Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asst. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10(26), Section 147, Section 148, Section 151, Section 68, Section 132.

Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

Q: How many judgments cite Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asst. CIT?

29 judgments on BharatTax cite Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (137 Taxmann.com 315), spanning 2024 to 2026.

137 Taxmann.com 315High Court2022#4108 most cited

What is Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asst. CIT authority for?

When reopening an assessment, the assessing officer must provide the assessee with a copy of the superior officer's approval, including their comments, name, designation, and date, not merely state the reasons in a letter. This ensures transparency in the reassessment process.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asst. CIT · 137 Taxmann.com 315 · Bombay HC · 2022 · reassessment · reopening assessment · reasons to believe · superior officer approval · section 147 · section 148 · section 151 · live link

Sections most often in play

Section 10(26)Section 147 Section 148 Section 151 Section 68 Section 132 Section 143(3)Section 61

Issues it is cited on

section 10(26)section 61 substantive assessment protective assessment live link regular assessment escapement of income reopening of assessment reason to believe cross objection section 151 reassessment proceedings

Judgments citing Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. v. Asst. CIT

Poonam Rahul Anand, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2147/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2147/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Poonam Rahul Anand, V The Income Tax Officer, Anands Plot No.70, S Ward-1(1), Nashik. Niwas River View, Savarkar Nagar, Gangapur Road, Nashik – 422007. Pan: Addpa4704D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 16/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 16.07.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal In Limine By Refusing To Condone The Delay Of 224 Days In Filing The Appeal Against The Asst. Order U/S 147 Without Appreciating That The Said Delay Was Due To Reasonable Cause & The Same Ought To Have Been Condoned In The Interest Of Justice.

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.2147/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Poonam Rahul Anand, V The Income Tax Officer, Anands Plot No.70, s Ward-1(1), Nashik. Niwas River View, Savarkar Nagar, Gangapur Road, Nashik – 422007. PAN: ADDPA4704D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Sanket Joshi – AR Revenue by Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 16/12/2024 Date of pronouncement 23/12/2024 आदेश/…

Mr Altaf Patel, Panvel vs. ITO Ward 1, Panvel

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

ITA 1449/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 250

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1449/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr.Altaf Patel, V The Income Tax Officer, House No.128, s Ward-1, Panvel. Bhusar Mohalla Panvel Raigad, Panvel – 410206. PAN: BCAPP4701L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by None. Revenue by Shir Manish Mehta – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 05/12/2024 Date of pronouncement 11/12/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is…

Bhagwan Raosaheb Damale, Ladsangvi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(9), Aurangabad

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

ITA 1441/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…।आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण ”एस एम सी” "ायपीठपुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1441/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Bhagwan Raosaheb Damale, V The Income Tax Officer, At Post Ladsangvi, s Ward-1(9), Aurangabad. Aurangabad, Maharashtra – 431007. PAN: AZWPD4618F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Dhiraj Dandgaval – CA/AR Revenue by Shri Manoj Tripathi – DR Date of hearing 28/11/2024 Date of pronouncement 29/11/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P.…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Futura Travels Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 723/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…s has been done by the Ld. Assessing Officer summarily, in violation of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (supra) and the jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Tata Capital Financial Services Limited v. ACIT (2022) 443 ITR 127 (Bom). 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. On the first issue relating to claim of deduction towards interest on loan to the bank treated as prior period expenses amounting to ₹ 1,41,041/-, it is a fact on record that assessee had obtained a vehicle loan from Bank of India during the financial year 200…

Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), Kolkata.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 637/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 & I.T.A. No. 1067/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,…Respondent Pcit, Kolkata-2, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

…24.04.2018 - SC) : [2018] 404 ITR 10 (SC), 8. Sabh Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax [[2017] 398 ITR 198 (Delhi)] - SLP dismissed 9. Tata Capital Financial Services Limited vs AC IT [in WRIT PETITION NO. 546 OF 2022] reported in [2022] 443 ITR 127 (Bombay), 10. Income Tax vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. (21.08.2019- SC) [2019] 418 ITR 315 (SC), 11. Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2015 281 CTR 241 (SC), 12 STL Extrusion (P) Ltd [2010 : 333 ITR 269 13. CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal P. Ltd. [(2014) 361 ITR 10 (Delhi)], 14. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in [2017] 3…

Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. P.C.I.T., Kolkata - 2, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1067/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2013-2014

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

Rajesh Khanna, Neelkanth Plywood, Yamunanagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Yamunanagar

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 62/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT Sr.DR

Section 148Section 69A

…on of such report should be enclosed alongwith the reasons. Such document, referred to in the reasons to believe, is mandatorily to be provided to the assessee. 25.1 In “Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Others”, 443 ITR 127 (Bom.), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has reiterated the position of law, as enunciated by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in “SABH Infrastructure” (supra). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court directed the revenue to adhere to the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, while re-opening the assessment proceedings. It was emphasized that…

Income Tax Officer, Yamuna Nagar vs. Rajesh Khanna, Yamuna Nagar

In the result, the assessee's appeal in ITA

ITA 230/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT Sr.DR

Section 148Section 69A

Deepak Manaji Bhosale, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office-32(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 3891/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Sdeepak Majaji Bhosale, Vs Ito – 32(1)(4) B-2006, Ekta Bhoomi Kautilya Bhavan, Garden-Iii, Datta Pada G Block,Bkc, Road, Borivali (E), Bandra (E), Mumbai-400066. Mumbai-400051. Pan/Gir No. : Aacpb5184C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Mrs.Tejal Kharikar.ARFor Respondent: Shri R.R Makwana.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…sued by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in SABH Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax 398 ITR 198 (Delhi) and Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. Vs Asst. Deepak Manaji Bhosale, Mumbai. Commissioner of Income Tax 443 ITR 127 (Bombay). The impugned order ought to be quashed and cancelled. 9. On the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. A.O. completed the assessment proceeding without affording any opportunity to cross examining the third party, based on whose statement, the alleged addition of Rs.24,00,000/- as been made. Thus non providing of opportunity to cross ex…