How many judgments cite Raymond Woolens Mills Ltd. v. ITO and Other?

25 judgments on BharatTax cite Raymond Woolens Mills Ltd. v. ITO and Other (241 ITR 856), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Raymond Woolens Mills Ltd. v. ITO and Other come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 144, Section 69A, Section 132, Section 142(1).

Raymond Woolens Mills Ltd. v. ITO and Other

241 ITR 856High Court2000#4648 most cited

What is Raymond Woolens Mills Ltd. v. ITO and Other authority for?

Information obtained during the assessment proceedings of a subsequent assessment year can be used to reopen a completed assessment. A mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer is not sufficient grounds to reopen a case.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Raymond Woolens Mills Ltd v ITO · Revathy C.P. Equipments Ltd v DCIT · 241 ITR 856 · reopening assessment · subsequent year information · change of opinion · material facts · income escaping assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 144 Section 69A Section 132 Section 142(1)Section 144B Section 151

Issues it is cited on

within four years full and true disclosure material facts necessary for assessment mere change of opinion change of opinion kelvinator tangible material live link income escaping assessment escapement of income reason to believe liable to tax

Judgments citing Raymond Woolens Mills Ltd. v. ITO and Other

M/S. Ellore Jewel Place, Bangalore vs. ITO-Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee firm is

ITA 1646/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George Km/S. Ellore Jewel Palace, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 620, Avenue Road, Ward-2(2), Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560 002. Now: Ward-5(2)(1), Pan : Aaafe3111A Bengaluru

For Appellant: Shri. H. N. Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Saravanan B, Addl. CIT

Section 133ASection 14Section 143(1)Section 148

…arrived at during the course of the original assessment proceedings. Hence, there is no question of change of opinion. ALA Firm v. CIT (Mad) 102 ITR 622. Ess Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd v. CIT (SC) 247 ITR 818. Revathy C.P. Equipments ltd. v. DCIT & Ors (Mad) 241 ITR 856, EMA India Ltd v. ACIT (ALL) 30 DTR 82. Change of opinion comes to rescue of assessee only when assessing officer has taken on permissible views at the time of original proceedings. A wrong application of law cannot be held as permissible view and that can always be changed for appreciation of law. Reopening valid, Som Dutt Builders (P) Ltd v. DC…

ITO 3(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Everlon Synthetics P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

ITA 6965/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6965/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Income Tax Officer 3(1)(4), M/S Everlon Synthetics बनाम/ R. No. 666, Pvt. Ltd., V. Aayakar Bhawan,M.K. Road, 67, Regent Chambers, Mumbai – 400 020. 208 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaace0860H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

Section 115JSection 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…ase and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in not following the judicial decisions in the cases viz. (1 )A.L.A. Firm Vs. CIT(Mad) 102 ITR 622. (2) Ess Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT(SC) 247 ITR 818. (3) Revathy C.P. Equipments Ltd. vs. DCIT & Ors.(Mad) 241 ITR 856. (4) EMA India Ltd. Vs. ACIT(All) 30 DTR 82 wherein it has been held that when there is no discussion on the issue in the assessment order and no details were called for by the Assessing Officer or filed by the assessee on the issue, no finding either positive or negative was arrived at during the course of the original assessment proceedings, th…

M/S Bajpe Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Bank Niyamitha, Mangalore vs. ITO, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year :2010-11 is allowed”

ITA 1028/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S Bajpe Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Bank Niyamitha, D No.3-67, Bajpe, Mangalore. . Appellant Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3), Mangalore. . Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Suresh MuthukrishnanFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…found that the actual interest earned on the FD’s is Rs.28,75,000/-. The AO analysed the objections of the appellant on reopening by relying on Ess Kay Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (SC) 247 ITR 818 and Revathy CP Equipments Ltd. Vs. DCIT & Ors. (Mad) 241 ITR 856. Accordingly, AO assessed the interest income of Rs.28,75,000/- and denied deduction u/s 80P on the same. 6. On appeal the CIT(A) observed that in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Ltd., Hon’ble Karnataka High Court analysed the case of M/s Totgars Co-op Sales Society Ltd., and observed that in that case apart from providing c…

M/S New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1023/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, CIT/DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80H

…CIT(A) after considering the submissions of both the parties and various decisions in the cases of A.G. Holdings (P) Ltd. vs. ITO in W.P.(C)8031/2011, Ess Kay Engineering Co. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT(SC) 247 ITR 818, Revathy C.P. Equipments Ltd. vs. DCIT & Ors. (Mad) 241 ITR 856 and EMA India Ltd. vs. ACIT(All) 30DTR 82, dismissed the assessee’s pleas raised on validity of re-assessment proceedings as per observations made in para 5.2 and 5.3 of the impugned order. The learned CIT(A) further considering the rival submissions and the facts of the case, also dismissed the grounds raised by the assessee on merits of the add…

New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5126/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, CIT/DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80H