citedby: 108657189

1 - 2 of 2 (1.25 seconds)

In the above factual matrix, we findthat in the present case, the re-assessment notice u/s 148 is soley based on the audit objection which as per the decision of Carlton Overseas Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax officer (supra) and Torrent Power S.E.C. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (supra) above, does not constitute objective material. It is therefore held that initiating reassessment proceedings on the basis of audit objection with no new tangible material, is not permissible in law.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

3. It is urged that the Revenue is doing no more than re-visiting the merits of the original scrutiny assessment which it was especially barred from conducting afresh. Learned counsel relied upon the previous Division Bench's judgment in Carlton Overseas Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax officer & Ors., (2009) 318 ITR 295 and Torrent Power S.E.C. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (2017) 392 ITR 330 (Guj), to contend that the rulings in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Kelvinator of India Ltd., 320 ITR 561 authorises review of the completed scrutiny only and only if tangible material is made available to the revenue.

Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Search Results Page