ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDUR, JAMSHEDPUR vs. JAI PRAKSH SINGH, JAMSHEDPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the reasons recorded for reopening did not mention any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts. Since the original assessments were under Section 143(3) and reopening was beyond four years, the first proviso to Section 147 applied.
What were the facts?
The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order quashing reassessments for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15. The CIT(A) found no fresh information for reopening. The revenue argued that differences in VAT/Service Tax, PF/ESIC, and Form 26AS warranted reopening.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment beyond four years was valid without recording the assessee's failure to disclose material facts. Whether the reasons recorded for reopening were sufficient to justify the reassessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 36(1)(va),Section 2(24)(x)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
Per Bench Both the appeals filed by the revenue are directed against the separate orders of the ld CIT(A), Patna-3 both dated 28.10.2024 in Appeal No.CIT(A), Patna- 3/10817/2012-13 for the assessment year 2013-14 and in Appeal No.CIT(A), Patna-3/10733/2013-14 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. Shri Sharvan Kumar Jha, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Ashish Kumar Deharia, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue.
It was submitted by ld CIT DR that the ld CIT(A) has quashed the assessment for both the assessment years on the ground that there is no fresh
P a g e 1 | 6
ITA No. 5 & 9 /Ran/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 14-
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 →- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026