Forum
Read and express views
× Latest Case Laws on Income Tax by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals in India

These are the latest case laws decided by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) of India on Income Tax which have been published recently. The case laws are open for discussion and we invite expert comments from our members on its applicability and effect on relevant issues.

10-06-2019, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Section 147, 151(1), 148, Tribunal Delhi

  • amit
  • amit's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Administrator
More
6 days 21 hours ago #9715 by amit
Section - 147, 151(1), 148, 40(a)(ia)
Order Date - 10-06-2019
Favouring - Assessee
Court - Tribunal Delhi
Appellant - DCIT
Respondent - Oriental Bank of Commerce
Justice - R.K. PANDA AM & KULDIP SINGH JM
Citation - 619Taxpundit131
Appeal No. - ITA No.4334/Del./2016
Asstt. Year - 2006-07

Order

PER : KULDIP SINGH

Appellant, DCIT, Circle 19 (1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Revenue’) by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 02.05.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-7, New Delhi qua the assessment year 2006-07 on the grounds inter alia that :-

“"On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in quashing the reassessment order passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer without appreciating the facts that the assessee company has not truly and fully disclosed all the facts before the Assessing Officer and it did not produced any material facts on record before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment proceedings as well as reassessment proceedings.”

2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : Initially, assessment of the assessee was completed under section 143 (3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) vide order dated 27.11.2007 at an income of Rs.714,07,00,170/-. Thereafter, AO, after recording the reasons for reopening, issued a notice u/s 148 of the Act to which assessee filed objections which have been disposed off.

3. AO after declining the contentions raised by the assessee that“assumption of jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings u/s 147/143 (3) in view of proviso to section 147, put in specific restriction on the AO to reopen the case in which assessment has been completed u/s 143 (3) of the Act when the assessee has fully and truly disclosed all material facts necessary for assessment”, AO proceeded to make addition of Rs.14,04,00,000/- debited in P&L account as provision on account of staff welfare fund.

4. Assessee carried the matter by way of an appeal before the ld. CIT (A) who has deleted the addition after allowing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved, the Revenue has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal.

5. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case.

6. Undisputedly, reopening u/s 147 of the Act has been made by AO beyond a period of four years after framing assessment u/s 143 (3) of the Act. It is also not in dispute that all the items as to provisions of Rs.14,04,00,000/- on account of staff welfare and provision of Rs.2,83,51,006/- on account of expenses are items of the balance sheet.

7. Challenging the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT (A), ld. DR for the Revenue contended inter alia that it is not a case of change of opinion; that the AO was having prima facie material on the basis of which reopening has been made and relied upon the assessment order. Ld. DR also relied upon the decisions rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as Hon’ble High Court cited as R.K. Malhotra, ITO vs. Kasturbhai Lalbhai 109 ITR 537 (SC), Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO 236 ITR 34, CIT vs. P.V.S. Beedies Ltd. 237 ITR 13 (SC), Yuvraj vs. UOI 315 ITR 84 (SC), Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. DCIT 340 ITR 64 (SC), Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. vs. DCIT 340 ITR 53 (Delhi), New Delhi Television Ltd. vs. DCIT (2017) 84 taxmann.com 136 (Delhi), Sun Direct TV Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (2018) 98 taxmann.com 201 (Madras), A Sridevi vs. ITO 2018-TIOL-2246- HC-MAD-IT, South Asia FM Ltd. vs. ACIT (2018) 98 taxmann.com 200 (Madras), Pranawa Leafin (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2013) 33 taxmann.com 454 (Bombay), CIT vs. Kiranbhai Jamnadas Sheth (HUF) (2013) 39 taxmann.com 116 & Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. 346 ITR 228 (Guj.).

8. However, on the other hand, to repel the arguments addressed by the ld. DR for the Revenue, ld. AR for the assessee contended inter alia that when the assessee has fully and truly disclosed all the material particulars necessary for assessment, reopening s not permissible; that the reasons recorded do not justify reopening u/s 147/148 in case of completed assessment u/s 143(3) as no tangible material has come to the light for initiating reassessment proceedings and relied upon the decisions cited as Allied Strips Ltd. vs. ACIT 384 ITR 424 (Delhi), Donaldson India Filters Systems Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT 371 ITR 87 (Delhi), Lalit Bagai vs. DCIT (2014) 91 CCH 7 (Del.)(HC), CIT vs. Valvoline Cummins Ltd. (2014) 90 CCH 0233 (Del.)(HC), Global Signal

Click to view and download Full Free Judgement of DCIT vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce

Unable to display Google Map.




Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.129 seconds

If You Appreciate What We Do Here On TaxPundit, You Should Consider:

We are thankful for your never ending support.

Latest Analysis - High Courts

BEST CYBERCITY (INDIA) PVT. LTD. vs ITO

BEST CYBERCITY (INDIA) PVT. LTD. vs ITO

BEST CYBERCITY (INDIA) PVT. LTD. vs ITO Read More
PUNEET SHARMA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS

PUNEET SHARMA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS

PUNEET SHARMA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS Read More
CIT vs HONDA CARS INDIA LTD.

CIT vs HONDA CARS INDIA LTD.

CIT vs HONDA CARS INDIA LTD. Read More
PCIT vs. ROYAL AND SUN ALLIANCES IT SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

PCIT vs. ROYAL AND SUN ALLIANCES IT SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

PCIT vs. ROYAL AND SUN ALLIANCES IT SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36

Forum Features

Latest Case Laws
Latest Case Laws are instantly updated in the Forum into their respective section
Latest from CBDT
Latest Circulars, Notifications, Orders etc. from CBDT is updated in the Forum
Ask Experts
You can ask questions to the community
Support
Support queries are either replied via mail or in the Forum so that others can be benefited
Press Releases
Latest Press Notes and Press Releases are updated in the Forum
Connect with Members
You can connect with our community members by replying to their queries

Recommended Articles

 

SITE INFORMATION

All content herein is the copyright of Taxpundit. No images, text, or any other content may be, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of Taxpundit.

All Rights Reserved. All Content Copyright.

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest developments and special offers!

Company Master Data Since 1900. More than 1.75 Million Records. Register/Login to get FREE access. Read more
Toggle Bar