Satidham Syntex Limited vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle 5(3)(1)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee company, engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of cotton grey fabric, filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 27.09.2009, declaring total income at Rs.2,22,79,852/-. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and an assessment order u/s. 143(3) dated 29.12.2011 was passed, assessing the total income at Rs.6,05,66,170/-. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessee’s case vide notice u/s. 148 dated 28.11.2013 for the reason that the assessee has made investment of Rs.5 crores in M/s. Jagat Publication Ltd. towards share application money and was allotted shares during FY 2009-10. The assessee’s contention that the source of the said investment was out of refund of share application money received from M/s. Rama Qualitex Ltd. was not accepted by the Assessing Officer who then passed the assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 31.03.2015, determining the total income at Rs.11,05,66,170/- after making an addition u/s. 69 of the Act as ‘unexplained investment’. The assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority, challenging the impugned assessment order. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee on technical ground without getting into the merits of the case.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not considering the submission filed by the appellant against the order dated 31.03.2015 passed u/s. 147 of the Act and on the contrary gave a decision for order passed u/s. 143(3) which was not pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
• 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not adjudicating the ground of appeal taken by the appellant for re-opening the case u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
• 3. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not adjudicating the ground of appeal taken by the appellant for addition of Rs.5,00,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as alleged unexplained investment, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Similar Judgements

• Balasaheb Pundlikrao Ghormode v/s Income Tax Officer

  Nagpur bench

• Income Tax Officer Ward-25(2), New Delhi. Vs. M/s Telplay Packaging Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Dismissed

• ITA No.8487/Del/2025

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Dismissed

• ITO, Ward 2(1), New Delhi Vs Ms Anglian Infrastructure Development Private Ltd.

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Dismissed

• ITA no. 2464/Del/2019

  Delhi bench

• PERIYA AGOUNDER RAMASAMY v. ITO Ward-1(6), SALEM