Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2010 (7) TMI 368 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Court upholds legality of reopening assessments under Section 147 of Income-tax Act based on new Supreme Court decision. The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the validity of notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment years 2005-06 and ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Court upholds legality of reopening assessments under Section 147 of Income-tax Act based on new Supreme Court decision.

                          The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the validity of notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. It held that the reopening of assessments based on a subsequent Supreme Court decision was legal. The court ruled that the decision in Liberty India v. CIT, which disallowed deductions on duty drawback under Section 80-IB, constituted valid material for reopening the assessment. The petitioner's arguments based on prior judicial decisions were distinguished, and the court concluded that the reopening was justified under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Validity of notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
                          2. Reopening of assessment based on subsequent Supreme Court decision.
                          3. Applicability of Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
                          4. Relevance of prior judicial decisions and their applicability.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Validity of Notices under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
                          The petitioner challenged the notices issued under Section 148 for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The notices were issued within four years from the expiry of the relevant assessment years. The petitioner argued that the reopening of the assessment was based on a subsequent Supreme Court decision, which does not constitute valid material for reopening.

                          2. Reopening of Assessment Based on Subsequent Supreme Court Decision:
                          The petitioner contended that the decision of the Supreme Court in Liberty India v. CIT, which held that "duty drawback" is not eligible for deduction under Section 80-IB, does not constitute material for reopening the assessment. The petitioner relied on prior decisions, including CIT v. India Gelatine and Chemicals Ltd., which allowed such deductions. The petitioner argued that reopening based on a subsequent decision is equivalent to a review, which is not permitted under Section 147.

                          3. Applicability of Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961:
                          The court examined Section 147, which allows the Assessing Officer to reassess income if there is reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. The court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd., which emphasized that reopening should be based on "tangible material" and not mere change of opinion. The court held that a subsequent Supreme Court decision constitutes material to form a belief of escaped assessment.

                          4. Relevance of Prior Judicial Decisions and Their Applicability:
                          The petitioner cited several decisions to support their argument, including:
                          - Geo Miller and Co. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT, which dealt with rectification under Section 154 and not reopening under Section 147.
                          - CIT v. Ramachandra Hatcheries, where reopening was not allowed based on a subsequent Supreme Court decision when the issue was already settled by the appellate authority.
                          - State of West Bengal v. Kamal Sengupta, which related to review under Order 47, rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code and not reopening under Section 147.
                          - CIT v. Rao Thakur Narayan Singh, where reassessment was invalid as the issue was already decided by the Tribunal.
                          - Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. v. ITO, which related to rectification of mistakes and not reopening.

                          The court distinguished these cases, stating that Section 147 pertains to reopening and reassessment, not review. The court held that the decision in Liberty India v. CIT applies retrospectively and constitutes valid material for reopening the assessment.

                          Conclusion:
                          The court dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 read with Section 147 for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 was legal and in accordance with the law. The subsequent Supreme Court decision in Liberty India v. CIT constituted valid material for reopening the assessment, and the petitioner was not entitled to the deduction on the duty drawback amount under Section 80-IB.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found