Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. DCIT

353 ITR 474High Court#5356 most cited

What is Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

When considering a deduction claim under Section 80HHC, the provisions of Section 80IA(9) must be applied. The formation of the Assessing Officer's belief for issuing a notice is subject to judicial review based on whether there was relevant material for a reasonable person to form that belief.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd v DCIT · 353 ITR 474 · 75 Taxmann.com 143 · Section 80HHC · Section 80IA(9) · deduction · exporters · reassessment notice · formation of belief

Also reported as

75 Taxmann.com 143

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 35(1)(ii)Section 80G

Issues it is cited on

section 80absection 80hsection 80hhcsection 80hhdeduction under section 80iasection 251(2)section 80aeligible businesssection 80iasection 80igross total incomesection 251

Judgments citing Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. DCIT

M/S Allahdad Tannery, Kanpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Kanpur

ITA 620/LKW/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Aug 2025AY 2004-05
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 801BSection 80HSection 80ISection 8O

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण 'बी' न्यायपीठ, लखनऊ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW श्री कुल भारत, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री निखिल चौधरी, लेखा सदस्य के समछ BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ ITA No.620/LKW/2016 निर्धारण वर्ष/ Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/s Allahdad Tannery 99/85A, Jajmau, Kanpur- 208010. PAN:AAEFA9951C अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) अपीलार्थी कि और से/Appellant by: प्रत्यर्थी कि और से /Respondent by: सुनवाई कि तारीख / Date of hearing: घोषणा कि तारीख / Date of pronouncement: V. DCIT-1 Kanpur प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) Shri Ashish Jaiswa…

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 524/AHD/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER, I.T.A. Nos.521& 522/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2000-2001 & 2002-2003) Inox India Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 9th Floor, KP Platina, Income Tax, Racecourse, Circle-1, Vadodara-390007. (Now Circle-1(1)(1)) Vadodara. [PAN No.AAACI4416P] And I.T.A. Nos.523 & 524/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005) Inox India Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of 9th Floor, KP Platina, Income Tax, Racecourse, Circle-1(2), Vadodara-390007. (Now Circle-1(1)(1)) Vadodara. [PA…

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 523/AHD/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER, I.T.A. Nos.521& 522/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2000-2001 & 2002-2003) Inox India Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 9th Floor, KP Platina, Income Tax, Racecourse, Circle-1, Vadodara-390007. (Now Circle-1(1)(1)) Vadodara. [PAN No.AAACI4416P] And I.T.A. Nos.523 & 524/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005) Inox India Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of 9th Floor, KP Platina, Income Tax, Racecourse, Circle-1(2), Vadodara-390007. (Now Circle-1(1)(1)) Vadodara. [PA…

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2) Now Circle- 1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 522/AHD/2023[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER, I.T.A. Nos.521& 522/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2000-2001 & 2002-2003) Inox India Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 9th Floor, KP Platina, Income Tax, Racecourse, Circle-1, Vadodara-390007. (Now Circle-1(1)(1)) Vadodara. [PAN No.AAACI4416P] And I.T.A. Nos.523 & 524/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005) Inox India Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of 9th Floor, KP Platina, Income Tax, Racecourse, Circle-1(2), Vadodara-390007. (Now Circle-1(1)(1)) Vadodara. [PA…

Inox India Limited, Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Circle-1 Now Circle 1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2000-2001 and other years before us, on the above two issues which were argued before us

ITA 521/AHD/2023[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2000-01

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR
Section 251Section 251(2)Section 801A(9)Section 801HSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER, I.T.A. Nos.521& 522/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2000-2001 & 2002-2003) Inox India Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 9th Floor, KP Platina, Income Tax, Racecourse, Circle-1, Vadodara-390007. (Now Circle-1(1)(1)) Vadodara. [PAN No.AAACI4416P] And I.T.A. Nos.523 & 524/Ahd/2023 (Assessment Years: 2003-2004 & 2004-2005) Inox India Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of 9th Floor, KP Platina, Income Tax, Racecourse, Circle-1(2), Vadodara-390007. (Now Circle-1(1)(1)) Vadodara. [PA…

Pooja Hardware Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT - 13 (1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3712/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mr. Vipul Joshi &For Respondent: Mr. H.M. Bhatt, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(1)(ii)

…ciency or correctness of material was not to be Sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. considered at this stage. M/s Pooja Hardware Pvt. Ltd. 6 M/s Pooja Hardware Pvt. Ltd. ii) Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd Vs DCIT 353 ITR 474 Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd Vs DCIT 353 ITR 474 Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd Vs DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj, where the Hon'ble High Court held the formatio (Guj, where the Hon'ble High Court held the formatio (Guj, where the Hon'ble High Court held the formation by belief that the A.O. is essentially within his subjective belief that the A.O…

Lisamma Sebastian, Kota vs. Income Tax Officer, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 661/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 69A

…relevant bearing on such formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment-sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. 6 LISAMMA SEBASTIAN VS ITO, WARD 2(2), KOTA 2) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd Vs DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj) where the Hon'ble High Court held that formation of belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd vs ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj) where the Hon'ble HC held if a…

Shri Amit Mangilal Jain, Mumbai vs. ACIT, - 33(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed and the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3331/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 3331 & 3332/Mum/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Shri Amit Mangilal Jain Vs. Acit – 33(1) 2Nd Floor, Arkade House, 103, 1St Floor, Atmaram Sawnt Marg, Eastern House, Kandivali (E), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400101. Mumbai – 400021. Pan/Gir No. : Aabpj0925G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JainFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar.DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3331 & 3332/Mum/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Shri Amit Mangilal Jain Vs. ACIT – 33(1) 2nd Floor, Arkade House, 103, 1st Floor, Atmaram Sawnt Marg, Eastern House, Kandivali (E), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400101. Mumbai – 400021. PAN/GIR No. : AABPJ0925G Appellant .. Respondent ITA No. 4158 & 4159/Mum/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10 & 2010-11) ACIT – 33(1) Vs. Shri Amit Mangilal 103, 1st Floor, Eastern Jain House, Nariman Point, 2nd Floor, Arkade Mumbai – 400021 House, Atmaram…

Shri Radhey Comsec Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-13(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is stand dismissed

ITA 3968/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhshri Radhey Comsec Pvt. Vs. Cit(A)-21 Ltd., 315, Luxuria Room No. 8, 3 Rd Floor, Business Hub, Near V.R. B-Wing, Mittal Court, Mall, Dumad Road, Nariman Point, Surat – 395007 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aajcs7720B Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…rial available on record has rational connection and relevant bearing on such for belief for issuing valid notices for re- assessment Sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. (ii) Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd Vs DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj), where the Hon'ble High Court held the formation by belief is essentially within AO's subjective satisfaction at the stage of issue of notice only question is whether there was relevant material on which the AO could have formed requisite belief. 6.2 The Appellant has relied on the case law of Signature Hotels wherein the case was re-opened…

DCIT 4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Hema Dyeing & Printing Wills P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s Cross Objection is dismissed and appeal by the Revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5682/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh: A.Y : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Mangal
Section 147Section 68Section 69C

…can allege that he has not applied his mind. As could be seen from the discussion above and in view of the decisions in the case of Rohilkhand Educational Charitable Trust vs. CCIT and Others 365 ITR 233 (All.) and Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.), the AO had in his possessions, new tangible material because of which he had issued notice u/s. 148. In view of the counter arguments given against each point of the learned counsel for the appellant, it is held that there is no substance in this ground of appeal and the same is dismissed. The action of the AO in initiating the proceeding…

M/S.Kedia Finvest Consultant Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1664/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh: A.Y : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JainFor Respondent: Shri S. Michael
Section 147Section 148Section 234D

…to reopend a case. He need not establish beyond doubt that there is escapement before issuing the notice. This can be done at the time of assessment but not at the time of issue of notice. Reliance is placed on : i) Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj), where the Hon'ble High Court held the formation by belief is essentially within AO's subjective satisfaction-at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which the AO could have formed requisite belief. In case of M/s. Coronation Agro Industries Ltd. v/s DCIT 6(2)(1), as brought out by the Hon'b…

Surendrakumar H Chaplot, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 18(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee regarding the reopening stands dismissed

ITA 620/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 145Section 147Section 148

…le on record has rational connection and relevant bearing on such formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment - sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. 2) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble HC held if…

Laxman D Daware, Mumbai vs. ITO 19 (2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3464/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147

…ri Laxman D Daware rational connection and relevant bearing on such formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment - sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. 2) Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble HC held if…

Laxman D. Daware, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3463/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147

…ri Laxman D Daware rational connection and relevant bearing on such formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment - sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. 2) Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble HC held if…

Laxman D. Daware, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3462/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147

…ri Laxman D Daware rational connection and relevant bearing on such formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment - sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. 2) Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble HC held if…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

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

ITA 2234/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment.-sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. ITA NOs. 2231, 2232, 2233 & 2234/MUM/2018 M/s. Union Bank of India 2) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon’ble HC held if…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

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

ITA 2233/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment.-sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. ITA NOs. 2231, 2232, 2233 & 2234/MUM/2018 M/s. Union Bank of India 2) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon’ble HC held if…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

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

ITA 2232/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment.-sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. ITA NOs. 2231, 2232, 2233 & 2234/MUM/2018 M/s. Union Bank of India 2) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon’ble HC held if…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

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

ITA 2231/MUM/2018[1991-92]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 1991-92

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment.-sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. ITA NOs. 2231, 2232, 2233 & 2234/MUM/2018 M/s. Union Bank of India 2) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon’ble HC held if…

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai

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

ITA 1803/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…formation of belief for issuing valid notices for re-assessment.-sufficiency or correctness of material was not to be considered at this stage. ITA NOs. 2231, 2232, 2233 & 2234/MUM/2018 M/s. Union Bank of India 2) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT 353 ITR 474 (Guj.) where the Hon'ble High Court held formation by belief by AO is essentially within his subjective satisfaction - at the stage of issue of notice, only question is whether there was relevant material on which reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. 3) N.K. Industries Ltd. vs. ITO 362 ITR 542 (Guj.) where the Hon’ble HC held if…

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. DCIT (353 ITR 474) — Cited in 22 Judgments | BharatTax