Trib) 177- 181 18 Prashant S Joshi and Dattaram Shridhar Bhosale v. ITO and UOI

230 CTR 232High Court2010#13829 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(2)(a)

Issues it is cited on

section 147(1)section 148(1)section 116section 147(a)beyond four yearsfirst proviso to section 147paper companyshell companymere change of opinionlive linkincome escaping assessmentborrowed satisfaction

Judgments citing Trib) 177- 181 18 Prashant S Joshi and Dattaram Shridhar Bhosale v. ITO and UOI

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed as above

ITA 3130/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…out income having escaped assessment is satisfied, there cannot be any reopening of assessment. The finding of income having escaped assessment is a precondition for reopening the assessment. Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Prashant & Joshi vs. ITO (230 CTR 232) has observed "The AO must have reasons to believe that such is the case (i.e. any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for a particular year) before he proceeds to issue notice under s. 147" and that "the reasons which are recorded by the AO are the only reasons which can be considered when formation. Clearly this condition is not sat…

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

ITA 759/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…ly and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year.” Page 19 of 31 I.T.A. No. 757 to 759/Kol/2022 A Ys: 2011-12 to 2013-14, Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. 10. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi (2010) 230 CTR 232 (Bom) has observed ‘The AO must have reasons to believe that such is the case (i.e. any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for a particular year) before he proceeds to issue notice u/s 147”. In other words, reasons have to be recorded for reopening the assessment prior to issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. It is well settled in l…

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

ITA 758/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…ly and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year.” Page 19 of 31 I.T.A. No. 757 to 759/Kol/2022 A Ys: 2011-12 to 2013-14, Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. 10. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi (2010) 230 CTR 232 (Bom) has observed ‘The AO must have reasons to believe that such is the case (i.e. any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for a particular year) before he proceeds to issue notice u/s 147”. In other words, reasons have to be recorded for reopening the assessment prior to issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. It is well settled in l…

PURPLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT, GUJRAT vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the three appeal for AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed

ITA 757/KOL/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.757 To 759/Kol/2022 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aafcp2218P) Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata. ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Appeared For Appellant. Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 26.08.2024 Order Per Manish Borad: The Captioned Appeals Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years (In Short “Ay”) 2011-12 To 2013-14 Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 03.11.2022 Arising Out Of The Separate Assessment Orders U/S 143(3)/147 Of The Act By Acit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Dated 31.12.2018. Since Grounds Of Appeal Raised In These Appeals Are Common & Facts Are Identical, Except Variance In Amount, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To Dispose Of All These Appeals By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…ly and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year.” Page 19 of 31 I.T.A. No. 757 to 759/Kol/2022 A Ys: 2011-12 to 2013-14, Purple Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. 10. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi (2010) 230 CTR 232 (Bom) has observed ‘The AO must have reasons to believe that such is the case (i.e. any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for a particular year) before he proceeds to issue notice u/s 147”. In other words, reasons have to be recorded for reopening the assessment prior to issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. It is well settled in l…

D.C.I.T.CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL SALE CO.LTD., KOLKATA

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

ITA 2364/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…in response to a notice issued under sub-section (1) of Section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year.” 10. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi (2010) 230 CTR 232 (Bom) has observed ‘The AO must have reasons to believe that such is the case (i.e. any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for a particular year) before he proceeds to issue notice u/s 147”. In other words, reasons have to be recorded for reopening the assessment prior to issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. It is well settled in l…

SMT. SAVITRI KADUR,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 1700/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 2(47)Section 45Section 54E

…] 6 SOT 415 (Bangalore) 163- 165 16 CIT Vs. Dynamic Enterprises [2013] 359 ITR 83 (Karnataka) 166- 176 17 ACIT Vs. P Sivakumar [2014] 43 Taxmann.com 211 (Chennai – Trib) 177- 181 18 Prashant S Joshi and Dattaram Shridhar Bhosale Vs. ITO and UOI [2010] 182- 230 CTR 232 (Bombay) 188 19 CIT Vs. J.P Devadhar and M.S Sanklecha [2014] 221 Taxmann 118 189- Page 20 of 23 (Bombay) 190 20 Sharadha Terry Products Ltd. Vs. ACIT [2016] 68 taxmann.com 191- 220 282 (Chennai Trib.) 21 CIT Vs. A.N Naik Associates [2004] 136 Taxman 107 (Bombay) 221- 229 22 Smt. Girija Reddy Vs. ITO [2012] 23 taxmann.com 95 (Hyd.) 230- 245…

M/S. KHATRI PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4353/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 4353/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 M/S Khatri Projects Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, A-2/106, Sector-16, Rohini, Ward-5(2), Delhi-110085 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacck7376A Assessee By : Sh. Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2016 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.05.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-36, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Vivek Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 148Section 68

…formation provided by the Investigation Wing and did not apply his own mind while recording the reasons for reopening the assessment, therefore, the reopening itself was bad-in-law. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Prashant S Joshi Vs ITO 230 CTR 232 " Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs R.B Wadkar 268 ITR 332 (Bom.) 30 Khatri Projects Pvt. Ltd. " ITO Vs Laxmi Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 (SC) " Bhageria Finance and Investment Ltd. Vs DCIT 43 CCH 40 (Del.) " Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO 338 ITR 51 (Del.) " G & G Pharma India Ltd. Vs ITO 43 CCH 18 (Del. Trib.) " CIT Vs Atul Jain 299 ITR 383 (Del.) " ACIT V…

Trib) 177- 181 18 Prashant S Joshi and Dattaram Shridhar Bhosale v. ITO and UOI (230 CTR 232) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax