How many judgments cite Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT?

51 judgments on BharatTax cite Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (250 CTR 119), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 143(3), Section 151, Section 10AA, Section 115JB, Section 148.

Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

250 CTR 119High Court2012#2238 most cited

What is Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT authority for?

An assessment cannot be reopened beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the assessee failed to make a full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment beyond four years · full and true disclosure · failure to disclose material facts · time-barred reassessment notice · jurisdiction to reopen assessment · mere change of opinion

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 151 Section 10AA Section 115JB Section 148 Section 40A(2)(b)Section 69C

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(2)(a)full and true disclosure beyond four years circular trading section 151(2)initial assessment year fresh tangible material mere change of opinion section 10aa computer software section 144c(1)section 40a(2)(b)

Judgments citing Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

Dy.C.I.T. Cir 1(1), Bilaspur(Cg) vs. M/S Secl, Bilaspur(Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 380/BIL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Jul 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 380 & 381/Rpr/2014) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) बनाम/ Dy.C.I.T. Secl Circle 1(1) Seepat Road, Bilaspur Vs. Mahima Commercial (Cg) Complex, Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur (Cg) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs2066E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Korde, Shri Vivek RuiaFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DR

Section 147

…S Udyog Limited & Ors .V/s ITO(313 ITR 321(Del) (e) Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd.V/s. DDIT(E)(361 ITR 160)(Bom) (f) Grindwell Norton Ltd v ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 673 (Bom) (g) Shriram Foundry v DCIT (2012) 350 ITR 115 (Bom) (h) Sound Casting Pvt. Ltd. v DCIT (2012) 250 CTR 119 (Bom) (i) Voltas Ltd v ACIT (2012) 70 DTR 433 (Bom) 7.2 We simultaneously notice that there is no averment to the effect as to what material facts necessary for assessment were not disclosed by the assessee in the course of original assessment proceedings fully as well as truly. The reasons being justiciable, the AO is expected to record a findi…

M/S. Emta Coal Ltd., ( Erstwhile Known As M/S. Eastern Mineral & Trading Agency ), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3(1), Kolakta

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2422/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Emta Coal Ltd…………………………………………..............................…….............Appellant 5B, Nandlal Basu Sarani Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aacce 3506 G]

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…ance Pvt. ltd. ITA No. 117/Kol/2018 iv) Rural Electrification SLP No.1835C/2014 decided on 28.08.2017 Rural Electrification SLP No.1835C/2014 decided on 28.08.2017 Rural Electrification SLP No.1835C/2014 decided on 28.08.2017 v) Sound Casting P. ltd. Vs. DCIT 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) Sound Casting P. ltd. Vs. DCIT 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) vi) CIT Vs. Orient Craft ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 356 (Del.) CIT Vs. Orient Craft ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 356 (Del.) vii) CIT Vs. Vishishth Chay Vyapark ltd. ITA No. 1108 CIT Vs. Vishishth Chay Vyapark ltd. ITA No. 1108-1109/2010 dated 03.12.2015 1109/2010 dated 03.12.2015 viii) CIT Vs. Pradeshiya I…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Abir Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed in above terms

ITA 2068/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Abir Infrastructure Pvt. Income-Tax, Ltd., Hyderabad. Central Circle – 1(3), Hyderabad. Pan – Aafc3608N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri H. SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Shri M. Dayasagar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Asst. Commissioner of Vs. Abir Infrastructure Pvt. Income-tax, Ltd., Hyderabad. Central Circle – 1(3), Hyderabad. PAN – AAFC3608N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by: Shri M. Dayasagar Assessee by: Shri H. Srinivasulu Date of hearing: 27/05/2021 Date of pronouncement: 11/06/2021 O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, AM: This appeal of the Revenue for AY 2010-11 is directed against the CIT(A) - 11, Hyderabad’s order, dated 24/07/2018 invo…

Haldia Petrochemicals Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2455/KOL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…material facts. The jurisdictional requirement for carrying out the reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case.” 4.5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose 3 I.T.A. No. 2455/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Haldia Petrochemicals Limited. material facts necessary for assessment and therefore reopening beyond four years was not…

Om Praaksh Singh, Ranchi vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 361/RAN/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Om Prakash Singh Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi Sankalp, East Jail Road, Ranchi- 834001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agkps0300D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manjit Verma, A/RFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Mohanti, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234CSection 263Section 37(1)

…material facts. The jurisdictional requirement for carrying out the reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case.” 4.5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment and therefore reopening beyond four years was not vaild. (A.Y. 2005-06). 4.6. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orie…

JCIT (OSD) - 7(3), Mumbai vs. Tirupati Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 69/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Jcit (Osd) – 7(3) Vs. M/S. Tirupati Constructions Mumbai 214, Laxmi Plaza, Laxmi Industrial Estate New Link Road, Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400 053 Pan/Gir No.Aafft0513J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) C.O.No.23/Mum/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.69/Mum/2019) (Assessment Year: 2008-09)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material necessary for the assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year in question.” 3.4. We also find that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sound Casting Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT reported in 250 CTR 119 had held as under:- “2A. The reopening of the assessment has admittedly taken place beyond a period of four years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. There is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment…

ACIT (OSD), Ward - 12(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Amrabathi Investra Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 365/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.231/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…material facts. The jurisdictional requirement for carrying out the reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case.” 4.5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment and therefore reopening beyond four years was not vaild. (A.Y. 2005-06). 4.6. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orie…

Amrabathi Investra Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 231/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.231/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…material facts. The jurisdictional requirement for carrying out the reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case.” 4.5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment and therefore reopening beyond four years was not vaild. (A.Y. 2005-06). 4.6. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orie…

H, L.G.Memorial Hospital (P) Ltd., Asansol vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-2, Asansol

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2603/KOL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Mar 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble) Assessment Years: 2007-08 Hlg Memorial Hospital Pvt. Ltd….………........................................................……………….…......Appellant Sen Railegh Road Asansol – 713 305 West Bengal [Pan : Aabch 3927 P] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Asansol……………….............….……....…....Respondent Appearances By: Shri K.M. Roy, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 27Th, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 13Th , 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…fulfilled in the present case.” reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case.” 4.5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court i 4.5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 n the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reaso…

DCIT, Circle - 10(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. V2 Retail Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 723/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…t Year: 2008-09 M/s. V2 Retail Ltd. requirement for carrying out the reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case.” 4.5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment and therefore reopening beyond four years was not valid. (A.Y. 2005-06). 4.6. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orie…

V2 Retail Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 611/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

Indian Wire and Steel Products, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-44, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allow

ITA 1160/KOL/2019[2010-1]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2020

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Indian Wire & Steel Products.....…………........................................................……………….…......Appellant 2Nd Floor 113A, Manohar Das Katra Kolkata – 700 007 [Pan : Aaafi 7079 M] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-44, Kolkata………………………………….…....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 10Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 10Th, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 132(1)Section 147Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Indian Wire & Steel Products.....…………........................................................……………….…......Appellant 2nd Floor 113A, Manohar Das Katra Kolkata – 700 007 [PAN : AAAFI 7079 M] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-44, Kolkata………………………………….…....Respondent Appearances by: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, JCIT Sr. D/R, appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : December 10th…

ACIT, Circle - 25, Kolkata vs. M/S. Mala Roy & Others, Kolkata

In the result, this appeal of the In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 407/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

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

…The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 4.5. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 4.5. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that ther reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons e is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully which have be…

ACIT, Circle - 25, Kolkata vs. M/S. Mala Roy & Others, Kolkata

In the result, this appeal of the In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 406/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2012-13

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

Aries Agro Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 557/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.557,558 & 559/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year :2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Aries Agro Ltd Vs. Dcit-14(1)(1) Plot No. 24, Aries House 460, Aaykar Bhawan Deonar, Govandi M.K.Road Mumbai-400 043 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaaca5035G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35D

…he case of Hindustan Lever Limited Vs ACIT (2004) 268 ITR 332. The assessee has relied upon following case laws:- “Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs. ACIT [2004]-268 ITR 332 {Bom} Titanor Components vs. ACIT [2011]-60 DTR 273 {Bom} Sound Casting Pvt.Ltd vs. DCIT [2012] 250 CTR 119 {Bom} Sitara Diamond Pvt.Ltd [2012] 345 ITR 91 {Bom} Lok Housing & Construction Ltd. vs. DCIT [2012] 348 ITR 154 [Bom] Prashant Joshi vs. ITO-324 ITR 154 [Bom] Similarly, as regards deduction claimed u/s 35D, the assessee has filed written submission and argued that its claim of expenditure related to share issue expenses is in accordance with p…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Dibrugarh vs. T & T Projects Ltd., Guwahati

In the result and for the reasons discussed above, we find no merit in this appeal

ITA 208/GTY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.208/Gau/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Bhardwaj, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh Goenka, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ictional requirement for carrying out the reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case.” Decision on similar line was held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd vs Dy. CIT (2012) 250 CTR 119(Bom). The Hon'ble Court held as follows: "There is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment for that assessment year. Hence, we find merit in the contention that the jurisdictional condition for reopening the as…

DCIT 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Diasqua India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3234/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidiasqua India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit-5(1)(2) Room No.568, 5Th Floor Cw-6061,6062,6063,6071 Bharath Diamond Bourse Aaykar Bhawan Bkc, Bandra(E) M.K.Road Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaccd3418N Appellant) .. Respondent) & Dcit-5(1)(2) Vs. Diasqua India Pvt.Ltd. Room No.568, 5Th Floor Cw-6061,6062,6063,6071 Aaykar Bhawan Bharath Diamond Bourse M.K.Road Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaccd3418N Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee By Suchek Achalia, Ar Revenue By Somnath Wajale, Dr

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…t proceedings then, the assessment cannot be reopened after a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment years. This legal proposition is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound casting Pvt.Ltd. Vs. JCIT [2012 250 CTR 119 (Bombay)], where the Hon’ble High Court held that when reopening of assessment has admittedly taken place beyond the period of four 10 & 3234/Mum/2016 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, and also there is no allegation in the reasons, which have been disclose to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and tr…

Diasqua India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 5 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2283/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

Neeta Garg, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ajmer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5/JPR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (Addl. CIT)

Section 134ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…close fully and truly all the material facts necessary for the assessment. Hence the reopening is not sustainable in law. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Sound Casting Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, 250 CTR 119 (Mum.) and submitted that when there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment, then the reopening beyond four years is not valid. He has also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of…

M/S. Maa Tara Agro Industries, Murshidabad vs. ITO, Ward-4, Murshidabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 233/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2019AY 2006-2007

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 233/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Maa Tara Agro Industries……………………………....………………..…………………….….Appellant Vill. + P.O. Satitara Murshidabad – 742 132 [Pan : Aamfm 5316 R] Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Murshidabad...........................................................…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri V.N. Purohit, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…ndustries facts. The jurisdictional requirement for carrying out the reassessment, after the expiry of period of four years, is not fulfilled in the present case.” 4.5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sound Casting (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) (HC), has held that there is no allegation in the reasons which have been disclosed to the assessee that there was any failure on his part to fully and truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment and therefore reopening beyond four years was not vaild. (A.Y. 2005-06). 4.6. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orie…