How many judgments cite Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO?

46 judgments on BharatTax cite Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO (411 ITR 207), spanning 2019 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(1), Section 143(3), Section 151, Section 133A.

Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO

411 ITR 207High Court2019#2546 most cited

What is Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO authority for?

For reassessment proceedings to be valid, especially after a return is merely processed under Section 143(1), the Assessing Officer must have a genuine "reason to believe" that income escaped assessment, based on correct facts and proper application of mind. If the assessee disputes the facts, the order on objections must address and establish their correctness, and sanction under Section 151 cannot be mechanical.

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

Also referred to as

Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO · reassessment · Section 147 · Section 148 · reason to believe · processing under Section 143(1) · correct facts · application of mind · Section 151 sanction · mechanical approval · order on objections

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 151 Section 133A Section 10(38)Section 131

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assets processing under section 143(1)section 149(1)(c)section 39 sanction under section 151 section 5(2)substantive assessment live link approval under section 151 non application of mind section 148(2)sanctioning authority

Judgments citing Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IN SITU) CIRCLE-I, , LUDHIANA vs. KAPIL THAPAR, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed and Cross

ITA 246/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 153CSection 69A

…regard and reliance has been placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of 'M/s BIC Cello India Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT', reported in 475 ITR 463 (SC) and to other case of Bombay High Court in the case of 'Ankita A. Choksey Vs ITO', reported in 411 ITR 207, besides the cases of Jurisdictional Chandigarh Bench of the ITAT in the case of 'Kissan Fats Limited in ITA No. 407/Chd/2023' and in the case of 'M/s Fortune Metaliks Ltd. Vs DCIT in ITA No.1090/Chd/2019' and also on the latest judgment in the case of 'Taj Land Developers and Promoters Pvt.Ltd. in ITA No. 606/Chd/2024' for Asstt. Year 2011 -12.…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MOHALI PUNJAB vs. TAJ LAND DEVELOPEFRS AND PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED , SECTOR MOHALI PUNJAB

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 606/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

For Appellant: \nShri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nSmt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151

…hed the re-opening of the assessment. He relied\nupon the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case\nof BIC Cello (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT 475 ITR 463, Tata Sons\nLtd. Vs DCIT reported in 137 taxmann.com 414 and Ankita A.\nChoksey Vs ITO reported in 411 ITR 207 (Bombay High Court).\nApart from these judgements, he has relied upon a large\nnumber of other orders of the ITAT which are placed on the\nPaper Book running into 192 pages. Index of the Paper Book\nreads as under :\n\nS.\nNo.\nPARTICULARS\nPAGES\nRE-OPENING PURELY ON THE BASIS OF THE AIR INFORMATION\n1. Copy of order in the case of Gaurav Joshi…

SANTOSH RANI LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SH PARVEEN KALYAN,KURUKSHETRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KARNAL, KARNAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4770/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Santosh Rani Vs Ito, Legal Heir Of Late Shri Parveen Ward-1, Karnal, Kalyan, Krishna Nagar, Gamri, Haryana-132001. Thanesar, Distt.-Kurukshetra, Haryana-136118. Pan-Awhpr4944D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Suresh K.Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19.09.2025 Order

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…tional Pvt Ltd 357 ITR 24 (Del);  Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (1) Ltd (2017) 396 ITR 5 (Del);  CIT vs., Atlas Cycle industries (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P&H);  Siemens Information System Ltd., vs. ACIT 293 ITR 548 (Bom.);  Ankita A. Choksey vs. Income Tax Officer 411 ITR 207 (Bom);  DCIT vs M/s KLA Foods (India) Ltd and others ITA No.2846/Del/2015 dt: 08.04.2019, M/s Superior Technologies P Ltd ITA No.2269/Del/2017. M/s Shiv Sai Infrastructure P Ltd ITA No.2527/Del/2017 and ITO vs Randeep Investment (P) Ltd ITA No.4365 & 4005/Del/2015 dt: 26.03.2019. B. Mechanical Approval The copy of performa for obtaining approval…

QUALITY ENABLED REMOTE SOLUTIONS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-20(3), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4107/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekquality Enabled Remote Solutions (P) Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 20 (3), Ugf – 61A, World Trade Centre, New Delhi. Babur Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan :Aaacq0881A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Krishnan, Advocate Shri Harshit Chauhan, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.07.2025 Date Of Order : 17.09.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-25, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 16.08.2017 For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Order Passed By Id. Cit(A) Is Wrong Both On Facts & In Law.

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…others and has also not dealt with the objections raised by the assessee, has only proceeded to complete the assessment without dealing with the above objections. 8. On the above issue, Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ankita A. Choksey vs. ITO (2019) 411 ITR 207 (Bom.) held as under :- “7 Thus, we are of the view that even in cases where the return of income has been accepted by processing under Section 143(1) of the Act, reopening of an assessment can only be done when the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The mere fact that the return has been…

VINOD KOHLI,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE 35(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 896/DEL/2021[2012 - 2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Ms. Monalisa Maity, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 148(2)Section 292B

…AO prima facie has not done the bare necessary enquiry into the material received before he concluded that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 20. I further find that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ankita A. Choksey vs. ITO [2019] 411 ITR 207 (Bom) has held that 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 and prima facie, establish that the facts stated by it in its reaso…

MALKIAT AGRO INDUSTRIES 01, CANTT ROAD, NABHA 147201, PUNJAB,PUNJAB vs. LOVISH SHELLEY THE DCIT CIRCLE MANDIGOBIND GARH JAO INCOME TAX OFFICER NABHA, PUNJAB

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 485/CHANDI/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri K.K. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 133Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV, VP & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 485/Chd/ 2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Malkiat Agro Industries 01 बनाम The DCIT Cantt Road, Nabha 147201 Circle Mandi Gobindgarh Punjab "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABFM3457E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri K.K. Singla, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum…

SSSP CONSULTANT AND TECHNO SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 719/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JainFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande

Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…ation supplied by the survey officials by examining the record. Hence, the AO could not have entertained the belief that there was escapement of income. In this regard, the Ld.AR placed reliance on the following case law:- a. Ankita A. Choksey vs. ITO, [2019] 411 ITR 207 (Bom); b. Paranjape Schemes (Construction) Limited vs. DCIT, 2024 (3) TMI 736 – Bombay High Court 4.1. The Ld.AR further submitted that the AO has taken the view that the above said loans may be accommodation entries. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee has repaid the loans either in the same year or in the subsequent years. In this regard, th…

SSSP CONSULTANT AND TECHNO SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 717/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JainFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande

Section 133ASection 147Section 148

SONAL SNEHAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1653/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

Section 10(38)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 68

…nction under section 151 of the act and relied on the decision of honourable Delhi High Court in case of the restaurant ACIT tea Ltd versus DCIT (2017) 397 ITR 665 (Delhi) and also of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of punk it jokes versus ITO (2019) 411 ITR 207. vii. The learned assessing officer has not carried out any enquiry before initiating reassessment proceedings. He submits that the reopening has been made on the completely borrowed satisfaction which is not permitted under the law. For this proposition he referred to several judicial precedents. viii. approval granted by the principal Commissio…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. FUTURA TRAVELS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 723/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…peal of the assessee on the legal ground of holding the reassessment assessment proceedings as bad in law. To buttress our finding, we place reliance on the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO (2019) 411 ITR 207 (Bom) which held that condition precedent of reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment on correct facts must be satisfied by the ld. Assessing Officer so as to have jurisdiction to issue reopening notice. In this case, it was held that ld. Assessing Officer has to come to the reasonable belief/conclusion that income c…

A.C.I.T ,WARDHA CIRCLE , WARDHA , WARDHA vs. M/S KAPIL SOLVEX PVT .LTD , YAVATMAL

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

ITA 221/NAG/2017[2009-20010]Status: Trans-OutITAT Pune26 Sept 2024

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…rect. The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal held that the reopening was on the basis of wrong facts and accordingly the same was held to be invalid. 21. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ankita A. Choksey vs ITO & Ors (2019) 411 ITR 207 (Bom), he submitted that in this case the assessee had declared the value of immovable property received on account of dissolution of the company. In the reasons recorded, it was stated that the assessee had received consideration on sale of property. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that the reopening should be based on correct facts and s…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7, DELHI vs. SHREE BALKISHAN AGARWAL GLASS INDUSTRIES LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA - 401 / 2024HC Delhi30 Jul 2024

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…where authorities appear to have concurred with reasons for reopening assessment without applying their mind, reopening of assessment would be invalid. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ankita A. Choksey vs. Income Tax Officer And Others (2019) 411 ITR 207 (Bom) has held that condition precedent for issue of notice for reassessment is that the reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment must be based on correct facts. Notice based on wrong facts is without jurisdiction and has to be quashed. The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. M/s KLA Foods (India) Ltd. and Others…

SRUTHI RIEDL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2, HYDERABAD

ITA 126/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Sruthi Riedl, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Vs. (International [Pan No. Aggpp6953R] Taxation)-2, Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Ar /Revenue By: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit-Dr राजस्‍वजस्‍व द्वारा सुनवाई ई की तारीखीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीखीख/Pronouncement On: 08/11/2023

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2(47)

…of JDA does not result in accrual of income. 9.8. The assessment has to be reopened on correct facts. In the present case reasons recorded contained factual errors. In this context, the appellant relies on the following decisions. 1) Ankita A.choksey Vs ITO - 411 ITR 207 (Born). 2) Sagar enterprises Vs ACIT 257 ITR 335 (Guj). 3) Shodiman Investments (P) Ltd —422 ITR 337(Born). 10.The assessee objected to the reopening of the assessment on 24.11.2021 and 11.02.2022 (Pages 7 to 16 of PB-1). Ld A.O did not pass a speaking order separately disposing of the objections and there by violated the ratio laid down by the a…

RPG NIRMAN P.LTD,MEERUT vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

In the result all the captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3026/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

…rement of the law. The ITAT was, therefore, perfectly justified in confirming the order of the CIT (A) and holding the reopening of the assessment to be bad in law.” 12. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ankita A.Choksey 411 ITR 207. The relevant findings read as under: “On 5th October, 2018, the Petitioner filed its objection to the impugned reopening notice and the reasons in support thereof. In particular, the Petitioner pointed out that the reasons in support of the impugned notice erroneously proceed on the basis that the Petitioner received a consideration of Rs.3.79…

RPG NIRMAN (P) LTD.,MEERUT vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

In the result all the captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3025/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

RPG NIRMAN (P) LTD.,MEERUT vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

In the result all the captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3024/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

RPG NIRMAN (P) LTD.,MEERUT vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

In the result all the captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3023/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

SUSHIL KAANDGUL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-22(3)(6), MUMBAI

ITA 1442/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ashwin Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R

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

…rred in holding the initiation of reassessment proceedings as valid despite the fact that the reasons for reopening were factually incorrect thereby violating the law laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Ankita A. Choksey v. ITO (2019) 411 ITR 207 (Bom.)(HC) which held the reopening of assessment based on incorrect information to be invalid. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in adding Rs. 3,19,500/- to the income of the appellant under section 68 merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures as he has failed to find any fault with the ample doc…

M/S. AJANTA MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 608/KOL/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…eason in which the mistakes were there, the reopening of assessment would be bad in law. In para 13 of the said decision , the Co-ordinate Bench has considered the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Ankita A. Choksey vs. ITO in [2019] 411 ITR 207 (Bom) wherein the Hon’ble Court has held that the reason to believe that income chargeable has escaped assessment must be on correct facts. The relevant parts are reproduced as under: "6. It is a settled position in law that the Assessing Officer acquires jurisdiction to issue a reopening notice only when he has reason to believe that income cha…

M/S. AJANTA MERCHANTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 607/KOL/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Showing 1–20 of 46 · Page 1 of 3