JITENDRA ROOPRAJ MEHTA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the AO was not justified in initiating reassessment proceedings as the reason for reopening (bogus purchases) was not the basis for the final addition (URD purchases). The Tribunal relied on the decision in CIT vs. Jet Airways (India) Ltd.
What were the facts?
The assessee's income was reopened based on information from the Sales Tax Department alleging hawala transactions and bogus purchases. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) ultimately treated these as purchases from unregistered dealers (URD) and made additions based on the gross profit.
What were the issues?
Whether reassessment proceedings initiated on one ground can lead to additions on a different ground not forming the basis of the original reason to believe.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(5)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. Bholanath Poly Fab. Pvt. Ltd.712 citing355 ITR 290 · 2013 · HC
- CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.694 citing331 ITR 236 · 2011 · HC
- CIT v. President Industries471 citing258 ITR 654 · 2002 · HC
- CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar212 citing263 ITR 610 · 2003 · HC
- Deepak Dalela v. ITO9 citing50 DTR 502
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. CIT(A)-4, Pune. 4. Pr.CIT-3, Pune. 5 �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक सद�य” / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER
// True Copy // व�र�ठ �नजी स�चव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
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 →- Shivaraj M S vs. The Union Of INDIAKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026