Voltas Ltd. v. ACIT

349 ITR 656High Court2012#4828 most cited

What is Voltas Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

A notice issued under section 148 is time-barred and deserves to be quashed if no allegation is made against the assessee for failure to disclose material facts, and the AO's assertion of no prior assessment is contrary to the record. The jurisdiction assumed under section 147 is without lawful basis in such circumstances.

25

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

Also referred to as

Voltas Ltd v ACIT · 349 ITR 656 · reopening of assessment · section 147 · section 148 · time barred notice · failure to disclose material facts · contrary to facts on record · quashed notice

Also reported as

141 Taxmann.com 12770 DTR 433

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 151(1)Section 10(38)Section 115BBESection 115JBSection 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

material facts necessary for assessmentkelvinatormere change of opinionchange of opinionreopening of assessmentregular assessmentreason to believesection 151notice under section 148section 142assistant commissionersection 139

Judgments citing Voltas Ltd. v. ACIT

VIJAYSINGH MADHAVRAO PATWARDHAN,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-26(1), MUMBAI (NOW DCIT-41(1)(1), MUMBAI), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2688/MUM/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am Vijaysingh Madhavrao Patwardhan Asst. Cit-26(1) 4 Sangli Villa, 10Th Road, Now Dcit-41(1)(1) North Extension Jvps, Kautilya Bhawan, Bandra Kurla Vs. Mumbai-400 051 Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400 051

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)Section 2

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM Vijaysingh Madhavrao Patwardhan Asst. CIT-26(1) 4 Sangli Villa, 10th Road, Now DCIT-41(1)(1) North Extension JVPS, Kautilya Bhawan, Bandra Kurla Vs. Mumbai-400 051 Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400 051 PAN/GIR No. AGLPP 8828 J (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Rakesh Joshi Respondent by : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik Date of Hearing : 04.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.06.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, VP: This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 17.03.2025, passed by…

SHANKER LAL,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 36(1) DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3808/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Shanker Lal Vs Ito C/O-Sumer Garg & Co. Ward-36(1) 501A, Itl Northex Tower Delhi. A-09, Netaji Subhash Place Pitampura, Delhi-110034 Pan-Abgpl9915J Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.C.Garg, Ca Respondent By Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02.05.2025 Order

Section 147

…) Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. V/s. DDIT(E) (361 ITR 160) (Bom) (f) Grindwell Norton Ltd v ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 673 (Bom) (g) Shriram Foundry v DCIT (2012) 350 ITR 115 (Bom) (h) Sound Casting Pvt. Ltd. v DCIT (2012) 250 CTR 119 (Bom) (i) Voltas Ltd v ACIT (2012) 70 DTR 433 (Bom) (j) Pr.CIT, Central-11 vs DSC Ltd. [2023] 153 taxmann.com 535 (Delhi) 8. In the instant case, the AO has clearly mentioned in the reasons recorded that ‘no assessment has been carried out’ which is contrary to facts on record. No allegation has been made against the assessee towards failure to disclose material facts contemplated in the firs…

M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMET TAX. CIRCLE- LTU -2, , MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 1678/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: BEFOR SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri C NareshFor Respondent: ShriKrishna Kumar SR. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 90

…use a subsequent decision of the Tribunal is contrary to appellant's stand, the jurisdictional issue still remained whether there has been failure to disclose material facts necessary for assessment. Reliance is placed on the decision in Voltas Vs ACIT (2012) 349 ITR 656 (Bom). It is incorrect to state that the AR in case of Bank of India had accepted the issue of exclusion of income of foreign branches in toto. The AR had only accepted the fact that the issue was decided against in the latter decision in the case of Technimount even though the same was decided in favour of the appellant in Bank of India's case…

ASHU SHUKLA,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ITO WARD 5(1)(1), GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

ITA 1853/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. Ito Ward 5(1)(1), Gautam Smt Ashu Shukla, Nri Residency, Flat No.204, Budh Nagar, Noida, Tower-1, Sector-45, Uttar Pradesh-201301 Noida, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh- 201 301 Pan :Bsips9841Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pancham Sethi, Ca Department By Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr, Dr

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Vs. ITO WARD 5(1)(1), GAUTAM SMT ASHU SHUKLA, NRI RESIDENCY, FLAT NO.204, BUDH NAGAR, NOIDA, TOWER-1, SECTOR-45, UTTAR PRADESH-201301 NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH- 201 301 PAN :BSIPS9841Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Pancham Sethi, CA Department by Shri Sanjay Kumar, SR, DR Date of hearing 21.10.2024 Date of pronouncement 29.10.2024 ORDER PER MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.12.…

ANJU CHIRANIA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 3158/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalanju Chirania, Vs. Ito, Ward –4(1)(3), 301, Sona Chambers, Room No. 637, 507/509, Jss Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Chira Bazar, Marine Lines, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Afcpc9073Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…ncome Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the Assessing Officer's action in reopening the assessment u/s 147 ignoring the rationale provided in the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court Bombay in the case of Voltas Ltd Vs ACIT (2012) 349 ITR 656 (Bom), despite the facts submitted in statement of facts (SOF) before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as before the Assessing Officer as follows: a. Prior to issuance of notice u/s 147, the Assessing Officer initiated the inquiry proceedings w/s 133(6) dated 14.01.2020, which were duly responded by way of two letters dated 2…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI, INCOME TAX vs. HINDUSTAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE, CHENNAI

ITA 611/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 611/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai. Hindustan Institute Of Technology & Science, 40, Gst Road, St Thomas Mount, Chennai - 600 016. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aaath-6508-A] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By Shri R. Venkatesh, C.A प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 26.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 04.09.2024 Pronouncement आदेश / Order Per S.R. Raghunatha, A.M : This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [Nfac], Delhi (Hereinafter “Cit(A)] In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059507197(1), Dated 09.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai For The

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 3(1)

…legal precedents: :- 6 -: ITA No.611/Chny/2024 a) ACIT Vs ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd. [2012] 348 ITR 299 (SC): 78 DTR 153 (SC) b) CIT Vs Simplex Concrete Piles (I) Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 129 (SC): [2012] 79 DTR 82 (SC) c) Voltas Ltd. Vs ACIT [2012] 349 ITR 656 (Bom) d) Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs Dy.CIT [2013] 351 ITR 23 (Del) e) Bhor Industries Ltd. Vs ACIT [2004] 267 ITR 161(Bom) No new Material f) CIT Vs Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC) g) CIT Vs Usha International Ltd.[2012] 348 ITR 485 (Del)(FB): 77 DTR 396 (Del)(FB) On merits Ground No.3: Issue related to claim of accumulation of…

SAI SIMRAN INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR,ODISHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 91/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack04 Jun 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.87/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.86/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.90/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.91/CTK/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Sai Simran Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO, NFAC, Delhi Plot No.C.P.-28, Sector-4, Niladri Vihar, Chandrasekharpur Bhubaneswar-751021 PAN No. :AASCS 1240 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA राजस्व की…

SAI SIMRAN INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR,ODISHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 90/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack04 Jun 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.87/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.86/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.90/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.91/CTK/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Sai Simran Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO, NFAC, Delhi Plot No.C.P.-28, Sector-4, Niladri Vihar, Chandrasekharpur Bhubaneswar-751021 PAN No. :AASCS 1240 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA राजस्व की…

SAI SIMRAN INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,NFAC,DELHI, NFAC DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 87/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack04 Jun 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.87/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.86/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.90/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.91/CTK/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Sai Simran Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO, NFAC, Delhi Plot No.C.P.-28, Sector-4, Niladri Vihar, Chandrasekharpur Bhubaneswar-751021 PAN No. :AASCS 1240 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA राजस्व की…

SAI SIMRAN INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(1), BHUBANESWAR,ODISHA

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 86/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack04 Jun 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.87/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.86/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.90/CTK/2024 आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.91/CTK/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Sai Simran Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Vs ITO, NFAC, Delhi Plot No.C.P.-28, Sector-4, Niladri Vihar, Chandrasekharpur Bhubaneswar-751021 PAN No. :AASCS 1240 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA राजस्व की…

ECI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 968/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. ECI Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AAACE74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/s. ECI Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. PAN : AAACE74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas Rev…

DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. ECI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. ECI Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN : AAACE74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/s. ECI Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. PAN : AAACE74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas Rev…

GMR AIR CARGO & AEROSPACE ENGINEERING LTD(SUCCESSOR TO GMR HYDERABAD AIR CARGO & LOGISTICS PVT LTD),SHAMSHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3) , HYDERABAD

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

ITA 183/HYD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Gmr Air Cargo & Vs. Ito,Ward-2(3) Aerospace Engineering Signature Towers Ltd.(Successor To Gmr Kondapur, Kothaguda Hyderabad Air Cargo & Opp. Botanical Gardens Logistics Pvt Ltd.) R.R.District Rajiv Gandhi International Hyderabad-500 084 Airport, Samshabad Hyderabad-500 409

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

…Ltd. vs. ITO (332 ITR 226) (Bom.) vii.CIT vs. Hewlett-Packard Globalsoft(P.) Ltd. (380 ITR 386 (Karn.HC) viii. Viren Sureshchandra Shah v. ACIT (63 taxmann.com 104) (Guj.HC) ix. Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT(343 ITR 183) (Bom.) x. Voltas Ltd. v ACIT (2012) 349 ITR 656( Bom.) 9 ITA 183/Hyd/2020 13. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that reopening u/s. 147 of the I.T.Act in absence of fresh tangible material / failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material which are necessary for the assessment is bad in law and void. i. CIT v. Chaitanya Properties (P.) Ltd (240…

M/S BHARTIYA SAMRUDDHI FINANCE LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6022/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: Shri KVSR. Krishna, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…vs. Purolator India Ltd. [2012] 343 ITR 155 (Del) (HC). 9. BLB Limited vs. ACIT [2012] 343 ITR 129 (Del) (HC). 10. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 534 (Bom) (HC). 11. Voltas Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2012] 349 ITR 656 (Bom) (HC). 12 ITA.No.6022/Del./2016 M/s. Bhartiya Samruddhi Finance Ltd., New Delhi. 12.Rose Serviced Apartments Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [2012] 348 ITR 452 (Del) (HC). 13. Mihir Textiles Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax [2012] 347 ITR 546 (Guj) (HC). 14. Eagle Fashion P. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income- ta…

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD,BILASPUR(CG) vs. DY.. C.I.T.-1(1), BILASPUR(CG)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 399/BIL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Jul 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 380 & 381/Rpr/2014) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) बनाम/ Dy.C.I.T. Secl Circle 1(1) Seepat Road, Bilaspur Vs. Mahima Commercial (Cg) Complex, Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur (Cg) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs2066E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Korde, Shri Vivek RuiaFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DR
Section 147

…(e) Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd.V/s. DDIT(E)(361 ITR 160)(Bom) (f) Grindwell Norton Ltd v ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 673 (Bom) (g) Shriram Foundry v DCIT (2012) 350 ITR 115 (Bom) (h) Sound Casting Pvt. Ltd. v DCIT (2012) 250 CTR 119 (Bom) (i) Voltas Ltd v ACIT (2012) 70 DTR 433 (Bom) 7.2 We simultaneously notice that there is no averment to the effect as to what material facts necessary for assessment were not disclosed by the assessee in the course of original assessment proceedings fully as well as truly. The reasons being justiciable, the AO is expected to record a finding to this effect in the reasons recorded itsel…

DY.C.I.T. CIR 1(1), BILASPUR(CG) vs. M/S SECL, BILASPUR(CG)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 380/BIL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Jul 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 380 & 381/Rpr/2014) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2007-08) बनाम/ Dy.C.I.T. Secl Circle 1(1) Seepat Road, Bilaspur Vs. Mahima Commercial (Cg) Complex, Vyapar Vihar, Bilaspur (Cg) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs2066E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Korde, Shri Vivek RuiaFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DR
Section 147

…(e) Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd.V/s. DDIT(E)(361 ITR 160)(Bom) (f) Grindwell Norton Ltd v ACIT (2004) 267 ITR 673 (Bom) (g) Shriram Foundry v DCIT (2012) 350 ITR 115 (Bom) (h) Sound Casting Pvt. Ltd. v DCIT (2012) 250 CTR 119 (Bom) (i) Voltas Ltd v ACIT (2012) 70 DTR 433 (Bom) 7.2 We simultaneously notice that there is no averment to the effect as to what material facts necessary for assessment were not disclosed by the assessee in the course of original assessment proceedings fully as well as truly. The reasons being justiciable, the AO is expected to record a finding to this effect in the reasons recorded itsel…

OM PRAAKSH SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 361/RAN/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Om Prakash Singh Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Ranchi Sankalp, East Jail Road, Ranchi- 834001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agkps0300D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manjit Verma, A/RFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Mohanti, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234CSection 263Section 37(1)

…m Pottery equally applies in the case in hand. The reasons recorded, as noted, do not warrant assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer to issue notices under Section 148.” 4.3. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Voltas Ltd. v. ACIT (2012) 349 ITR 656 / 70 DTR 433 (Bom.)(HC)has held as follows: “even otherwise even the above reasons given subsequently do not satisfy the jurisdictional requirements of Section 147(1) of the Act inasmuch as they do not undertake that there was a failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessments.” 4.4. The Hon’ble…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GAIL (INDIA) LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the ld AO on the limited issue that order passed by the ld AO is barred by limitation. Ground No. 1 is dismissed

ITA 6079/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jul 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(Ltu), Vs. M/S. Gail (India) Ltd, Circle-1, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place, Nbcc Plaza Pusp Vihar, Rk Puram, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 263

…trict Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd, 220 ITR 194 (Gujrat) document1 4. Jindal Photofilms Ltd. 234 ITR 170 (Delhi) 5. Berger Paints India Ltd. 245 ITR 645(Cal) and Mercury Travels Ltd, 258 ITR 533(Cal) 6. Eicher Ltd. 294 ITR 310 (Del) 7. Voltas Limited. 349 ITR 656 (Bom) 8. Manjusha Estate (P) Ltd, 314 ITR 236(Guj) 9. Jal Hotels Co. Ltd, 184 Taxman 1 (Del) 10. Feather Foam Ent.(P) Ltd, 296 ITR 342(Del) 11. Goetze Ltd. 321 ITR 431 (Del) 12. Satnam Overseas 228 CTR 121 (Del) 13. IL& FS Investment Managers Ltd. 298 ITR 32 (Bom) 14. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance, 325 ITR 471 (Bom) 15. Siemens Information. 295…

ACIT (OSD), WARD - 12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. AMRABATHI INVESTRA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

ITA 365/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.231/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.231/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) M/s Amrabathi Investra (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-12(3), Kolkata C/o, Subash Agarwal & Associates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, 2nd Floor, Suite-213, Kolkata- 700069 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCA 1312 Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.365/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) ACIT (OSD), Ward-12(3), Vs. M/s Amrabathi Investra (P) Ltd. Kolkata C/o, Subash Agarwal & Associates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson La…

AMRABATHI INVESTRA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 231/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.231/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.231/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) M/s Amrabathi Investra (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-12(3), Kolkata C/o, Subash Agarwal & Associates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, 2nd Floor, Suite-213, Kolkata- 700069 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCA 1312 Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.365/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) ACIT (OSD), Ward-12(3), Vs. M/s Amrabathi Investra (P) Ltd. Kolkata C/o, Subash Agarwal & Associates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson La…

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2