SHRI SANDIP HARKISHAN MARWADI,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RAJKOT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law because the reasons recorded were factually incorrect, vague, and lacked application of mind. The information used for reopening did not directly pertain to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessment was reopened based on information about client code modifications (CCM) used for tax evasion. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions for alleged fictitious losses and unaccounted expenditure related to CCM.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147/148 was valid based on the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.1,673 citing320 ITR 561 · 2010 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull525 citing87 ITR 349 · 1973 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM. & Dr. DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM
Per, Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha:
Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2009-10, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dated 23/03/2023, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act, dated 26/12/2016.
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026