Techman Buildwell P. Ltd. v. ACIT

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, New Delhi vs. Network Programme India Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

…se facts, we find that the decisions relied upon by the assessee are squarely applicable to the present case. In the present fact situation, we further lay our hands on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High court in the case of Techman Buildwell P. Ltd. ACIT, 370 ITR 771 (Del.), wherein the Hon'ble Court has held as under : "In the present case the reasons to believe extracted above nowhere highlight what, if at all, was the material which the AO came up or became aware of subsequent to the original assessment. In other words, what triggered the AOs curiosity to impel him to re-examine the files and docum…

Hanish Singla, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(3), Faridabad

In the result, I set aside the orders of the authorities below and quashed the reopening of the assessment

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

…he AY 1997-98. What was recorded was that the petitioner had wrongly claimed certain deductions which he was not entitled to. The reassessment proceedings initiated in the year 2004 were not valid.” 8. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Techman Buildwell 370 ITR 771 held that AO’s omission sole basis of initiating proceedings u/s 148 of the Act, notice not valid. 9. Considering the above discussion, it is clear that at the original assessment stage AO considered the issue of claim of deduction on account of interest to the banks and others and as such, on mere change of opinion AO could not have reopened the…

M/S. Alcatel Lucent India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

…e of Vardhaman Industries [2014] 363 ITR 625 (Raj.) held that “reasons must be based on new and tangible material. Notice based on documents already on record, not valid.” The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Techman Buildwell P. Ltd., vs., ACIT [2015] 370 ITR 771 (Del.) held that “Assessing Officer’s omission was the sole basis of notice under section 148. Notice under section 148 not valid.” Since in the present case, the notice under section 148 have been issued after 04 years and no new and tangible material has been brought on record at the time of reopening of the assessment and the A.O. wanted to co…

M/S. Fashionage Corporation (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

…was that the petitioner had wrongly claimed certain deductions which he was not entitled to. The reassessment proceedings initiated in the year 2004 were not valid.” 4.3. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Techman Buildwell P. Ltd., vs. ACIT (2015) 370 ITR 771 (Del.) held as under : “Held, allowing the petition, that the "reasons to believe" nowhere highlighted what, if at all, was the material which the Assessing Officer came upon or became aware of subsequent to the original assessment. In other words, what triggered the Assessing Officer's curiosity to impel him to reexamine the files and documents…

M/S. Network Programme (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2002-03

…hese facts, we find that the decisions relied upon by the assessee are squarely applicable to the present case. In the present fact situation, we further lay our hands on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High court in the case of Techman Buildwell P. Ltd. ACIT, 370 ITR 771 (Del.), wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under : “In the present case the reasons to believe extracted above nowhere highlight what, if at all, was the material which the AO came up or became aware of subsequent to the original assessment. In other words, what triggered the AOs curiosity to impel him to re-examine the files and documents pe…