Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO

257 ITR 639High Court2002#6449 most cited

What is Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

When reassessment proceedings are initiated, the sufficiency or correctness of the material used to form the belief that income has escaped assessment is not a matter to be considered at that initial stage. The assessee cannot challenge the sufficiency of the material that led to the formation of the AO's belief.

18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO · Section 147 · Section 148 · escapement of income · formation of belief · sufficiency of material · reassessment proceedings · AO's belief · relevant material

Judgments citing Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO

Ramya Constructions Limited, Vijayawada vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 639/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 14ASection 151Section 153Section 153A

…e re- opening assessment in detail held that there are reasons and material forming the basis for re-opening, and by following the decisions reported in Raymond Wollen Mills Ltd. Vs. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (Supreme Court) and Green Arts (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO (2005) 257 ITR 639 (Del), observed that Page 2 of 8 correctness or sufficiency of such basis cannot be called in question. He further opined that there is nothing in section 147 of the Act to suggest that a learned Assessing Officer cannot re-open the assessment where he did not investigate and un-earth any material before conducting any enquiry after issuance of n…

Shri Kirodi Mal, Alwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Alwar

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 883/JPR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Jul 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. Javed Khan, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara (Addl. CIT)
Section 147Section 148Section 149

…sis of which the Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. ITO 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts P. Ltd. Vs ITO 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief – ITO Vs. LakhmaniMewal Das 103 ITR 437 (SC). In the instant case, the assessee had not filed any return of income for the year under consideration. The AO has in his possession credible information that an amount of Rs. 37 lakhs was deposited in cash in his bank account. In view of the…

Bharat Jha-HUF, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-37(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6834/DEL/2019[2013+-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 148Section 250Section 68

…. The Hon'ble HC stated as under: "..The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as heid by Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd. V ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Green Arts (P) Ltd. V ITO (2005) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief-ITO V. LakhmaniMewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)..." 6.1 Therefore, I am of the considered view that if the subjectivity of 'reason to believe' cannot be subject matter of consideration of the appellate courts, the subjectivity in 'opinion' of the A.O. can never be subject matter of c…

Krishna Devi, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 38(3), New Delhi

ITA 6356/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Krishna Devi, Vs Income Tax Officer, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Ward-38(3), New Delhi-110085 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abrpd0875E Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.01.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…. The Hon'ble HC stated as under: "..The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd. V ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Green Arts (P) Ltd. V ITO (2005) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief-ITO V. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)..." 4.14 Therefore, Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that if the subjectivity of 'reason to believe' cannot be subject matter of consideration of the appellate courts, the subjectivity in 'opinion' of the A.O. can never be subject matter…

The DCIT, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad vs. Ganesh Plantations Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as cross appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2295/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Ms. Nupur Shah alongwithFor Respondent: Shri L. P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ct. What is paramount is the relevancy of the material collected. A reference in this regard can be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC) and Dr. Lata Chouhan vs. ITO, (2010) 329 ITR 400 (MP). The fresh information recd. By the AO is authentic and evokes certain disquiet. Certain element of subjectivity involved in formation of belief thus cannot overstretched at the threshold stage. Hence, the plea of the assessee that the finality of assessment earlier made under s.143(3) of the Act cannot be disturbed is totally misplaced in t…

Ganesh Plantations Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as cross appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2200/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Ms. Nupur Shah alongwithFor Respondent: Shri L. P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ct. What is paramount is the relevancy of the material collected. A reference in this regard can be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC) and Dr. Lata Chouhan vs. ITO, (2010) 329 ITR 400 (MP). The fresh information recd. By the AO is authentic and evokes certain disquiet. Certain element of subjectivity involved in formation of belief thus cannot overstretched at the threshold stage. Hence, the plea of the assessee that the finality of assessment earlier made under s.143(3) of the Act cannot be disturbed is totally misplaced in t…

Lakshya Ice & Cold Storage P Ltd, Aligarh vs. ITO Ward 1(5), Aligarh

In the result, by the assessee is allowed

ITA 124/AGR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S Lakshya Ice & Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Vs.. Income Tax Officer, Goyal Bhawan, Opp. Maheshwari Inter Ward 1(5), Aligarh College, Sasni Gate, Bye Pass Road, Aligarh (Pan: Aabcl5656R) (Respondent) (Appellant)

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep K. Sahgal, Adv. & Sh. Utsav Sahgal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), and also as held in the case of Great Arts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (2002) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief – ITO Vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR (SC). In another case Hon’ble SC in case of ACIT Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500 has held that at the stage of issue of notice, the only question is whether there was relevant material on which a reasonable person…

Natthi Singh HUF, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Bharatpur

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 563/JPR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…he Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2002) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief- ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC). 4.7. Thus, in view of these facts, I hold that AO had rightly initiated the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the IT Act.” Hence, in view of the above discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of the ld. CIT…

Bharatpur Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Bharatpur

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 562/JPR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…he Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2002) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief- ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC). 4.7. Thus, in view of these facts, I hold that AO had rightly initiated the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the IT Act.” Hence, in view of the above discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of the ld. CIT…

Sishma Singh, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Bharatpur

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 561/JPR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…he Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2002) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief- ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC). 4.7. Thus, in view of these facts, I hold that AO had rightly initiated the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the IT Act.” Hence, in view of the above discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of the ld. CIT…

Vimlesh Faujdar, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Bharatpur

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 560/JPR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…he Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2002) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief- ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC). 4.7. Thus, in view of these facts, I hold that AO had rightly initiated the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the IT Act.” Hence, in view of the above discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of the ld. CIT…

Subhash Singh, Jaipur vs. Ac, Bharatpur

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 289/JPR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…he Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2002) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief- ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC). 4.7. Thus, in view of these facts, I hold that AO had rightly initiated the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the IT Act.” Hence, in view of the above discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of the ld. CIT…

M/S Deepraj Hospital P Ltd, Hathras vs. ITO 3(5), Hathras

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 41/AGR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra01 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 147Section 148Section 68

…e sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC), and also as held in the case of Great Arts Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO [2002] 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief - ITO Vs. I.T.A Nos. 41 & 40/Agra/2017 30 Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR (SC). In another case Hon'ble SC in case of ACIT Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 500 has held that at the stage of issue of notice, the only question is whether there was relevant mate…

M/S Charan Singh Ice & Storage P Ltd, Hathras vs. ITO 3(5), Hathras

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 40/AGR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra01 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 147Section 148Section 68

…e sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC), and also as held in the case of Great Arts Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO [2002] 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief - ITO Vs. I.T.A Nos. 41 & 40/Agra/2017 30 Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR (SC). In another case Hon'ble SC in case of ACIT Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd (2007) 291 ITR 500 has held that at the stage of issue of notice, the only question is whether there was relevant mate…

Om Prakash Rasoria, Alwar vs. ITO, Alwar

ITA 46/JPR/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Apr 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CA and Shri Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Seema Meena,JCIT - DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 147Section 54B

…the Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd.vs ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts (P) Ltd vs ITO [2002] 257 ITR 639 (Del.). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency to belief – ITO vs Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC). 4.9. It has been held by various courts that it is the duty of the assessee to disclose primary facts and truly. Reliance is placed upon the following. (a) Zohar Siraj Lokhandwala vs M.G. Kamat[1994] 210 ITR 956 (Bom.) ‘’ Assessee pr…

Genom Biotech Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC -40, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the appeals of the revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 4656/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…loyees, the retraction 49 M/s. Genom Biotech Pvt. Ltd. from them after a long period of time could only be attributed to the influence of the assessee over them. (iii) The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held in the case of Bachittar Singh Vs. CIT (329 ITR 400) that the retraction of earlier statement was not possible. (k) The various evidences show that the all the concerns located in Cyprus are controlled by Shri Binod Kumar, since the directors of those concerns are controlled by him only. These facts prove that the payments made to Cyprus and UK companies are not for business considerations and th…

ACIT, Alwar vs. Supreme Cylinders Pvt. Ltd., Alwar

In the result, the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 716/JPR/2016[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2017AY 1998-99
For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Goyal (C.A)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…he Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2002) 257 ITR 639 (Delhni). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC). 4.7. It has been held by various courts that it is the duty of the assessee to disclose primary facts fully and truly. Reliance in this regard is placed upon the following :- (a) Zohar Siraj Lokhandwala v. M.G. Kamat (1994) 210 ITR 956…

Janno, Jaipur vs. ITO, Alwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 776/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Feb 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal , CAFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT- DR
Section 147Section 148Section 54B

…Department opened the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Great Arts (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2002) 257 ITR 639 (Del.). The assessee cannot challenge 3 Smt. Janno vs. ITO, Ward- 1(2), Alwar sufficiency to belief – ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) 4.7 Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down in the case of Kelvinator India 320 ITR 561 that AO has power to reassess, only if there is a tangible material and the procedure laid down in the case o…

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO (257 ITR 639) — Cited in 18 Judgments | BharatTax