Rasalika Trading and Investment Company Private Limited v. DCIT

365 ITR 447High Court2014#4510 most cited

What is Rasalika Trading and Investment Company Private Limited v. DCIT authority for?

Reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated based on stale information that was available during the original assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer cannot simply change their opinion to reopen an assessment.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Rasalika Trading and Investment Company · Section 147 · Section 148 · reopening assessment · stale information · change of opinion · original assessment · Section 143(3) · valid reasons

Issues it is cited on

recognised provident fundsection 50bsection 43b(f)approved gratuity fundsection 40a(9)section 211wholly and exclusively for businesssection 35dslump salesection 32(1)(ii)domestic companyfull value of consideration

Judgments citing Rasalika Trading and Investment Company Private Limited v. DCIT

Saraswati Realtech P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-22(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 3269/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2010-11 Saraswati Realtech P. Ltd., Vs. Ito, B-23, Ground Floor, Ward-22(3), Pushpanjali Enclave, New Delhi. Pitampura, New Delhi. Pan: Aamcs0744G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Jain, Ca & Shri Hemant Pahwa, Ca Revenue By : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2021 Order

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, CA &For Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…here was escapement of income from assessment. The reason must have a live link with the formation of belief. He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Rasalika Trading and Investment Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, reported in 365 ITR 447 and various other decisions. 10. The ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that there is no allegation of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for completion of the assessment. Therefore, the second notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 3rd March, 2017 by recording the same re…

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 3768/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 143(3)Section 148

…- Madhukar Khosla Vs ACIT(2014) 367 ITR 165 (Del) - PCIT Vs Tupperware India private limited (2016) 284 CTR 68(del) - Turner Broadcasting Systems Asia Pacific Inc. vs DCIT (2016) 380 ITR 412 (del) - Rasalika Trading and Investemnt Co. Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT ( 2014) 365 ITR 447(Del) (ii) that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind while adopting rate of US dollar for computing interest liability and therefore, reasons need to be rejected on the ground of non-application of mind also. (iii) that no addition has been made on this account in subsequent years and no case of prior year has either been reopened on th…

ITO, Khurda vs. Bularam Dalai, Khurda

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 294/CTK/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Aug 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri B.R.Panda/Bhimsen Sahoo, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80C

…was available at the time of the original assessment and in fact appears to have been used by the AO during the completion of proceedings u/s.143(3), it was held that reopening was not sustainable - Rasalika Trading & Investment Co. (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2014)365 ITR 447/ 101 DTR 28 / 43 Taxmann.com 371(Delhi)(HC). In the case of CIT v. P. G. Foils Ltd. (2014) 102 DTR 26 / (2013) 215 Taxman 104 (Mag.)/356 ITR 594 (Guj.)(HC), where the AO proposed to reopen the assessment of the assessee within four years from the end of the assessment year, on the very same issues on which he had raised queries while framing the…

M/S. Jpm Tools Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 916/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Sainiassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Salil AggarwalFor Respondent: Ms.Bedobani, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…y, 2012 was already available to the Assessing Officer at the time of passing of the first reassessment order u/s 147 of the I.T. Act dated 3rd January, 2013. No new material has been brought on record and the Assessing 3 M/s. JPM Tools Ltd. vs. ACIT Ltd 365 ITR 447 and G & G Pharma India Limited 384 ITR 147. He has also submitted that report of investigation wing dated 20th January, 2012 was already on record at the time of reopening of the assessment in first instance. Therefore report is not sacrosanct on which no inquiry has been conducted by the Assessing Officer. He has further submitted that the Ass…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Gupta Dyefab P.Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4198/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobina Chaudhari, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147sSection 148Section 68

…and no new facts have been recorded in the reassessment proceedings and therefore the assessment/reassessment made has rightly made by the ld. CIT (A) is directed to be quashed. The reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi reported in 365 ITR 447, 378 ITR 351 in the cae of CIT vs. Multi Plex 386 ITR 8708, 717 Prahlad B. (Calcutta) and decision of ITAT Delhi “E” Bench in ITA 6087/De/2013 vide order dated 3.6.2016 Page 6 of 8 in the case of Narendra Polycap Pvt. LTd. vs. ITO. 6. In the circumstances and facts of the case and decisions cited herein above as held by us herein above ld. CIT(…

M/S. Paramount Intercontinental Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, Ground No.1 of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6135/DEL/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2015AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyassessment Year : 2001-02

For Appellant: Shri Gurmeet Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Raman Kant Garg, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…orded; c) There is no tangible material; and d) Notice has been issued based on the information received from the Investigation Wing of the Department. 4. He relied on the following case laws:- i) 85CCH 040 (Delhi High Court); ii) 357 ITR 24 (Del); and iii) 365 ITR 447 (Del) 5. On merits, no argument was specifically raised by the ld. counsel for the assessee. 3 6. The ld. DR, Shri Raman Kant Garg, on the other hand, relied on page 9, para 6 of the ld.CIT(A)’s order and submitted that the AO, on receipt of tangible material from the Investigation Wing, has independently examined the same and, after applicati…