How many judgments cite Vodafone Essar South Ltd. v. CIT?

12 judgments on BharatTax cite Vodafone Essar South Ltd. v. CIT (141 TTJ 84), spanning 2017 to 2024.

Vodafone Essar South Ltd. v. CIT

141 TTJ 84High Court2011#9230 most cited

What is Vodafone Essar South Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Commissioner cannot revise an assessment order under section 263 solely because they deem the Assessing Officer's inquiries inadequate, especially when the Assessing Officer has conducted inquiries and accepted the assessee's explanations after due verification. The Assessing Officer's view is permissible if supported by facts and evidence.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Vodafone Essar South Ltd. v. CIT · section 263 · inadequate enquiry · Assessing Officer · Commissioner's revision powers · permissible view · evidence on record · ITAT Delhi

Also reported as

12 Taxmann.com 233

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

erroneous and prejudicial section 263 section 26 section 142(1)section 143(3)total income document interest

Judgments citing Vodafone Essar South Ltd. v. CIT

Aaravi Developers, Ahmedabad vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 3, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 659/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.659/Ahd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Aaravi Developers The Pr.Cit-3 बनाम/ A-312, Siddhi Vinayak Tower Ahmedabad B/H. Divya Bhaskar V/S. S.G. Highway, Makarba Ahmedabad – 380 051 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abdfa 5385 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16-03-2024 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Ahmedabad (Hereinafter Referred To As “Pcit” In Short) In Exercise Of The Revisionary Powers Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act” In Short) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. Aaravi Developers Vs. The Pr.Cit Asst. Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…ed by the assessee regarding the unsecured Aaravi Developers vs. The Pr.CIT Asst. Year : 2018-19 7 loans. The view taken by the AO was a permissible one, supported by the facts and evidence on record. 6.5. In the case of Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vs. CIT - 141 TTJ 84 (ITAT, Delhi), it was held that if the AO has made inquiries, even if the inquiries are deemed inadequate by the Commissioner, the order cannot be revised under Section 263 of the Act on that ground alone. The AO’s acceptance of the assessee’s explanations after due verification cannot be deemed erroneous. 6.6. In the case of CIT vs. Ashish Rajpa…

Navinchandra K. Patel, Surat vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 57/SRT/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.57/Srt/2021 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Court Hearing) Navinchandra K. Patel, Vs. The Pcit-1, Surat. 5, Kaaliytawadi Faliya, At Post Saniya Hemad, Surat-395006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Birpp6292D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02/02/2023 10/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Surat (In Short “Ld. Pcit”], Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”), Dated 31.03.2021. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Has Erred In Passing Revisionary Order U/S 263 Of The I.T. Act Setting Aside The Order Of Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Dated 24.11.2017 For The Year Under Consideration Although Said Order Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Has Erred In Observing That Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act Is Erroneous On The Ground That Indexed Cost Of Acquisition Of Property Is Under Assessed By Rs.2,12,58,035/-. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Has Erred In Observing That Order

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54BSection 54F

…under the facts and circumstances of the case. This position is further supported by the following judicial pronouncements;  CIT Vs. Anil Kumar Sharma, 335 ITR 83 (Del HC);  Ramakant Singh Vs. CIT 140 TTJ 41 (Patna ITAT);  Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vs CIT 141 TTJ 84 (Del ITAT);  CIT Vs. Developement Credit Bank Ltd. 323 ITR 206 (2010);  CIT vs Gabrial India Ltd. 203 ITR 108 (1993);  Russel Properties Pvt Ltd Vs. CIT 109 ITR 229 (Cal);  CIT Vs. Vikash Polymers 341 ITR 537 (Del); 18. In this regard, we also place reliance on the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Fab India Overseas (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT…

Dinesh Kumar Singh, Mirzapur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad

ITA 11/ALLD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad04 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma, CIT-DR and Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…ITA No.11/Alld/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dinesh Kumar Singh, Mirzapur, U.P. v. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax,Allahabad, U.P. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 11/Alld./2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 Mr. Dinesh Kumar Singh, Pr. Commissioner of Income Ouri, Jamalpur, Ouri, Chunar, v. Tax, Allahabad, U.P. Mirzapur, 231305,U.P. PAN:BVTPS4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Ramendra Kumar Vishwakarma, CIT-DR and Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R.…

M/S Basti Wine Co. (English), Kanpur vs. Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kanpur

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

ITA 683/LKW/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow02 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 263

…as placed on the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. [2009] 289 Taxman 436 (Delhi) (HC) and further reliance was placed on an order of Delhi Tribunal in the case of in the case of Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vs. CIT [2011] 141 TTJ 84 (Delhi) (Trib) 3. Without prejudice to the above, it was argued that where revisionary authority opined that further inquiry was required, such inquiry should have been conducted by the revisionary authority himself which he has not done. It was submitted that the assessee had filed elaborate replies to the show cause notice by learned CIT and le…

Shri Pankaj P. Khara, Navi Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-7, Mumbai

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

ITA 801/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshri Pankaj P Khara, Vs. Pr. Cit-27 64D,Askini, Op Chs Room No. 401, 4Th Ltd,Plotno.20, Secotr- Floor, Tower No. 6, 11, Behind Kanchan Vashi Railway Station Junga, Koparkhairne, Commercial Complex, Navi Mumbai – 400709 Vashi – 400703 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Akhpk0207E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Hiral Sejpal.Ca. Dr Respondent By : Mr.Nikhil Chaudhary.Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.01.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit)-27, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms.Hiral Sejpal.CA. DRFor Respondent: Mr.Nikhil Chaudhary.DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Pankaj P Khara, Vs. Pr. CIT-27 64D,Askini, Op CHS Room No. 401, 4th Ltd,PlotNo.20, Secotr- Floor, Tower No. 6, 11, Behind Kanchan Vashi Railway Station Junga, Koparkhairne, Commercial Complex, Navi Mumbai – 400709 Vashi – 400703 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AKHPK0207E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Ms.Hiral Sejpal.CA. DR Respondent by : Mr.Nikhil Chaudhary.DR Date of Hearing 06.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement 31.01.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER P…

Essar Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 6, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3759/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Vajresh Consultants Prcit 6, Ltd. (Earlier Known As Aayakar Bhavan, Essar Capital Ltd.), Mumbai - 400020 Vs. 40-B, Ridge Road, Malabar Hill, Mumbai – 400 006 Pan: Aabce 7257R (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar, A.R. & Shri Hiten Chande, A.R. Revenue By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 263

…nd even if such enquiry was inadequate in the opinion of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax, this does not give power to him to pass an order, under section 263 merely because he has different opinion in the matter. ix) Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vs. CIT (141 TTJ 84) The Delhi Tribunal held that in cases where AO enquired on all the issues and assesses responded by giving the detailed replied, it cannot be said there was lack of enquiry on the part of the AO on the ground that assessment order does not give reason for allowing the expenditure and AO did not make further enquiry. Further, it was held that ther…

M/S. Singhal Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., C.C. - 4(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee ( in ITA No

ITA 1072/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1071 & 1072/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2013-14 &2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

…nvoked under the facts and circumstances of the case. This position is further supported by the following judicial pronouncements; CITVs. Anil Kumar Sharma, 335 ITR 83 (Del HC); Ramakant Singh Vs. CIT 140 TTJ 41 (Patna ITAT); Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vs CIT 141 TTJ 84 (Del ITAT); CIT Vs. Development Credit Bank Ltd. 323 ITR 206 (2010); CIT vs Gabrial India Ltd. 203 ITR 108 (1993); Russel Properties Pvt Ltd Vs. CIT 109 ITR 229 (Cal); CITVs. Vikash Polymers 341 ITR 537 (Del); M/s Singhal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos.1071 & 1072/Kol/2018 Assessment Years:2013-14 & 2014-15 14. In this regard, we also place relianc…

M/S. Singhal Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., C.C. - 4(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee ( in ITA No

ITA 1071/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.1071 & 1072/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2013-14 &2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

M/S. Amira Enterprises Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT (C), Gurgaon

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3206/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT- DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SA No. 452/DEL/2017 & [Assessment Year: 2014-15] M/s Amira Enterprises Ltd Vs. The Pr.C.I.T 54, Prakriti Marg, Sultanpur Farms Central Mehrauli, New Delhi Gurgaon PAN : AAGCA 5057 J [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 07.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 29.11.2017 Assessee by : Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv Revenue by : Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT- DR ORDER PER B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ord…

M/S. Amira Pure Foods Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT (C), Gurgaon

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3205/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT- DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SA No. 451/DEL/2017 & [Assessment Year: 2014-15] M/s Amira Pure Foods Pvt. Ltd Vs. The Pr.C.I.T 54, Prakriti Marg, Sultanpur Farms Central Mehrauli, New Delhi Gurgaon PAN : AAACA 2200 M [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 07.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 29.11.2017 Assessee by : Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv Revenue by : Smt. Aparna Karan, CIT- DR ORDER PER B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ord…

M/S Shree Saibaba Construction, Nagpur vs. CIT-IV, Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 292/NAG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no. 292/Nag./2014 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) M/s. Shree Saibaba Construction Behind Goyal Talkies …………… Appellant Kamptee, Nagpur 441 002 PAN – ABNFS6079D v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ..…….………. Respondent Circle–8, Nagpur Assessee by : Shri K.P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri A.R. Ninawe Date of Hearing – 22.06.2017 Date of Order – 27.06.2017 O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, J.M. The assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 20th Marc…

M/S Western Coalfields Ltd, Nagpur vs. Principal Commissioner F Income Tax-II, Nagpur

In the result this appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 143/NAG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 30

…SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER.. I.T.A. No. 143/Nag/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11. M/s Western Coalfields Ltd., The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Nagpur. Vs. Nagpur. PAN AAACW1578L. Appellant. Respondent. Appellant by : Shri K.P. Dewani. Respondent by : Shri A.R. Ninawe. Date of Hearing : 20-03-2017. Date of Pronouncement : 21st March, 2017. O R D E R. PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A.M. : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Nagpur dated 10-03-2015 and pertains to assessment year 2010-11. The grounds of appeal read as under : 1. The order p…