COLEN CHEMICAL PVT. LTD.,JAMSHEDPUR V. ITO, WARD 1(1), JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

ITA 165/RAN/2025

AI Insights

Colen Chemical Pvt. Ltd. filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which were dated 31.03.2025 for the assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. The original assessments for these years were completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act on 29.01.2016 and 29.12.2016, respectively. Notices under section 148 for reopening the assessments were issued on 28.03.2018 and 24.06.2019, respectively, both beyond the four-year period from the end of the relevant assessment years. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in CEAT Ltd., found that the conditions for reopening the assessments beyond four years were not met, as there was no evidence of suppression or failure to disclose material facts by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 826145 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CEAT Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, P.L.Goenka HUF vs. Income Tax Officer
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM CHANDRA MARNDI
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNIL SURANA
• Keywords: Difference of opinion; Change of opinion; Borrowed satisfaction
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, र ाँची न्य यपीठ, र ाँची IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.165 & 167/RAN/2025 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2014-2015) Colen Chemical Pvt. Ltd, 1st Floor, Room No.9, Tiwary Bechar Complex, Main Rd. Bistupur, Jamshedpur-831001 Vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Jamshedpur स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : AABCC 3978 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sunil Surana, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Ram Chandra Marndi, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 07/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, both dated 31.03.2025 for the assessment year 2013-2014. 2. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that for the assessment year 2013- 2014 the original assessment came to be completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 29/01/2016 and for the assessment year 2014-2015 the original assessment came to be completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 29.12.2016. Notice u/s.148 of the Act for A.Y.2013-2014 came to be issued on 28.03.2018 and for A.Y.2014-2015 the notice was issued on 24.06.2019. The Ld. AR drew our attention to reason recorded to reopening for the assessment year 2013-2014 at pages 47 to 51 of the paper book which reads as follows:- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 2 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 3 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 4 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 5 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 6 3. The Ld. AR drew our attention to reason recorded to reopening for the assessment year 2014-2015 at pages 5 to 9 of the paper book which reads as follows:- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 7 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 8 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 9 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 10 4. It was submission that as the reopening has been done beyond the period of 4 years and the assessment has also been original completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. The provision to section 147 of the Act requires that there should be failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts required for assessment. It was the submission that in the reason recorded there is the no whisper that there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose to truly and fully all material required for Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 11 assessment. It was submission that in view of the decision of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CEAT Ltd., reported in (2022) 449 ITR 171(SC) the reopening is liable to be quashed as also the consequential assessment order. 5. In reply, the Ld.CIT DR assisting the Ld.Sr.DR submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brockers Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 14 SCC 208 and the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of P.L.Goenka HUF, passed in ITAT/241/2024 IA No:GA/2/2024, dated 06.05.2025. It was submission that even if the reason recorded are borrowed satisfaction, still it should be held that the reason are valid. It was the submission that the reopening of the assessment is liable to be upheld. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal reasons recorded clearly shows that the reasons do not specify much less even whisper that there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts require for the assessment. In the present case, it is admitted fact that the scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3) for the assessment year 2013-2014 came to be completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 29/01/2016 and for the assessment year 2014-2015 the assessment completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 29.12.2016. Notice u/s.148 of the Act for A.Y.2013- 2014 came to be issued on 28.03.2018 and for A.Y.2014-2015 the notice was issued on 24.06.2019, which in both the cases, issued after 4 years from the end relevant assessment year. Thus, the provision to section 147 of the Act requires that there should be a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts required for the assessment. The Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 12 question of borrowed satisfaction or change of opinion is not the issue before the Bench. A perusal of the reasons recorded clearly shows that there is no recording of the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts required for the assessment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CEAT. Ltd reported in 449 ITR 171 in para 2 has held as follows:- 2. It is not in dispute that the assessment was sought to be reopened beyond four years. Therefore, all the conditions under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for reopening the assessment beyond four years are required to be satisfied. Having gone through the reasons recorded for re- opening, we are of the opinion that the conditions precedent for reopening of the assessment beyond four years are not satisfied. The reassessment was on change of opinion. There are no allegations of suppression of material fact. Under the circumstances, no error has been committed by the High Court in setting aside the reopening notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the High Court. The special leave petition stands dismissed. 7. In these circumstances, respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CEAT Ltd., referred to supra, the reasons recorded in both the appeals of the assessee are found to be unsubstantial and consequently the same stands quashed. As the reopening has been quashed, the consequential assessment for both the years under consideration also stands quashed. 8. In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 07/01/2026. Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) लेख सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्य नयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER र ाँची Ranchi; दिनांक Dated 07/01/2026 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.165&167/Ran/25 13 आदेश की प्रनिललपप अग्रेपर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेश िुस र/ BY ORDER, (Senior Private Secretary) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, र ाँची / ITAT, Ranchi 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- . 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकि आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. निभागीय प्रनतनिनर्, आयकि अपीलीय अनर्किण, र ाँची / DR, ITAT, Ranchi 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "