) Vide Order Dated 27.09.2017. 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is As Regards To Assumption Of Jurisdiction By The Ao For Reopening Of Assessment U/S.147 R.W.S. 148 Of The Act, As The Ao During The Original Assessment Proceedings Has Formed An Opinion After Seeking Explanation & After Examining The Present Issue Of Factoring Of Income U/S.143(3) Of The Act. Hence, Now Reopening Is Bad In Law. The Assessee Also Raised The Interconnected Issue, Which Is On Merits That The Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ao Beig Factoring Income In The Hands Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Ms. M. Lavanya, FCA &For Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…r the afore-stated reasons, we see no merit in these civil appeals filed by the Department, hence, dismissed with no order as to costs.” 6.1 As regards to change of opinion, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ralson India vs. DCIT reported in [2014] 366 ITR 103 has held that “the change of opinion cannot per-se be reason to reopen assessment because in the original proceedings once the AO has called for certain material and after taking into account or consideration has framed the assessment and if the concept of change of opinion is to be removed, as was urged by Revenue, the AO would be left with unbr…

VISHESH INFRASTRUCTURE P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 4464/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Batra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. SL Anuragi, Sr. DR

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

…search proceedings initiation of reassessment proceedings on basis of same material already available on record could not be upheld [Assessment year 1991-1992] [In favour of assessee] 7.6 In the case of Raison India Ltd.v.Dy. CIT [2014] 43 taxmann.com 293/366 ITR 103 (Delhi). the Court has held that since entire material was available on record at time of completion of assessment proceedings, impugned notice seeking to reopen assessment was to be quashed. 7.7 In the case of CIT v. Mirza international Ltd. [2015] 54 taxman.com 217/229 Taxman 443 (All.). Where the Assessing Officer having completed assessm…