Bharatkumar Nihalchand Shah v. ACIT

434 ITR 621High Court2021#24988 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 132Section 132(1)(c)Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

tangible materialescapement of incomereason to believereopening of assessmentprevious yearsection 148section 147section 250companysection 14indianfac

Judgments citing Bharatkumar Nihalchand Shah v. ACIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Meerut, Meerut (U.P.) vs. Nita Rastogi, Meerut (U.P.)

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3382/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Acit Vs Nita Rastogi Circle-1(1)(1) 32-C, Janta Nagar, Garh Road, Meerut-250001. Meerut-250002. Pan-Aanpr7715E Appellant Respondent Revenue By Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr.Dr Assessee By Dr. Kapil Goel, Adv. Date Of Hearing 23.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26.11.2025

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 690

…angible material and the formation of the reason to believe that income had escaped assessment." [Para 36] Bharat kumar Nihalchand Shah vs. Assistant Commissioner of Tax Circle - 1(2) [2021] 128 taxmann.com 228 (Gujarat)/[2021] 281 Taxman 521 (Gujarat)/[2021] 434 ITR 621 (Gujarat) [19-03-2021], it was held that "... There was no basis or material placed on record by department to prima facie show that profit was earned by assessee with regard to transactions and there was no live link between information received and reasons recorded so as to enable Assessing Officer to form a reason to believe that income had es…

Nasa Agro Industries Private Limited, Fazilka vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-II, Bathinda

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 236/ASR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Y. K. Sud & Sh. P. K. Anand, CAs
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153cSection 250

…ASSESSEE HAD TRADED IN SHARES WITH BENEFICIARY OF SEARCHED BOGUS COMPANY- ASSESSEE DISCLOSED FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ASSESSMENT- REASONS CANNOT BE SUPPLEMENTED BY AFFIDAVIT-NOTICE UNSUSTAINABLE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, 55. 147, 148. 12. 434 ITR 621 (Guj) Bharatkumar Nihalchand Shah vs ACIT REASSESSMENT -NOTICE-VALIDITY-CONDITION, PRECEDENT FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE-REASON TO BELIEVE INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT-INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING-ASSESSING OFFICER NOT APPLYING HIS 12 I.T.A. No. 236/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 MIND TO INFORMATION-SANCTION NOT OBTAINED FOR NOTIC…

Mani D Seervai, Mumbai vs. ITO 34(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 232/MUM/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Golvala & Ms. Aruna Aiyar, A/RsFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 69

…d. Counsel for assessee also referred to the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Deepak Wadhwa vs. ACIT reported in 435 ITR 699 (Delhi)(HC) and that of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bharatkumar Nihalchand Shah vs. ACIT reported in 434 ITR 621 (Guj)(HC) and further that of the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Jaipur in the case of Satish Kumar Khandelwal vs. ITO [2021] 127 taxamann.com 683, to submit that where very reason for reopening assessment that assessee had not filed return of income was incorrect and Assessing Officer had reopened assessment without ascertaining whether assessee had…

Bharatkumar Nihalchand Shah v. ACIT (434 ITR 621) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax