1 Yuvraj v. Union of India Bombay High Court

225 CTR 283High Court2009#6119 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

mere change of opinion change of opinion reason to believe section 142 scrutiny assessment section 148 section 147 section 143 person company section 14 section 143(3)

Judgments citing 1 Yuvraj v. Union of India Bombay High Court

AKSH OPTIFIBRE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, ALWAR

In the result, all the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 170/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Akul Agarwal, C.A. (thr. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 234ASection 250

…en once formed. In the\npresent case, it seen that no opinion has been formed and no discussion has been made of\nthe issue under consideration in the original assessment proceedings. In the case of\nYuvraj v. Union of India, (2009) 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/[2009] 225 CTR 283 (Bombay)\nof the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, it was held that the points not decided while passing\nassessment order under section 143(3) not a case of change of opinion. The relevant\nextract of the order is reproduced as under:\n\"We have perused the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax\nAct, 1961, on January 9, 1998. T…

ITO, WARD-1(1), SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR vs. MS. KSHIRSAGAR FABRICS, SOLAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 97/PUN/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

…evy of tax of Rs.20,45,580. 8 This is brought to the notice of the department for confirmation and necessary action. Sr. Audit Officer/LAP IX” 10. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Yuvraj vs. Union of India reported in 225 CTR 283 (Bom), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that where during original assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Act, issue as to whether gain from sale of right to purchase of a plot was capital gain or casual income was not addressed, reopening of assessment to treat the long term capital gain as casual income cou…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), BHILAI, DURG vs. BHILAI JAYPEE CEMENT LTD., BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 241/RPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No.241/Rpr/2023) (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax 1(1), V Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd, Bhilai, Durg S Bsp Premises, Slag Yard Road (Opp Sector 4 Nmoh), Bhilai Pan: Aadcb1675Q (अपीलाथ" /Applicant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri. R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri. Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 25-10-2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of : 30-10-2023 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

For Appellant: Shri. R.B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)(x)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…is justified in quashing the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s of the Acton the ground that it was a mere change of opinion of the Assessing Officer whereas the case of Yuvraj v/s Union of India of Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide 315 ITR 84 (Bombay) (2009) 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) has held that "points not decided while passing assessment order under section 143(3) is not a case of change of opinion & assessment was reopened validly" and in the case of Chetan Sabharwal v/s ACIT of Hon'ble Delhi High Court (2019) 110 taxman. com 57 (Delhi) has held that where original assessment orders were silent on aspect on whic…

NEEL BUILDERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 18(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6336/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: For RevenueFor Respondent: Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. Dr

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…decisions :- 10 ITA.No.6336/Del./2019 1. Yoqendrakumar Gupta Vs ITO (51 taxmann.com 383) (SC)/r20141 227 Taxman 374 (SC) 2. Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO And Others 236 ITR 3. Yuvrai v. Union of India Bombay High Court r20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/[2009] 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) 4. ACIT Vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd [2007] 161 Taxman 316 (SC)/[2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)/[2007]210 CTR 30 (SC) 5. Devi Electronics Pvt Ltd Vs ITO Bombay High Court 2017-TIQL-92-HC- MUM- IT 6. Acorus Unitech Wireless (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT Delhi High Court [2014] 43 taxmann.com 62 (Delhi)/[2014] 223 Taxman 181 (Delhi)(MAG)/[2014] 36…

GOEL WAX (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-11(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2075/DEL/2018[2008-809]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2020AY 2008-809

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S GOEL WAX (P) LTD., Vs. ITO, WARD 11(4), C/O RAJ KUMAR & ASSOCIATES, NEW DELHI CAs, L-7A, SOUTH EXTENSION, PART-2, NEW DELHI – 49 (PAN: AAACG0121F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Raj Kumar, CA Department by : Sh. Manoj Kumar Chopra, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-35, New Delhi on 01.12.2017 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09 on the following grounds:- 1. That under the facts and c…

JAI PAL,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD 2, PANIPAT

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2750/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-11 JAI PAL, Vs. ITO, WARD-2, H.NO. 2198, E-BLOCK, PANIPAT ANSAL SUSHANT CITY, PANIPAT HARYANA (PAN: ASCPS2095M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, CA Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Karnal on 23.01.2019 in relation to the assessment year 2010-11 on the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the or…

APC AIR SYSTEMS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 4715/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Mrs. Sonia Rani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 APC AIR SYSTEMS P. LTD., Vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), 1/7236, EAST GORAKH PARK, NEW DELHI BEHIND HANUMAN MANDIR, SHAHDARA, NEW DELHI – 110 032 (PAN: AAECA7472P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Mrs. Sonia Rani, CA Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-I, New Delhi on 08.05.2018 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09 on the following grounds:- 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) err…

GIGGLE INFOTECH PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 10(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1284/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Ostwal, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S GIGGLE INFOTECH PVT. Vs. ITO, WARD 10(1), LTD., NEW DELHI C/O D. OSTWAL & ASSOCIATES, 310, COMPETENT HOUSE, F-14, MIDDLE CIRCLE, CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI – 110 001 (PAN: AACCG6898F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Deepak Ostwal, FCA Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR.. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-35, New Delhi on 09.11.2017 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09 on the follo…

TARA ALLOYS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 5407/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Nippun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2007-08 TARA ALLOYS LTD., Vs. ITO, WARD 16(1), 102, HARSHA HOUSE, NEW DELHI KARAMPURA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, NEW DELHI – 110 015 (PAN: AAACT0545N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Nippun Mittal, CA Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-16, New Delhi on 30.05.2018 in relation to the assessment year 2007-08 on the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and circumstances of th…

HEAT FLOWN ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 11(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 3692/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Sh. PranshuFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-11 HEAT FLOWN ELECTRICALS PVT. Vs. ITO, WARD 11(2), LTD., NEW DELHI 207, ALLIED HOUSE, 2, OLD ROHTAK ROAD, INDERLOK, NEW DELHI – 35 (PAN: AABCH0771R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Sh. Pranshu Singhal, CA Department by : Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR. ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi on 29.03.2019 in relation to the assessment year 2010-11 on the following grounds:- 1.…

NEELAM ARORA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-36(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the respective assesses are allowed

ITA 2689/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhui.T.A. No. 2689/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Neelam Arora, Vs. Ito, Ward-36(4), C/O Kapil Goel, Adv. New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi – 85 (Pan: Afkpa9328J) (Assessee) (Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ma facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage. 2.1 Yuvraj v. Union of India Bombay High Court [20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/[2009] 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) Points not decided while passing assessment order under section 143(3) not a case of change of opinion. Assessment reopened validly. 3. Devi Electronics Pvt Ltd Vs ITO Bombay High Court 2017-TIQL-92-HC-MUM- IT The likelihood of a different view when materials exist of forming a reasonable belief of escaped income, will not debar the AO…

BLUE CHIP DEVELOPERS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 5(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1061/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhui.T.A. No. 1061/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Blue Chip Developers (P) Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward-5(1), C/O Raj Kumar & Associates, Cas New Delhi L-7A (Lgf), South Extension, Part-2, New Delhi – 49 (Pan: Aabcb4432B) (Assessee) (Respondent Assessee By : Shri Raj Kumar, Ca & Sh. Sumit Goel, Ca Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CA & Sh. Sumit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 68Section 69

…rima facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage. 2. Yuvraj v. Union of India Bombay High Court [20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/[2009] 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) Points not decided while passing assessment order under section 143(3) not a case of change of opinion. Assessment reopened validly. 3. Devi Electronics Pvt Ltd Vs ITO Bombay High Court 2017-TIQL-92-HC-MUM- IT The likelihood of a different view when materials exist of forming a reasonable belief of escaped income, will not debar the AO…

ANURAG,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1023/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhui.T.A. No. 1023/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Anurag, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), E-26, Shastri Nagar, Ghaziabad Meerut Uttar Padesh Pin: 250002 (Pan: Aawpa7602C) (Assessee) (Respondent Assessee By : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234B

UMESH KUMAR TYAGI,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 2(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2978/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 56

…rima facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage. 2. Yuvraj v. Union of India Bombay High Court [20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/r20091 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) Points not decided while passing assessment order under section 143(3) not a case of change of opinion. Assessment reopened validly. 3. Devi Electronics Pvt Ltd Vs ITO Bombay High Court 2017-TIQL-92-HC-MUM- II The likelihood of a different view when materials exist of forming a reasonable belief of escaped income, will not debar the AO…

DHARMENDER KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 65(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2728/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CA & Sh. Sumit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ekta Vishnoi, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

…prima facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage. 3. Yuvraj v. Union of India Bombay High Court [20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/r20091 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) Points not decided while passing assessment order under section 143(3) not a case of change of opinion. Assessment reopened validly. 4. ACIT Vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd (2007) 161 Taxman 316 (SC)/r20071 291 ITR 500 (SC)/[2007] 210 CTR 30 (SC) So long as the conditions of section 147 are fulfilled, the Assessing Officer is fr…

ARIES AGRO LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 557/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.557,558 & 559/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year :2008-09,2009-10 & 2010-11) Aries Agro Ltd Vs. Dcit-14(1)(1) Plot No. 24, Aries House 460, Aaykar Bhawan Deonar, Govandi M.K.Road Mumbai-400 043 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aaaca5035G Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35D

…relevant is there is a some tangible material, which suggest escapement of income within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T.Act, 1961. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Yuvraj vs Union of India ( 2009) 225 CTR 283 (Bom) and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Wollen Mills vs ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC). 11. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. The assesee has challenged reopening of assessment on two grounds. The first objection taken by the assessee for reop…

NEELKANTH PLYWOOD PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 18(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6702/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Neelkanth Plywood Pvt. Income Tax Officer Ltd. C/O Anil Jain Dd & Co. Vs Ward – 18 (1) Chartered Accountants, 611, New Delhi Surya Kiran Building, 19 K. G. Marg, New Delhi-110001 Pan No.Aaacn0805B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 68

…DR relied on the following decisions :- 1. Yoqendrakumar Gupta Vs ITO (51 taxmann.com 383) (SC)/r20141 227 Taxman 374 (SC) 2. Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO And Others 236 ITR 3. Yuvrai v. Union of India Bombay High Court r20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/[2009] 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) 4. ACIT Vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd [2007] 161 Taxman 316 (SC)/[2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC)/[2007]210 CTR 30 (SC) 5. Devi Electronics Pvt Ltd Vs ITO Bombay High Court 2017-TIQL-92-HC-MUM- IT 6. Acorus Unitech Wireless (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT Delhi High Court [2014] 43 taxmann.com 62 (Delhi)/[2014] 223 Taxman 181 (Delhi)(MAG)/[2014] 3…

SANJAY KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 63(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 825/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 153A

DILWARA LEASING & INVESTMENT LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-7(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee

ITA 3927/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…ma facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage. 3. Yuvraj v. Union of India Bombay High Court [20091 315 ITR 84 (Bombay)/r20091 225 CTR 283 (Bombay) Points not decided while passing assessment order under section 143(3) not a case of change of opinion. Assessment reopened validly. 4. (2007) 161 Taxman 316 (SC)/r20071 291 ITR 500 (SC)/[2007] 210 CTR 30 (SC) So long as the conditions of section 147 are fulfilled, the Assessing Officer is free to initiate proceedings under section…