ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.

291 ITR 500Supreme Court of India2007#41 most cited

What is ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

1,030

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,296 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. · Rajesh Jhaveri · 291 ITR 500 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reason to believe · income escaping assessment · prima facie material · tangible material · validity of reopening · initiation of reassessment · sufficiency of material

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 143(1)Section 142(1)Section 68Section 133ASection 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 147(a)fresh tangible materiallive linkmaterial facts necessary for assessmentmere change of opinionkelvinatortangible materialchange of opinionreason to believeescapement of incomeborrowed satisfactionincome escaping assessment

Judgments citing ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.

Mr. Sanjiv Narayan, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5546/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)(iii)Section 2(24)(iv)Section 234B

…re must be some basis for forming such a belief. From the order of the A.O. it is clear that the AO had a belief and there was material on record to support the belief. Reference is also made to the case of ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) which states if the Assessing Officer for whatever reason has reason to believe that income has escaped asstt he has jurisdiction to reopen the asstt. In the case of Bawa Abhai Singh v. Dy. CIT 253 ITR 83 the portion relevant to the issue is reproduced below:- 12 ITAs No.5512, 5513, 5546 & 5574/DEL/2011 “Section 147 with effect from 1-4-19…

Mr. Ranjeet Singh, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5513/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)(iii)Section 2(24)(iv)Section 234B

…re must be some basis for forming such a belief. From the order of the A.O. it is clear that the AO had a belief and there was material on record to support the belief. Reference is also made to the case of ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) which states if the Assessing Officer for whatever reason has reason to believe that income has escaped asstt he has jurisdiction to reopen the asstt. In the case of Bawa Abhai Singh v. Dy. CIT 253 ITR 83 the portion relevant to the issue is reproduced below:- 12 ITAs No.5512, 5513, 5546 & 5574/DEL/2011 “Section 147 with effect from 1-4-19…

Mr. J.S. Gujral, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5512/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 17(2)(iii)Section 2(24)(iv)Section 234B

…re must be some basis for forming such a belief. From the order of the A.O. it is clear that the AO had a belief and there was material on record to support the belief. Reference is also made to the case of ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) which states if the Assessing Officer for whatever reason has reason to believe that income has escaped asstt he has jurisdiction to reopen the asstt. In the case of Bawa Abhai Singh v. Dy. CIT 253 ITR 83 the portion relevant to the issue is reproduced below:- 12 ITAs No.5512, 5513, 5546 & 5574/DEL/2011 “Section 147 with effect from 1-4-19…

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

…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] 362 ITR 417 (Delhi) 7. Pranawa Leafin (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT Bombay High court [2013] 33 taxmann.com 454 (Bomba…

Khetan Twist Net P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3031/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Smt. Arati Vissanji, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…0,000/- in M/s Javda India Impex Ltd.” is a minor error in view of the fact that the original return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT v. Rajesh 6 Khetan Twist Net Pvt. Ltd. Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) analyzed the distinction between the acceptance of a return u/s 143(1) and an assessment which is framed u/s 143(3) of the Act. In the former case, the AO would have much wider latitude to reopen the assessment. Intimation u/s 143(1) is not an assessment. Further in Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held…

The Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S Amco Batteries Ltd

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal

ITA/572/2013HC Karnataka18 Nov 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 260Section 260A

…and the matter be remitted to tribunal for adjudication on merits. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on a decision of the Supreme Court in 'ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. RAJESH JHAVERI STOCK BROKERS (P) LTD.', 291 ITR 500 (SC). 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that an agreement has to be a contract in order to attract the applicability of Section 2(45) of the Act. While inviting the attention to clauses 3.1, 3.2 as well as other clauses of the agreement, it is contended that there is no delivery of possession under Section…

Ganapati Developers, Howrah vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-47, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Smt. Madhumita Roy)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 250Section 68

…on precedent is applicable whether the return of income was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act by intimation or assessed by scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. [See Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd., (SC) 291 ITR 500 and PCIT v/s. M/s. Shodimen Investments (Bombay) 2018 (93) Taxman.Com 153]. Further, the reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment must be on correct facts. If the facts, as recorded in the reasons are not correct and the assessee points out the same in its objections, then the order on objection must deal with it an…

Seawood Hospitality & Realty Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (CC) 3 (4), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed on the legal aspect of quashing of reopening of assessment

ITA 92/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Justice P P Bhatt & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Seawoods Hospitality & Vs. Dcit(Cc)-3(4), Mumbai Realty Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 3(4) Room No.1915, 19Th Floor B/306-309, Business Dynasty Park Air India Building Jb Nagar, Opp. Sangam Cinema, Nariman Point Andheri (E) Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 059 Pan/Gir No.Aamcs1472M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & M/S. Sukaniya Properties Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit (Cc)-3(4), B/306-309, Business Dynasty Mumbai Park, J B Nagar, Opp. Sangam Central Circle-3(4) Room No.1915, 19Th Floor Cinema, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059 Air India Building Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 Pan/Gir No. Aadcs9585J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Seawood Hospitaly & Realty P. Ltd. & M/S. Sukaniya Properties P. Ltd.

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)Section 68

…viding reasons recorded for reopening the assessment to the assessee. b. Raymond Wollen Mills Ltd., case reported in 236 ITR 34 (SC) on the aspect of sufficiency of reasons while reopening the assessment. c. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., reported in 291 ITR 500 (SC) on the aspect of sufficiency of reasons while reopening the assessment. d. Decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., vs. ACIT reported in 302 ITR 275 wherein it was held that information from Enforcement Directorate showing inflation of purchases could be a good ground for issuing notice u/s.148 o…

Ins Finance & Investment P Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 12(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 9266/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, Sr.D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(1)Section 68

…ourt in the case Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34(SC) which acts as a guiding principle for adjudging the validity of reopening u/s 147 of the Act and been reiterated by Apex Court in the case of ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd. 291 ITR 500 (SC). I.T.A. No.9266 /DEL/2019 26 13. We have to see, whether there was 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. On these facts we are unable to strike down the reopening of the case. At this stage, it is re…

Sanjeev Malhotra, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

ITA 6723/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Justice P. P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Though Video Conferencing) Through Video Conferencing Shri Sanjeev Malhotra Dcit, Vs. 10/81, Punjabi Bag West Circle-24(2), New Delhi- 110026 New Delhi Pan Aagpm3216Q

For Appellant: Shri Ajay WadhwaFor Respondent: Shri H K Chaudhary
Section 147Section 148Section 68

…f this he submitted that addition is incorrectly made in the hands of the assessee. 18. With respect to the reopening of the assessment the bench raised a very with respect to the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in case of Rajesh Jhaveri stockbrokers 291 ITR 500 (SC), the learned authorised representative submitted that though there is no assessment made in the case of the assessee u/s 143 (3) of the act, even in case of non-assessment or even in case of assessment u/s 143 (1) of the act there cannot be a reassessment if there are no reason to believe by the assessing officer. It was stated that when the…

DDIT, Noida vs. M/S. Pt L.P. Display Indonesia, Indonesia

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1888/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…nd objections were filed against the initiation of re-assessment proceedings. The same were disposed off by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 19.11.2012. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., 291 ITR 500 (SC) and other decisions, the Assessing Officer observed that at the time of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Assessing Officer is not required to establish that there is escapement of income; mere bonafide reasons to believe that there is escapement of income is sufficient for issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The objection of the as…

DDIT, Noida vs. M/S. Pt L.P. Display Indonesia, Indonesia

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1887/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…nd objections were filed against the initiation of re-assessment proceedings. The same were disposed off by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 19.11.2012. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., 291 ITR 500 (SC) and other decisions, the Assessing Officer observed that at the time of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Assessing Officer is not required to establish that there is escapement of income; mere bonafide reasons to believe that there is escapement of income is sufficient for issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The objection of the as…

M/S. Pt. Lp Display Indonesia, New Delhi vs. DDIT, Noida

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1847/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…nd objections were filed against the initiation of re-assessment proceedings. The same were disposed off by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 19.11.2012. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., 291 ITR 500 (SC) and other decisions, the Assessing Officer observed that at the time of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Assessing Officer is not required to establish that there is escapement of income; mere bonafide reasons to believe that there is escapement of income is sufficient for issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The objection of the as…

M/S. Pt. Lp Display Indonesia, New Delhi vs. DDIT, Noida

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1846/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…nd objections were filed against the initiation of re-assessment proceedings. The same were disposed off by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 19.11.2012. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., 291 ITR 500 (SC) and other decisions, the Assessing Officer observed that at the time of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Assessing Officer is not required to establish that there is escapement of income; mere bonafide reasons to believe that there is escapement of income is sufficient for issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The objection of the as…

M/S. Pt. Lp Display Indonesia, New Delhi vs. DDIT, Noida

In the result, appeals of the assessee of PT

ITA 1845/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing] आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1845 To 1847/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 To 2006-07 वष" Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan-Aaccl2631H Vs The Ddit [International Transaction] …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Sector-24, Noida. आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1887 & 1888/Del/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2004-05 & 2005-06 वष" The Ddit [International Transaction] Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, ..........अपीलाथ"/Appellant Plot No.A-2D, Sector-24, Noida. Vs Pt.Lp Display Indonesia, C/O-Pds Legal, Advocates & Solicitors, Office No.-7, 1St Floor, Atmaram Mansion Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. …………. ""यथ" / Respondent Pan-Aaccl2631H आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.1885 & 1886/Del/2014 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years 2005-06 & 2006-07 वष"

Section 133ASection 147

…nd objections were filed against the initiation of re-assessment proceedings. The same were disposed off by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 19.11.2012. Relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., 291 ITR 500 (SC) and other decisions, the Assessing Officer observed that at the time of issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Assessing Officer is not required to establish that there is escapement of income; mere bonafide reasons to believe that there is escapement of income is sufficient for issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The objection of the as…

Namita Malla Sarkar, Agartala vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Udaipur, Agartala

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati09 Oct 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.426/Gau/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Jayanta Mridha, JCIT, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…sessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Therefore, 5 Namita Malla Sarkar Assessment Year:2016-17 ldDR relied on the judgment of the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd 291 ITR 500 (SC), to support the action of the Assessing Officer to issue notice under section 148 of the Act before expiry of time limit to issue notice under section 143(2) of the Act. The above cited judgment by ld DR in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri in (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) is reproduced below for ready reference : “17. The scope and effect of section 147…

Shree Praksh Singh, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Digboi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati09 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.14/Gau/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri S. P. Bhati, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Amitava Sen, JCIT, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(1)

…eps under section 143(3) will not render the Assessing Officer powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Therefore,ld DR relied on the judgment of the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd 291 ITR 500 (SC), to support the action of the Assessing Officer to issue notice under section 148 of the Act before expiry of time limit to issue notice under section 143(2) of the Act. The above cited judgment by ld DR in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri in (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) is reproduced below for ready reference : “17. The scope and effect of section 147…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -22(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Sanjay Sunil Bajaj, Mumbai

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

ITA 2381/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. V. Vinod Kumar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 194CSection 40

…he Ld. CIT(A) erred in not deciding the appeal on merits with regard to the issue of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act ignoring the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500, wherein it was held that at the initiation stage, what is required is 'reason to believe’ but not the established fact of escapement of income. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year (AY) 2008-09 on 26.09.2008 declaring total income of Rs.67,83,235/-. The assessment was…

Shri Nitin Sharma, Jabalpur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -2, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 25/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Arora

Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)Section 153CSection 153C(1)Section 153DSection 263Section 7(1)

…scope of the limited scrutiny regime, i.e., in terms of the jurisdictional notice u/s. 143(2). Nothing else is in fact relevant. The same in fact represents trite law, for which we may, inter alia, refer to CIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. [2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC), holding that only one condition is to be satisfied to validate a notice u/s. 148(1), i.e., of there being a reason to believe an escapement of income from assessment. The question is not if an assessment u/s. 153A (1) r/w. section 153C could be, even assuming so, being itself a very precarious and tenuous issue, made, but validity of the as…

Stratagem Portfolio (P) Ltd, Rohtak vs. DCIT Circle- 24(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7878/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 151

…material. The existence of tangible and relevant material is a precondition for assuming jurisdiction, as has been held in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) and ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. reported in 291 ITR 500 (SC). Hence, in this case the proceedings have been initiated on the basis of no material much less any tangible and, relevant material and as such reasons record do not constitute valid reason to believe for initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. It is a case of reason to suspect' and not „reason to believe.” 6.2 I further note that the act…