← 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

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited, Secunderabad

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 552/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.552/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Ascend Telecom Income Tax, Central Circle Infrastructure (P) Ltd 3(2), Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.539/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ascend Telecom Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Infrastructure (P) Ltd Income Tax, Central Secunderabad Circle 3(2), Hyderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.R. Vasudevan राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 05/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Are Cross Appeals Filed By Both The Assessee As Well As The Revenue For The A.Y 2010-11 Against The Common Order Dated 31/07/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A) 11 Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Shri K.R. VasudevanFor Respondent: : Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

during the course of search proceedings. d) The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that it is settled position of law that the regular assessment proceedings which are already completed for the year could be interfered under section 153A only on the basis of any incriminating material unearthed during

Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 539/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.552/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Ascend Telecom Income Tax, Central Circle Infrastructure (P) Ltd 3(2), Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.539/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ascend Telecom Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Infrastructure (P) Ltd Income Tax, Central Secunderabad Circle 3(2), Hyderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.R. Vasudevan राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 05/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Are Cross Appeals Filed By Both The Assessee As Well As The Revenue For The A.Y 2010-11 Against The Common Order Dated 31/07/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A) 11 Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Shri K.R. VasudevanFor Respondent: : Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

during the course of search proceedings. d) The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that it is settled position of law that the regular assessment proceedings which are already completed for the year could be interfered under section 153A only on the basis of any incriminating material unearthed during

Paharpur Cooling Towers Limited., Kolkata vs. ACIT, CC-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 408/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.408/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd………...........………………....Appellant 8/1/B, Diamond Harbour Road, Kolkata – 700027. [Pan: Aabcp8017C] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata.…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Nitesh Agarwal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sailen Samaddar, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 06, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 04, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.02.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 20, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By Two Days. A Separate Application For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed. Considering The Shortness Of Delay, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned.

Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 250

amount of refund is less than ten per cent of the tax as determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on regular assessment;” 6.1 Now, the issue raised before us is that what would be the amount of tax determined ... regular assessment. The plea of the ld. AR is that the ‘tax determined’ would be the amount arrived at after giving MAT credit of the earlier year. However, the plea of the revenue is that the tax determined will be the amount of tax determined as per the provisions

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)

referred to in the reasons recorded as they are only pointing to Financial Statement filed and which were looked into and reviewed in the Regular Assessment proceedings earlier. The Full bench order of the Hon'ble ITAT, New Delhi, reported in 348 ITR 485 in the case ... university Campus at Padur and these were applied in the succeeding AY 2010-11. d) This was looked into during the course of the Regular Assessment proceedings by the then Ld. AO and after consideration of the Form No.10 along with Copy of the resolution and facts relating to utilization

Sarangabani Kirubakaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle-1(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 1234/CHNY/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1233/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1234/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Sarangabani Kirubakaran Dcit बनाम/ 17/6, First Pillayar Koil Street, Circle-1(2) Vs. Ekkatuthangal, Chennai-600 032. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bumpk-0892-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2009- 10 & 2011-12 Arises Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, [Cit(A)] Dated 13-09-2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By The Ld. Ao U/S.153C R.W.S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act. During Hearing, Ld. Ar Raised A Pertinent Additional Ground Of Appeal To Submit That Considering The Date Of Satisfaction Note, These Assessments Are Liable To Be Quashed Being Barred By Limitation. Reliance Has Been Placed On The Decision Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Jasjit Singh (155 Taxmann.Com 155). The Copy Of The Same Has Been Placed On Record. The Additional Ground Of Appeal Read As Under: -

For Appellant: Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. Sr.DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

assessment in search cases undertaken in terms of the provisions placed in Chapter XIVB was ordained to be undertaken simultaneously and parallelly to a regular assessment. Contrary to the scheme underlying Chapter XIVB, sections 153A, 153B and 153C contemplate a merger of regular assessments with those that may be triggered ... equal significance is the introduction of the concept of abatement of all pending assessments as a consequence of which curtains come down on regular assessments. B. Both sections 153A and 153C embody non-obstante clauses and are in express terms ordained to override sections

Sarangabani Kribakaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle1(2), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed accordingly

ITA 1233/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1233/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2.आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1234/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Sarangabani Kirubakaran Dcit बनाम/ 17/6, First Pillayar Koil Street, Circle-1(2) Vs. Ekkatuthangal, Chennai-600 032. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bumpk-0892-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2009- 10 & 2011-12 Arises Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, [Cit(A)] Dated 13-09-2023 In The Matter Of Separate Assessments Framed By The Ld. Ao U/S.153C R.W.S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act. During Hearing, Ld. Ar Raised A Pertinent Additional Ground Of Appeal To Submit That Considering The Date Of Satisfaction Note, These Assessments Are Liable To Be Quashed Being Barred By Limitation. Reliance Has Been Placed On The Decision Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Cit Vs. Jasjit Singh (155 Taxmann.Com 155). The Copy Of The Same Has Been Placed On Record. The Additional Ground Of Appeal Read As Under: -

For Appellant: Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. Sr.DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

assessment in search cases undertaken in terms of the provisions placed in Chapter XIVB was ordained to be undertaken simultaneously and parallelly to a regular assessment. Contrary to the scheme underlying Chapter XIVB, sections 153A, 153B and 153C contemplate a merger of regular assessments with those that may be triggered ... equal significance is the introduction of the concept of abatement of all pending assessments as a consequence of which curtains come down on regular assessments. B. Both sections 153A and 153C embody non-obstante clauses and are in express terms ordained to override sections

Sudarshan Bhagwandas Naval, Jalgaon vs. PCIT (Central Circle 1 Nagpur), Nagpur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 600/PUN/2024[AY 2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.600/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Sudarshan Bhagwandas Vs. Pcit (Central), Nagpur. Naval, Naval Multispecialty Hospital, Near Bhaskar Market, Jilla Peth, M.J. College Road, Jalgaon- 425001. Pan : Aafpn7830C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Abhishek K. Choksy & Shri Ankit Davda Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2024 आदेश / Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19 Arises Against The Pcit (Central), Nagpur’S Order Dated 01.02.2024 Passed In Case No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-24/1060387551(1) Involving Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Heard Both The Parties At Length. Case File Perused.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek K. Choksy &For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 263(1)

rejected as the learned PCIT’s revision directions have duly discussed all the relevant facts before reaching to an independent conclusion that the foregoing regular assessment was an erroneous one causing prejudicial to interest of the Revenue. Rejected accordingly. 8. Learned counsel raises the assessee’s third substantive argument that