HARSHIT TRADERS,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(1) SURAT, SURAT

ITA 1344/SRT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 August 2026AY 2012-138 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were vitiated due to the failure to appreciate that the bank account was disclosed in the original assessment and that the initial assessment was under Section 143(3), not 143(1). The Tribunal found the reassessment to be based on erroneous assumptions.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a diamond commission agent, was reassessed under Section 147 after an initial assessment under Section 143(3). The reassessment was based on the premise that a bank account with ING Vysya Bank (later merged with Kotak Mahindra Bank) was not disclosed, despite the assessee claiming it was disclosed during the original assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are valid when based on the erroneous assumption that a bank account was not disclosed, especially when it was allegedly disclosed in a prior Section 143(3) assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 194H

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

For Appellant: Shri Kishore Gheewala, CA
For Respondent: Shri J.K. Chandnani, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 06.07.2026Pronounced: 05.08.2026

PER : SUCHITRA KAMBLE, J M:

The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short “CIT(A)”] dated 14.11.2025 for the Assessment Year (in short “AY”) 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. The learned CIT(A) has miserably failed to understand & appreciate that the Reasons recorded stating that the appellant is not assessed by scrutiny assessment & the ROI has been processed u/s 143(1) only, ignoring altogether earlier assessment Dt.17-02-2015 u/s 143(3) by the predecessor ITO, are erroneous vitiating the r

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →