Reckitt Colman of India Ltd. v. ACIT

252 ITR 550High Court2001#6028 most cited

What is Reckitt Colman of India Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Documents previously accepted as correct can still be considered incriminating if circumstances suggest otherwise, especially when earlier conclusions were based on suppressed or misrepresented facts. This distinction is crucial between a mere change of opinion and a change of opinion based on fresh facts.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Reckitt Colman of India Ltd. v. ACIT · 252 ITR 550 · incriminating documents · change of opinion · fresh facts · suppression of facts · misrepresentation of facts · Hayden's rule of mischief · voidable order

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Reckitt Colman of India Ltd. v. ACIT

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 812/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…as correct, will not prevent such material or entry from being incriminating, if the circumstances suggest otherwise. The Hayden's rule of mischief has been judicially accepted and applied by Calcutta High Court in Reckitt Colman of India Ltd. vs. ACIT (2001) 252 ITR 550 (Cal). There is a distinction between a mere change of opinion and a change of opinion based on fresh facts. The latter would imply that the earlier conclusions of the AO were misled by placing evidence on suppression or misrepresentation of material facts. An order passed by the AO relying upon such make belief documents, Professional Automotiv…

Reckitt Colman of India Ltd. v. ACIT (252 ITR 550) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax