Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.29 seconds)The Income Tax Act, 1961
Commnr. Of Income Tax, Delhi vs M/S. Kelvinator Of India Ltd on 18 January, 2010
In the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator India Ltd. (2010) 187 Taxman 312
(SC), it has been held that even after 01.04.1999, concept of 'change of
opinion' cannot be removed. It has been held therein:
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Gujarat vs Bhanji Lavji, Porbandar on 21 January, 1971
M/s National Aviation Co. Ltd. 5
ITA No. 2185/Mum/2012
Mere change of opinion cannot form the basis - When the primary
facts necessary for assessment are fully and truly disclosed, the ITO will
not be entitled on change of opinion to commence proceedings for
reassessment. Similarly, if he has raised a wrong legal inference from
the facts disclosed, he will not, on that account, be competent to
commence reassessment proceedings as held in CIT vs. Bhanji Lavji
[1971] 79 ITR 582 (SC).
Asian Paints Ltd, Mumbai vs Dcit Ltu, Mumbai on 11 January, 2017
5. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee submits that the AO has
made the reassessment on the basis of a mere change of opinion and
therefore, the reassessment is not valid. Reliance is placed by him on the
decision in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. vs. DCIT (2009) 308 ITR 195
(Bom), Asteroids Trading and Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2009) 308
ITR 190 (Bom), Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society vs. CIT (1979) 119
ITR 996 (SC).
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 154 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Income Tax Officer, Income ... vs Nawab Mir Barkat Ali Khan Bahadur on 16 October, 1974
Having second thoughts on the same material, and omission to
draw the correct legal presumption during original assessment do not
warrant the initiation of a processing under section 147 as held in ITO
vs. Nawab Mir Barkat Ali Khan Bahadur [1974] 97 ITR 239 (SC).
Indian And Eastern Newspaper Society ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, New Delhi on 31 August, 1979
5. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee submits that the AO has
made the reassessment on the basis of a mere change of opinion and
therefore, the reassessment is not valid. Reliance is placed by him on the
decision in the case of Asian Paints Ltd. vs. DCIT (2009) 308 ITR 195
(Bom), Asteroids Trading and Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2009) 308
ITR 190 (Bom), Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society vs. CIT (1979) 119
ITR 996 (SC).
1