CHHABI LATA SAHU,ROURKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, ROURKELA

ITA 626/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 March 2026AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reopening was based on a change of opinion and reappraisal of existing evidence, not on any new material. Since the original assessment was completed under Section 143(3) and the reopening was initiated beyond four years, it was impermissible. The Tribunal relied on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in Rama Devi Sabat vs. DCIT.

What were the facts?

The assessee's original assessment for AY 2009-10 was completed under Section 143(3). Later, the Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147, alleging that income had escaped assessment due to failure to disclose material facts. The AO's reasons for reopening were based on a review of the purchase reconciliation statement and interest on security deposits, which were already available in the records.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment beyond four years, based on a change of opinion and reappraisal of existing material, is valid when the original assessment was completed under Section 143(3).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Sarangi & Bishwa Jyoti Pattnaik, ARs
For Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. DR
Hearing: 16.03.2026Pronounced: 16.03.2026

PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(Appeal) ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Visakhapatnam [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.CIT(A), Sambalpur/10013/2015-16 dated 19.09.2025 for the assessment year 2009-10. 2. Shri S. K. Sarangi & Bishwa Jyoti Pattnaik, ARs, represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by the ld. AR placed before us the copy of the reasons recorded and the same reads as under: 2

4.

It was the submission that the original assessment in the case of the assessee was completed on 01.09.2011. The impugned assessment year is 2

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 →