SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment was bad in law as it was based on suspicion and surmise without positive material to prove the assessee's ownership or beneficial interest in the bank account. Consequently, the reassessments were quashed.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened assessments for AYs 2002-03 and 2003-04 based on information about an HSBC Bank, Geneva account allegedly maintained by the assessee and his ex-wife. The assessee denied ownership or operation of any such account.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was validly initiated and whether the addition made under Section 69 was justified based on the evidence presented.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(27)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.
- ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.1,030 citing291 ITR 500 · 2007 · SC · Read judgment
- ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das721 citing103 ITR 437 · 1976 · SC · Read judgment
- Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar695 citing268 ITR 332 · 2004 · HC
- CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull525 citing87 ITR 349 · 1973 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd.366 citing29 Taxmann.com 392 · 2013 · HC
- Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO234 citing130 ITR 1 · 1981 · SC
- Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT205 citing119 ITR 996 · 1979 · SC
- Narayanappa v. CIT187 citing63 ITR 219 · 1967 · SC · Read judgment
- Prashant S. Joshi v. ITO179 citing324 ITR 154 · 2010 · HC
- Asstt. CIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.167 citing161 Taxmann 316 · 2007 · SC
- CIT v. SPL’s Siddhartha Ltd.164 citing345 ITR 223 · 2012 · HC · Read judgment
- 1. S. S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co.158 citing53 ITR 231 · 1964 · SC
- K.M. Sharma v. ITO136 citing254 ITR 772 · 2002 · SC · Read judgment
- Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC129 citing82 ITR 147 · 1971 · SC
- ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co.116 citing328 ITR 515 · 2010 · SC
- Anirudhsinhji Karansinhji Jadeja v. State of Gujarat103 citing5 SCC 302 · 1995 · SC
- CIT v. Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd.55 citing313 ITR 231 · 2009 · HC · Read judgment
- CIT v. K. Chinnathamban52 citing162 Taxmann 459 · 2007 · SC · Read judgment
- S.C. Prashar v. Vasantsen Dwarkadas Hungerfor Investment Trust Ltd.48 citing49 ITR 1 · 1963 · SC
- Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer38 citing176 ITR 352 · 1989 · HC
- CIT v. T. R. Rajakumari15 citing96 ITR 78 · 1973 · HC
- DCIT v. Bullion Investments & Financial Services (P) Ltd.11 citing123 ITD 568 · 2010 · ITAT
- Assam Co. Ltd. v. Union Of India10 citing150 Taxmann 571 · 2006 · HC
- Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Vapi Circle v. Resham Petrotech Ltd.10 citing136 ITD 185 · 2012 · ITAT
- Indivest Pte. Ltd., Singapore v. Additional Director of Income6 citing206 Taxmann 351 · 2012 · HC
- VXL India Ltd. v. Asst. CIT6 citing215 ITR 295 · 1995 · HC
- Vishal Swamp Agrawilla v. ITO5 citing349 ITR 380 · 1983 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SMT. BEENA PILLAI
Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member These two appeals by the assessee are directed against different orders of CIT(Appeals) for AYs 2002-03 & 2003-04. The grounds are common in both the appeals and only change in figures, which read as follows:-
AY 2002-03 “1. The CIT(A) erred both in Law and on the Facts of the case in upholding the re-opening of the assessment u/s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) made on 24.03.2014. ITA Nos. 46 & 47/Bang/2021 2. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of income of Rs. 731845- u/s 69 of the Act and in levying an i
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 →- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026