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.

51

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

Issues it is cited on

section 40a(2)(a)full and true disclosurebeyond four yearscircular tradingsection 151(2)initial assessment yearfresh tangible materialmere change of opinionsection 10aacomputer softwaresection 144c(1)section 40a(2)(b)

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

M/S. Satyam Investment Advisory Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(3), Kolkata

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 116/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Satyam Investment Advisory Pvt. Ltd……………....……………....…………………….....Appellant 51, Panchanna Gram Kolkata – 700 039 [Pan : Aalcs 2500 H] Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-3(3), Kolkata......……….....................Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 156Section 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 8 I.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. Satyam Investment Advisory Pvt. Ltd truly disclose material facts necessary for assessment and therefore reopening beyond four year…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7313/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI aft Vet. . Wea, AGT Tae, & Waar Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member ITA NOs.7310 to 7313/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2008-09 & 2007-08 Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. DCIT-Central Circle-5(1) 35, Ashok Chambers, qara/ | 19th Floor, Air India Broach Street, Devji Vs Building, Nariman Point, Retansey Marg, : Mumbai-400 020. Masjid Bunder Mumbai-400 009. (@istéd /Revenue) (fereatRXdt /Assessee) P.A. No. AAACB2975J faut fr 3X B/ Assessee by | Shri D.V. Lakhani Weed HY ZIT A / Revenue by Shri…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7312/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI aft Vet. . Wea, AGT Tae, & Waar Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member ITA NOs.7310 to 7313/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2008-09 & 2007-08 Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. DCIT-Central Circle-5(1) 35, Ashok Chambers, qara/ | 19th Floor, Air India Broach Street, Devji Vs Building, Nariman Point, Retansey Marg, : Mumbai-400 020. Masjid Bunder Mumbai-400 009. (@istéd /Revenue) (fereatRXdt /Assessee) P.A. No. AAACB2975J faut fr 3X B/ Assessee by | Shri D.V. Lakhani Weed HY ZIT A / Revenue by Shri…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7311/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI aft Vet. . Wea, AGT Tae, & Waar Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member ITA NOs.7310 to 7313/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2008-09 & 2007-08 Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. DCIT-Central Circle-5(1) 35, Ashok Chambers, qara/ | 19th Floor, Air India Broach Street, Devji Vs Building, Nariman Point, Retansey Marg, : Mumbai-400 020. Masjid Bunder Mumbai-400 009. (@istéd /Revenue) (fereatRXdt /Assessee) P.A. No. AAACB2975J faut fr 3X B/ Assessee by | Shri D.V. Lakhani Weed HY ZIT A / Revenue by Shri…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7310/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI aft Vet. . Wea, AGT Tae, & Waar Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member ITA NOs.7310 to 7313/Mum/2017 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2008-09 & 2007-08 Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. DCIT-Central Circle-5(1) 35, Ashok Chambers, qara/ | 19th Floor, Air India Broach Street, Devji Vs Building, Nariman Point, Retansey Marg, : Mumbai-400 020. Masjid Bunder Mumbai-400 009. (@istéd /Revenue) (fereatRXdt /Assessee) P.A. No. AAACB2975J faut fr 3X B/ Assessee by | Shri D.V. Lakhani Weed HY ZIT A / Revenue by Shri…

Rajendra Kumar Agrawal, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2437/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Rajendra Kumar Agrawal...…..…….……………………..……………………………………………….…..Appellant Room No.-27 4Th Floor 1, R.N. Mukherjee Road Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan :Adcpa 9872 H] Income Tax Officer, Ward-36(1), Kolkata...........................................................……………..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Sri Amit Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 18Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 3Rd, 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 143(1)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 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…

M/S. Cygnus Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 117/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 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 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…

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Adhunik Cement Ltd., (Now Dalmia Bharat Cement), Guwahati

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1375/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicialmember)

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 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 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…

M/S Jawahar Lal Jain (HUF), Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1132/CHANDI/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Mar 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153DSection 68

…o disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for this assessment. In the absence of this mention in the reasons, the re-opening cannot be sustained. For this proposition, we rely upon the ratio of judgment in Sound Casting (P) Ltd v. Dy.CIT (2012) 250 CTR 119 (Bom.) The allegation in the reasons is that the alleged unexplained cash credit of Rs. 10,45,077/- was not considered at the time of original assessment since the information was not in possession of department. Even this allegation is factually incorrect. Information about advance from customers was part of audited balance sheet. Therefore, re…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Chemito Tehcnologies P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4644/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2003-04 Dcit-7(3) M/S Chemito Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Road, 8, Mohatta Bhavan, Off Mumbai-400020. Dr. E. Moses Road, Mumbai-400018. Pan No. Aaact1930B Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri H.N.Singh, Dr Assessee By : Shri Ruturaj H. Gurjar, Ar Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/11/2017

For Appellant: Shri Ruturaj H. Gurjar, ARFor Respondent: Shri H.N.Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 35(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 40a

…submits that there was a full disclosure by the assessee in the original assessment completed u/s 143(3) on 30.11.2005. He relies inter alia on the decision in Tao Publishing Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2015) 370 ITR 135 (Bom), Sound Casting (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2012) 250 CTR 119 (Bom), Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT (2012) 343 ITR 183 (Bom), Mrs. Parveen P. Bharucha vs. DCIT (2012) 348 ITR 325 (Bom). 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supports the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the validity of reassessment. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our…

DCIT Ltu, Mumbai vs. The Tata Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2961/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharincome Tax Appeal No.2961/Mum/2014 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Tata Finance Ltd Large Tax Payer Unit (Now Merged With Tata Motors Centre -1, 29Th Floor Ltd.) World Trade Centre Bombay House 24 Cuffe Parade Homi Mody Street Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan : Aaact1629F (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Income Tax Appeal No.2962/Mum/2014 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2005-06) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Tata Motors Ltd. Large Tax Payer Unit Bombay House, 24 Centre -1, 29Th Floor Homi Mody Street World Trade Centre Mumbai – 400 001 Cuffe Parade Pan : Aaact2T27Q Mumbai – 400 005 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : Smt S Padmaja & Smt Mahva Sarkar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Dinesh Vyas & Shri Manish Haria सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/12/2016 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 22/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N.Prasad (J.M.) : These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-6, Mumbai Dated 27.01.2014 For The Assessment Years

For Appellant: Smt S Padmaja & Smt Mahva SarkarFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh Vyas & Shri Manish Haria
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80G

…520) (Bom.) iv) United Shippers Ltd. v. ACIT (371 ITR 441) (Bom.) v) Tao Publishing (P.) Ltd. v DCIT (370 ITR 135)(Bom.) vi) Crompton Greaves Ltd. v ACIT (275 CTR 49) (Bom.) vii) Business India v JCIT (370 ITR 154) (Bom.) viii) Sound Casting (P.) Ltd. v DCIT (250 CTR 119) (Bom.) ix) Priya Blue Industries (P.) Ltd. v DCIT (30 taxmann.com 68) (Guj) 8 Tata Finance Ltd. (now merged with Tata Motors Ltd) ITA No.2961 & 2962/Mum/2014, A.Ys.2003-04 & 2005-06 12. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee further submits that the reassessments were not made based on new information or fresh facts but was made merely on a change of…