Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another v. Income Tax Officer

308 ITR 22High Court2009#1528 most cited

What is Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another v. Income Tax Officer authority for?

An assessment cannot be reopened under Section 147 after four years unless the income escaped assessment due to the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts. Furthermore, reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer.

74

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Wel Intertrade (P) Ltd. v. ITO · Section 147 · Section 148 · reopening of assessment · change of opinion · failure to disclose material facts · reassessment beyond four years · full and true disclosure · income escaping assessment · Kelvinator principle

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 139Section 68Section 133(6)Section 142

Issues it is cited on

material facts necessary for assessmentfirst proviso to section 147true and full disclosurebeyond four yearsfull and true disclosurekelvinatorwithin four yearsmere change of opinionincome escaping assessmentlive linkchange of opinionreopening of assessment

Judgments citing Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another v. Income Tax Officer

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. South Delhi Promoters Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 6402/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 68

…r understanding of law, this is the pre-requisite condition for reopening the assessment after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. 13. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Wel Inter Trade (P) Ltd 308 ITR 22 has made the following observations, which are very relevant to the facts of the case in hand: “A plain reading of the said proviso makes it more than clear that where the provisions of Section 147 are being invoked after the period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, in addition to the Assessing Officer having reason to…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maharaji Education Trust, Ghaziabad

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 5138/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, C. AFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas[CIT]–
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

…ssee not having made a full and true disclosure of the material facts necessary for assessment.” ii. CIT Vs. DCM Ltd.,(2009) 24 DTR 72 (Del.), iii. Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. vs. CIT and Anr 308 ITR 38 (Del.), iv. Wel Intertrade (P) Ltd. & Anr. vs. ITO 308 ITR 22 (Del), v. CIT vs. Purolator India Limited 343 ITR 0155 (Del), vi. BLB Limited vs. ACIT 343 ITR 0129 (Del), vii. JSRS Udyog Limited & Another vs. ITO 313 ITR 321(Del.) viii. Atma Ram Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT 203 Taxman 0408 (Del). 27. In the end, he supported his contention by decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in NDTV Vs. DCIT dated 3.04.…

The ITO, - 2, Itarsi vs. M/S. Manish Kumar Rakesh Kumar, Hoshagabad

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 128/IND/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Apr 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2005-06

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

…were without jurisdiction as no action under section 147 could be taken beyond the four year period. " Apart from that the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of wel Inter-trade Private Ltd and another versus ITO reported in (2009) 308 ITR 22(Del) was considered by the learned CIT(A) while quashing the proceeding. 9. We have further considered the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court In the case of CIT V/s Kelvinator of India Ltd 2010, 187 taxmann 312(SC) where it was held that reopening of an assessment under section 147 of the Act is not permitted merely on the ground that…

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

…2 (P&H) 74. Babu Lai Jug Raj & Co.. 289 ITR 115 (Raj) 75. Shri Tirath Ram Ahuja (HUF). 306 ITR 173(Del) 76. Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company, 308 ITR 38 (Del) 77. India Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Ltd, 171 Taxman 379 (Del) 78. Wei Intertrade (P) Ltd, 308 ITR 22 (Del) 79. J P Bajpai HUF, 269 ITR 40 document1 80. JSRS Udyog Ltd, 313 ITR 321 (Del) 81. DT&TDS, 232 CTR 260 (Del) 82. Jashan Textile Mills (P) Limited. 284 ITR 542 (Bom) 83. Durga Prashad Goyal. 98 ITD 227 (Asr.) (SB)- 4.8 In view of the Plethora of case laws relied upon by the appellant and the findings of the undersigned that there was no non-d…

Charbuja Marmo (India) Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr.CIT- 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 4749/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

…749/Del./2019 M/s. Charbuja Marmo (India) Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year was invalid.” 20.2. In the case of Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another vs. Income Tax Officer (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del.) (HC), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under : “Conclusion : Assessee having fully and truly disclosed all the material facts necessary for the assessment as required by the A.O, the precondition for invoking the proviso to Section 147 was not satisfied and therefore, A.O. acted wholly without jurisdiction in issuing notice unde…

Punsumi India Ltd, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of assessee for the assessment years

ITA 1204/JPR/2018[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jul 2019AY 1995-96

Bench: The Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Dileep Shivpuri (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (ACIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(2)

…isdiction and liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions:- • Nokia India (P.) Ltd. 251 Taxmann 85 (Delhi) • Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. vs. CIT 308 ITR 38. • Wel Intertrade (P.) Ltd. & Anr. Vs. ITO 308 ITR 22. • Poysha Investments (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO 20 taxmann.com 161. The ld. AR has also submitted that there is no proper approval before issuing the notice U/s 148 of the Act as the approval is only mechanical without full application of mind. Punsumi India Ltd. vs. DCIT 8. On the other hand, ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the authorities below a…

Punsumi India Ltd, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of assessee for the assessment years

ITA 1203/JPR/2018[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jul 2019AY 1994-95

Bench: The Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Dileep Shivpuri (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (ACIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(2)

…isdiction and liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions:- • Nokia India (P.) Ltd. 251 Taxmann 85 (Delhi) • Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. vs. CIT 308 ITR 38. • Wel Intertrade (P.) Ltd. & Anr. Vs. ITO 308 ITR 22. • Poysha Investments (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO 20 taxmann.com 161. The ld. AR has also submitted that there is no proper approval before issuing the notice U/s 148 of the Act as the approval is only mechanical without full application of mind. Punsumi India Ltd. vs. DCIT 8. On the other hand, ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the authorities below a…

Punsumi India Ltd, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of assessee for the assessment years

ITA 1202/JPR/2018[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jul 2019AY 1993-94

Bench: The Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Dileep Shivpuri (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (ACIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(2)

…isdiction and liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions:- • Nokia India (P.) Ltd. 251 Taxmann 85 (Delhi) • Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. vs. CIT 308 ITR 38. • Wel Intertrade (P.) Ltd. & Anr. Vs. ITO 308 ITR 22. • Poysha Investments (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO 20 taxmann.com 161. The ld. AR has also submitted that there is no proper approval before issuing the notice U/s 148 of the Act as the approval is only mechanical without full application of mind. Punsumi India Ltd. vs. DCIT 8. On the other hand, ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the authorities below a…

Pushp Steels & Mining (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(2), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 6094/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR) &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153(1)Section 68

…ull and true disclosure material facts is a precondition which should be satisfied if reopening is after four years of end of the assessment year. It was held by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of WelIntertrade (P) Ltd. &Anr. vs. ITO (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del) that where assessee having fully and truly disclosed all the material facts necessary for the assessment as required by the AO the precondition for invoking the proviso to S. 147 was not satisfied and therefore AO acted wholly without jurisdiction in issuing notice u/s. 148 beyond four years period mentioned in S. 147. The judgment of the…

M/S. Sri Balaji Forgings (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee is allowed

ITA 3216/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Advocates &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…17 Sri Balaji Forgings (P) Ltd., New Delhi. assessment, hence reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year was invalid.” 20.2. In the case of Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another vs. Income Tax Officer (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del.) (HC), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under : “Conclusion : Assessee having fully and truly disclosed all the material facts necessary for the assessment as required by the A.O, the precondition for invoking the proviso to Section 147 was not satisfied and therefore, A.O. acted wholly without jurisdiction in issuing notice under…

Superior Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3301/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, hence reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year was invalid.” 20.2. In the case of Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another vs. Income Tax Officer (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del.) (HC), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under : 51 ITA.Nos.2269, 2857, 2527 & 3301/Del./2017 M/s. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, M/s. SPJ Hotels Private Limited, New Delhi, M/s. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi & M/s. Superior Buildwell Private Limited, Delhi. “Conclusion : Assessee having fully and truly dis…

M/S. Spj Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2857/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, hence reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year was invalid.” 20.2. In the case of Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another vs. Income Tax Officer (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del.) (HC), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under : 51 ITA.Nos.2269, 2857, 2527 & 3301/Del./2017 M/s. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, M/s. SPJ Hotels Private Limited, New Delhi, M/s. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi & M/s. Superior Buildwell Private Limited, Delhi. “Conclusion : Assessee having fully and truly dis…

M/S. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2527/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, hence reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year was invalid.” 20.2. In the case of Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another vs. Income Tax Officer (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del.) (HC), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under : 51 ITA.Nos.2269, 2857, 2527 & 3301/Del./2017 M/s. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, M/s. SPJ Hotels Private Limited, New Delhi, M/s. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi & M/s. Superior Buildwell Private Limited, Delhi. “Conclusion : Assessee having fully and truly dis…

M/S. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2269/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri Prashant Maharishi, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S.Rana, CIT-D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 263

…and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, hence reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year was invalid.” 20.2. In the case of Well Intertrade (P) Ltd., & Another vs. Income Tax Officer (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del.) (HC), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under : 51 ITA.Nos.2269, 2857, 2527 & 3301/Del./2017 M/s. Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, M/s. SPJ Hotels Private Limited, New Delhi, M/s. Shiv Sai Infrastructure (P) Ltd., New Delhi & M/s. Superior Buildwell Private Limited, Delhi. “Conclusion : Assessee having fully and truly dis…

Haryana Distillery Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1452/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09 Haryana Distillery Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 16, Community Centre, Circle-11(1), New Friends Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabch0933K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate Shri Raj Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 4Th December, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-35, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31St March, 2010 Declaring Income At Rs.1,73,82,410/-. The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act Was Completed On 30Th December, 2010 At An Income Of Rs.1,73,93,322/-. Subsequently, The Assessing Officer Reopened The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act By Recording The Following Reasons:-

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 68

…vs. Noble Resources (2011) 202 Taxman 223 (Del); viii) CIT vs. Sil Investments Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 166 (Del); ix) D.T. & T.D.C. Ltd. ACIT (2010) 324 ITR 234 (Del); x) JSRS Udyog Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 313 ITR 321 (Del); xi) Wel Intertrade P. Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del); xii) CIT vs. Indian Farmers Fert. (2008) 171 Taxman 379 (Del); xiii) CIT vs. Foramer France (2003) 264 ITR 566 (SC); xiv) ITO vs. Madnani Engineering Works Ltd. (1979) 118 ITR 1 (SC). 8. So far as the allegation of the Revenue that the assessee has not fully and truly disclosed all material facts necessary for completion of the assessment…

Turner Broadcasting System Asia Pacific, Inc., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 630/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Turner Broadcasting System Asia Vs Dcit, Pacific Inc. Circle 3(1)(2), C/O Pricewaterhosue Coopers (P) Ltd., International Sucheta Bhawan, Gate No.2, Taxation, 1St Floor, 11-A, New Delhi. Vishnu Digamber Marg, New Delhi. (Pan: Aabct6254F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Fca Shri Rishabh Malhotra, Ar Department By: Shri G.K. Dhall, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018

For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.K. Dhall, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 143Section 147Section 148

…to the petitioner does not contain any such allegation. Consequently, one of the conditions precedent for removing the bar against taking action after the said four year period remains unfulfilled. In our recent decision in Wel Intertrade Private Ltd. (2009) 308 ITR 22 (Del.) we had agreed with the view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Duli Chand Singhania (2004) 269 ITR 192 that, in the absence of an allegation in the reasons recorded that the escapement of income had occurred by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for h…

M/S. Dsc Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 146/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri. N. K. Saini & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07 M/S Dsc Ltd., Vs Dcit, Central Circle -15, E-9, 3Rd Floor, Ndse Part-2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan Aaacd0003D ( Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Madhur Aggarwal, Advocate Respondent By: Ms Ashmia Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 31 .10.2018 O R D E R Per Narasimha K. Chary, Jm This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 10Th November 2014 In Appeal No.97/2014-15 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Ii, New Delhi For Asstt. Year 2006-07. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Execution Of Contractual Works Including The Extension Of Widening Of Highways, Construction Of Flyovers, Culverts

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ashmia Neb, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…f) 177 Taxman 300 CIT vs. DCM Ltd. g) 165 Taxman 84 CIT vs. Intercontinental Trading & Investment h) Co. Ltd. 171 Taxman 379 Indian Fertilizer Co-op Ltd. i) j) 303 ITR 155 CIT V Indian Sugar and Gen. Inds Exim Corpn k) 324 ITR 234 DT and TDC Ltd. vs. ACIT 1) 308 ITR 22 Wei Inter-trade Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO m) 308 ITR 38 Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company v. CIT 6 n) 343 ITR 141 Atma Ram Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT o) 215 Taxman 441 Shivalik Bimetal Controls Ltd.vs.ITO p) 354 ITR 24 CIT vs. Suren International Pvt. Ltd. q) [2009] 119 ITD 175 (Del) M.M.T.C. Ltd. vs. DCIT r) [2009] 184 TAXMAN 1 (Del) Jal Hotels C…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7313/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…ilure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment then the proviso to section 147 of the Act are not satisfied. The Hon'ble Delhi High court in the case of Wel Intertrade Pvt. Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer 308 ITR 22 (Del.) held as under:- “Since the notice under section 148 had been issued after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the proviso to section 147 would come into play. A plain reading of the said proviso makes it clear that where the provisions of section 147 are being invoked after the period of four years from t…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7312/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…ilure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment then the proviso to section 147 of the Act are not satisfied. The Hon'ble Delhi High court in the case of Wel Intertrade Pvt. Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer 308 ITR 22 (Del.) held as under:- “Since the notice under section 148 had been issued after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the proviso to section 147 would come into play. A plain reading of the said proviso makes it clear that where the provisions of section 147 are being invoked after the period of four years from t…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7311/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…ilure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment then the proviso to section 147 of the Act are not satisfied. The Hon'ble Delhi High court in the case of Wel Intertrade Pvt. Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer 308 ITR 22 (Del.) held as under:- “Since the notice under section 148 had been issued after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the proviso to section 147 would come into play. A plain reading of the said proviso makes it clear that where the provisions of section 147 are being invoked after the period of four years from t…