What is Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

In reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148, the Assessing Officer can assess other income not specified in the original notice if the initial ground for reopening assessment is found to be valid. However, if the income for which the assessment was initially reopened is found not to have escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer cannot proceed to assess any other income.

How many judgments cite Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT?

398 judgments on BharatTax cite Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT (336 ITR 136), spanning 2012 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

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

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT (336 ITR 136)

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1732/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…he intends to do so, a fresh notice under s. 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee.” This view has also been ventilated by the Hon`ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd,336 ITR 136 (Del), wherein it was held as follows: “18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Jaganmohan Rao (supra) [sic—Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra)]. We may also note that the heading of s. 147 is "Income escaping assessment" and that of s. 148 "Issue of notice where income escaped asses…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1731/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…he intends to do so, a fresh notice under s. 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee.” This view has also been ventilated by the Hon`ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd,336 ITR 136 (Del), wherein it was held as follows: “18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Jaganmohan Rao (supra) [sic—Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra)]. We may also note that the heading of s. 147 is "Income escaping assessment" and that of s. 148 "Issue of notice where income escaped asses…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1730/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…he intends to do so, a fresh notice under s. 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee.” This view has also been ventilated by the Hon`ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd,336 ITR 136 (Del), wherein it was held as follows: “18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Jaganmohan Rao (supra) [sic—Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra)]. We may also note that the heading of s. 147 is "Income escaping assessment" and that of s. 148 "Issue of notice where income escaped asses…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1729/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…he intends to do so, a fresh notice under s. 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee.” This view has also been ventilated by the Hon`ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd,336 ITR 136 (Del), wherein it was held as follows: “18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Jaganmohan Rao (supra) [sic—Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra)]. We may also note that the heading of s. 147 is "Income escaping assessment" and that of s. 148 "Issue of notice where income escaped asses…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1728/KOL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…he intends to do so, a fresh notice under s. 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee.” This view has also been ventilated by the Hon`ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd,336 ITR 136 (Del), wherein it was held as follows: “18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Jaganmohan Rao (supra) [sic—Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra)]. We may also note that the heading of s. 147 is "Income escaping assessment" and that of s. 148 "Issue of notice where income escaped asses…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3644/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, CIT-DR&

Section 143(3)Section 147

…in ITA NO. 4949/Mum/2013 dated 23.12.2016 for A.Y. 2009-10, which has since merged with assessee bank and referred to Para 18.1 of the order. He then took us through the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ranbaxi Laboratories Ltd 334 ITR 341 (Del) and stated that the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court because wherein a superannuation claim of its employees was under litigation and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has noted that this claim was non funded and applicable to the managerial employees and hence the liability on account of superannuation of its emp…

Rajendra Hariprasad Jani, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Baroda

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1439/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1439/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Rajendra Hariprasad Jani Vs. Ito, Ward-8(1) 37, Jalaramdham Society Vadodara. Gidc Road, Manjalpur Vadodara 390 001. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80C

…dition of any other issue, which came 3 to his notice during the assessment proceedings. For this view, we find support from the decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jet Airways India Ltd., 195 taxmann 117, Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., 336 ITR 136 for the proposition that upon issuance of notice under section 148, if no addition is made on that issue, then it is not open to the AO to assess independently any other income which does not form the subject matter of the notice. In view of the above position of law, we quash the reassessment order, and allow the ground of appeal. 5. In the res…

Sangeeta Garg, New Delhi vs. ACIT Ward 62(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 6133/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2010-11 Sangeeta Garg, Vs. Acit, Flat No.6, Shree Radha Apartments, Ward-62(5), Plot No.3, Sector-9, New Delhi. Dwarka, New Delhi. Pan: Afmpg1036R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate & Shri Bankim Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Saras Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2019 Order This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24Th June, 2019 Of The Cit(A)-38, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr.DR

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

…any addition on account of this and, on the contrary, has made addition of Rs.8,99,934/- on account of capital gain on sale of the property. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 336 ITR 136, he submitted that the Hon’ble Delhi Court in the said decision has held that the AO has the jurisdiction to reassess on issues other than the issues in respect of which proceedings are initiated, but, he is not so justified when the reasons for the initiation of those proceedings cease to survive. Therefore, when the assessment was reopened for…

Devki Nandan Bindal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 4271/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 144Section 147Section 148

…non-existing, wrong and incorrect reasons, the reopening of the assessment have been held to the bad in Law. Copy of the same is filed on record. He has also relied upon Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., vs. CIT 336 ITR 136 (Del.) on the proposition that “for second addition which is not mentioned in the reasons, if no fresh 9 ITA.No.4271/Del./2019 Shri Devki Nandan Bindal, Delhi. notice have been issued under section 148, reopening would be bad in Law.” He has relied upon Order of ITAT, Mumbai G-Bench in the case of Juliet Industries Limited, Mumbai vs., ITO…

Fincity Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

ITA 627/HYD/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Arvindakshan

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 621 & 622/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Elem Investments Pvt. vs. Asst, Commissioner of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 8, PAN – AAACE4370L Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 626 & 627/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Fincity Investments Pvt. vs. Asst, Commissioner of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 8, PAN – AAACF3011D Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue b…

Fincity Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

ITA 626/HYD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Arvindakshan

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 621 & 622/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Elem Investments Pvt. vs. Asst, Commissioner of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 8, PAN – AAACE4370L Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 626 & 627/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Fincity Investments Pvt. vs. Asst, Commissioner of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 8, PAN – AAACF3011D Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue b…

Elem Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

ITA 622/HYD/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Arvindakshan

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 621 & 622/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Elem Investments Pvt. vs. Asst, Commissioner of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 8, PAN – AAACE4370L Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 626 & 627/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Fincity Investments Pvt. vs. Asst, Commissioner of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 8, PAN – AAACF3011D Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue b…

Elem Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are dismissed

ITA 621/HYD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Arvindakshan

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 621 & 622/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Elem Investments Pvt. vs. Asst, Commissioner of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 8, PAN – AAACE4370L Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 626 & 627/Hyd/2015 Assessment Years: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Fincity Investments Pvt. vs. Asst, Commissioner of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-tax, Central Circle – 8, PAN – AAACF3011D Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue b…

Naresh Kumar Garg, Haryana vs. ACIT, Bhiwani

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5706/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)

…ultimately made on that account, then addition on account of other items , which are no longer part of “ reasons to believe” cannot be made. Similar finding has been given by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd Vs CIT (2011) 242 CTR 117 (Del). We have to examine whether the ratio of the above decisions of the Hon’ble High Court apply in the case of the assessee. 7. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessment in the case of the assessee, as available on page 2 of the paper book, are reproduced as under: “Return of income in this case was file…

B.P.Poddar Foundation for Education, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1863/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1863/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 11Section 13Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…tends to do so, a fresh notice under s. 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee.” 13. This view has also been ventilated by the Hon`ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd,336 ITR 136 (Del), wherein it was held as follows: “18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Jaganmohan Rao (supra) [sic—Jet Airways (I) Ltd. (supra)]. We may also note that the heading of s. 147 is "Income escaping assessment" and that of s. 148 "Issue of notice where income escaped asses…

Vibhut Builders & Engg. P.Ltd, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 7331/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam

Section 147Section 148Section 14A

…, legality of which would be tested in event of a challenge by assessee - Held, yes Words and phrases : The words 'and also' as occurring.” 3.2. I also referred to Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., vs. CIT [2011] 336 ITR 136 (Del.) in which it was held as under : “The assessee-company was engaged in the business of manufacture and trading of pharmaceuticals products. The Assessing Officer accepted returned income of the assessee but 8 ITA.No.7331/Del./2018 Vibhut Builders & Engg. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Incom…

Manju Devi Baid, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-37(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 394/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz & Hz)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ble in law. In support of this contention, she relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Jet Airways India Limited [331 ITR 236] and that of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited –vs.- CIT [336 ITR 136]. 6. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, submitted that even though no addition was made by the Assessing Officer on account of the alleged bogus purchases, addition made by him under section 68 is directly related to such purchases. He contended that the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the re-assessment on account of unexplained cash cre…

Manju Devi Baid, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-37(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 393/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz & Hz)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ble in law. In support of this contention, she relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Jet Airways India Limited [331 ITR 236] and that of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited –vs.- CIT [336 ITR 136]. 6. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, submitted that even though no addition was made by the Assessing Officer on account of the alleged bogus purchases, addition made by him under section 68 is directly related to such purchases. He contended that the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the re-assessment on account of unexplained cash cre…

Krishna Print Pack, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Meerut

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

ITA 5135/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2009-10 Krishna Print Pack, Vs. Ito, 172, Anup Nagar, Fazalpur, Ward-1(3), Rhotak Road, Meerut. Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. Pan: Aagfk2165A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Anand, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2019 Order

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 147oSection 148Section 40A(3)

…t. Therefore, such addition cannot be sustained in law. For the above proposition, he relied on the following decisions:- (i) CIT vs. Ram Singh, 306 ITR 343 (Raj); (ii) CIT vs. Jet Airways (P) Ltd., 331 ITR 236 (Bom); (iii) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. CIT, 336 ITR 136 (Del); and (iv) CIT vs. Adhunik Niryat Ispat Ltd., 63 DTR 212 (Del). 8. He accordingly submitted that both legally and factually the addition made by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable. 9. The ld. DR, on the other hand, heavily relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). 10. I have considered the rival arguments made by bo…

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2283/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 148

…the provisions of section 147 as they stood after the amendment of April 1, 1989, continue to hold the field." This decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court was referred to by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd vs. CIT, (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Delhi) wherein it was held as follows:- ‘’18. We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Limited [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom). We may also note that the heading of section 147 is "income escaping assessment" and that of section 148 "issue of notice where incom…

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT

What is Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

Rajendra Hariprasad Jani, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Baroda

Sangeeta Garg, New Delhi vs. ACIT Ward 62(5), New Delhi

Devki Nandan Bindal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 46(3), New Delhi

Fincity Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

Fincity Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

Elem Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

Elem Investments P. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, Hyd, Hyderabad

Naresh Kumar Garg, Haryana vs. ACIT, Bhiwani

B.P.Poddar Foundation for Education, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-1(1), Kolkata

Vibhut Builders & Engg. P.Ltd, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-26(2), New Delhi

Manju Devi Baid, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-37(2), Kolkata

Manju Devi Baid, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-37(2), Kolkata

Krishna Print Pack, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Meerut

ACIT Central Circle, Salem vs. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt. Ltd., Salem