← All Phrases

“regular assessment”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(40) / Section 143(3) / Section 1442,899 judgments

The decision most relied on for regular assessment is CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (374 ITR 645), cited in 1,823 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on regular assessment

CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.
374 ITR 645 · 2015 · High Court
1,823
citing judgments

In Section 153A proceedings, the scope of assessment extends to abated proceedings, enabling an assessee to raise fresh legal claims that could have been made in regular assessment proceedings.

Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT
37 ITR 288 · 1959 · Supreme Court
570
citing judgments

Where an assessee maintains regular books of account, and these books are not rejected or found defective by the Assessing Officer, any cash deposits or available cash shown in the cash book, if sufficient to cover the transaction, cannot be treated as unexplained income or an addition under sections 68 or 69A.

Canara Housing Development Co. v. DCIT
49 Taxmann.com 98 · 2014 · High Court
283
citing judgments

Proceedings under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act are not confined solely to incriminating material found during a search, and the Assessing Officer can assess total income for the relevant years.

DCIT v. Sunil Kumar Sharma
159 Taxmann.com 179 · 2024 · High Court
269
citing judgments

Loose sheets of paper containing jottings, not shown to be part of regularly maintained books of accounts, do not constitute incriminating material for initiating assessment under section 153C. The satisfaction note required for 153C proceedings must specify the assessment year to which the alleged incriminating material belongs.

CIT v. British Paints India Ltd.
188 ITR 44 · 1991 · Supreme Court
204
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer has a duty to examine whether an assessee's books of account truly disclose the correct income and is not bound to accept the accounting system regularly employed by the assessee or methods followed in earlier years. Each assessment year is a distinct and self-contained unit for tax purposes.

CIT v. Lavanya Land (P) Ltd.
83 Taxmann.com 161 · 2017 · High Court
172
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A or 153C, additions cannot be sustained if the material or transactions relied upon do not relate or pertain to the assessee. Regular books of accounts not unearthed during search do not constitute incriminating material to justify additions.

All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
23 Taxmann.com 103 · 2012 · High Court
162
citing judgments

Additions cannot be made under Section 153A for assessment years where original assessments have become final, unless incriminating material relevant to those years is unearthed during the search operation under Section 132.

CIT v. Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja
302 ITR 63 · 2008 · High Court
147
citing judgments

When unaccounted receipts or suppressed sales are detected and books of account are rejected under Section 145(3), additions to income must be restricted to the profit element embedded in such transactions, not the entire transaction value. This profit element is to be estimated by considering the assessee's regular profit ratio as per books of account.

Judgments citing regular assessment

DCIT, Circle - 10(1), New Delhi vs. Interglobe Aviation Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5035/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Circle 10 (1), Vs. M/S. Interglobe Aviation Limited, New Delhi. Upper Ground Floor, Gate No.2, Western Wing, Thapar House, Janpath, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aabci2726B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nagesh Behl, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2025 Date Of Order : 09.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Addl./Jcit (Appeals)-5, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Jcit (A)] Dated 30.08.2024 For Assessment Year 2019-20 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On The Facts & In Law, The Ld. Addl./Jcit (A) Is Correct In Holding That The Contention Of The Assesses Is Factual & Evident From Record W.R.T. The Disallowance U/S 37 Of The Act Amounting To Rs.11,05,60,134/- (Rs.38,48,85,884/- - Rs.27,43,25,750)

For Appellant: Shri Nagesh Behl, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 37

observe that Revenue has one more opportunity to verify various records submitted by the assessee at the time of regular assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act and AO found it to be in order. Therefore, grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed

Tremendous Mining and Minerals Pvt Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 157/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2012-13 Tremendous Mining & Vs Dcit, Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3, Cabin No.-1, 1205, New Delhi. 89-Hemkunth Chamber, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aacct8840N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashwini Kumar, Ca & Shri Ankur Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.01.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’, For Short) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Delhi-23/10303/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 24.12.2019 Passed U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Dcit, Central Circle- 3, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Ashwini Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

processed u/s 143(1) of the Act at the returned income and, subsequently, the case was selected under scrutiny through CASS and the regular assessment was completed on 23.03.2015 u/s 143(3) of the Act at the returned income. A search and seizure operation ... evident from the above discussion that in this case, the issues under consideration were never examined by the A.O. during the course of regular assessment. This fact is corroborated from the contents of notices 9 issued by the AO u/s 143(2)/142(1) and other sheet entries as mentioned

Mukul Malhotra, Ludhiana vs. Pr.CIT--1, Ludhiana

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 105/CHANDI/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 105/Chandi/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessmentyear: 2011-12) Shri Mukul Malhotra Pr. Cit-1 (Prop. M/S Shree Pitambra Alloys) Ludhiana. बनाम/ Vs. 108-C Miller Ganj Ludhiana-141003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ayspm-3774-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ludhiana-1 (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Vide Impugned Order Dated 29-03-2021 Proposing Revision Of Assessment As Framed By Ld. Ao U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 10-12-2018. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. The Perusal Of Order Sheet Entries Would Reveal That None Is Appearing For Assessee Since Past

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Rajat Kumar Kureel (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

assessee has failed to make the required submissions in set aside proceedings. 3. Upon perusal of impugned order of Ld. Pr. CIT and regular assessment order dated 10-12-2018, it could be seen that Ld. AO has failed to make requisite enquiries on issues which have been flagged ... failed to verify. There is nothing on record to suggest that any such verification was made by Ld. AO during the course of regular assessment proceedings. This being so, we uphold the revision of the order. 4. The appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced on 08-07-2025. (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ

Rama Rani, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 933/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 933/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ms. Rama Rani Dcit बनाम/ Vs. H. No 1058, Popular Enclave Circle 1(1), Sector 48-B, Chandigarh Chandigarh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aerpr-2072-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Ravinder Krishan (Advocate)– Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30-06-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Assails Invocation Of Revisionary Jurisdiction U/S 263 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chandigarh-1 (Pr.Cit) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16 Vide Impugned Order Dated 14-03-2024 Proposing Revision Of Assessment As Framed By Ld. Ao U/S.147 Of The Act On 29-03-2022. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 98 Days In The Appeal, The Condonation Of Which Has Been Sought By Ld. Ar On The Strength Of Condonation Petition Which Is Accompanied By An Affidavit Of The Assessee. It Has Been Stated That The Assessee Was Not In India When

For Appellant: Sh. Ravinder Krishan (Advocate)– Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Rajat Kumar Kureel (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 54F

quite clear that the issue of computation of capital gains was duly been enquired into by Ld. AO not only at the time of regular assessment proceedings but also at the time of reassessment proceedings. The case of the assessee was reopened specifically to examine the claim of capital gains