Sharda Kanoria vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Smt. Sharda Kanoria, filed her return of income for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 on 31.10.2009, declaring a total income of ₹ 7,34,606/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, information was later received by the Assessing Officer from the office of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Investigation), Ahmedabad, stating that the assessee had allegedly reduced her taxable income by ₹ 18,22,316/- for the A.Y. 2009-10 by misusing the Client Code Modification (CCM) facility. Based on this information, the Assessing Officer reopened the case under Section 147 of the Act, after recording the reasons and obtaining the necessary approval from the PCIT, Delhi. Notice under Section 148 was issued on 30.03.2016. The assessee filed an appeal before the Learned CIT(A) but the appeal was dismissed and the addition made by the Assessing Officer was sustained. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal challenging the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 and 148 of the Act as well as the addition of ₹ 18,22,316/- as made in the case of the assessee.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Assessing Officer had valid grounds to reopen the assessment under Section 147 of the Act?
• 2. Whether the addition of ₹ 18,22,316/- made by the Assessing Officer was justified?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• M/s Rukhmani Traders vs. Asst. CIT -18(3)

  Mumbai bench

• JAP Overseas Private Limited vs. ITO Ward, 10(2)(1)

  Mumbai 'F' Bench benchAY 2010-11Allowed

• ITA No. 3415/Mum/2025 & CO No. 268/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15)

• Aruna Sangal Vs. Income Tax Officer

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2009-10Allowed

• Jaspal Singh and Sons HUF Vs. ITO, Ward 50(3)

  Delhi ‘C’ Bench benchAY 2009-10Allowed

• Manohar Manak Alloys Private Limited v/s DCIT, Circle 4(2)(2)

  Mumbai bench