Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali v. ITO

68 SOT 197Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2015#3394 most cited

What is Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali v. ITO authority for?

Mere cash deposits in a bank account, without further tangible material, are not sufficient on their own to invoke reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. There must be tangible material and application of mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali · ITO · 68 SOT 197 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment proceedings · cash deposits · tangible material · reason to believe · escapement of income

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

tangible materialsection 254(1)income escaping assessmentagricultural incomereason to believeescapement of incomeconcealment of incomesection 234aincome-tax officerreopening of assessmentsection 254section 56

Judgments citing Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali v. ITO

Shri Ravindrasinh N.Gohil, Bhavnagar vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1(1), Bhavnagar

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3343/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Rastogi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…e, thus, relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of Mariyam Ismail Rajwani in ITA No.676/Ahd/2016 wherein on the basis of the ratio laid down by the division bench in the case of Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali-vs-ITO reported in [(2015) 68 SOT 197 URO (Del) the Learned Tribunal quashed such reassessment proceeding and the reassessment order thereof. On the other hand, the Learned Departmental Representative relied upon the order passed by authorities below whereby and whereunder the reopening u/s 147 of the Act has been confirmed. 4. Heard the respective parties perused the relevant materi…

Ashok Kumar Singh Bhadauria, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-32(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 6036/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2010-11 Ashok Kumar Singh Income Tax Officer Bahadauria, X-26, Hauz Vs Ward – 32 (5), New Delhi Khas, New Delhi -1100017 Pan No.Aahpb3067B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 147

…eposits in the bank account. Relying on the following decisions he submitted that the reopening is bad in law and should be quashed. 1. Munni Devi Vs. ITO Rewari, ITA No.3534/Del/2014 2. Harmeet Singh Vs. ITO, Delhi ITA No.1939/Del/2016 3. Bir Bahadur Singh, 68 SOT 197 4. Praveen Kumar Jain Vs. ITO, ITA No.1331/Del/2015 5. Sh. Mahavir Prasad Vs. ITO Rewari, ITA No.924/Del/2015 8. So far as the merit of the case is concerned he submitted that the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings as well as appeals proceedings had furnished the date wise details of cash withdrawn and cash deposit. However, it…

Premwati Suman, Agra vs. ITO-1(3), Agra

In the result both appeals are allowed

ITA 393/AGR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Premwati Suman, Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(3), 1/1, Hig Flats, Sanjay Place, Agra. Agra. Pan: Bnvps9819N (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri. Ranjeet Suman, Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(3), 1/1, Hig Flats, Sanjay Place, Agra. Agra. Pan: Bnlps9622P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151

…e under section 148 of the Act. The distinction noted by the learned CIT (A) is unconvincing and without any basis merely to circumvent and overcome the binding force of the referred decisions. ITAT, Delhi in the case of BirBahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO(2015) 68 SOT 197 (Delhi –Trib) wherein it was held that: “8.Let us, in the light of this legal position, revert to the facts of the case before us. All that the reasons recorded for reopening indicate is that cash deposits aggregating to Rs 10,24,100 have been made in the bank account of the assessee, but the mere fact that these deposits have been made in a bank…

Pushpa, Mathura vs. ITO-1(2)(3), Mathura

In the result,both appeals are allowed

ITA 332/AGR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenashri. Pushpendra Singh. Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(2)(3), M-22, Phase-I, Mahavidhya Colony. Agra. Mathura. Pan: Dldps6755P (Appellant) (Respondent) Smt. Pushpa Vs.. Income Tax Officer- 1(2)(3), M-22, Phase-I, Mahavidhya Colony. Agra. Mathura. Pan: Bcopd0484L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148

…scaped assessment was the information regarding the cash deposits. Now, whether this information can be said to constitute material which could lead to such a belief? ; In BirBahadur Singh Sijwali v. ITO [2015] 53 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) taxmann.com 366/68 SOT 197 (URO) (Delhi - Trib.), it has been held that where the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 on the ground that there was an escapement of income and the belief regarding such escapement of income was formed on the fallacious assumption of the Assessing Officer that bank deposits constituted undisclosed income, overlooking the fac…

Sapna Chauhan, Etawah vs. ITO, Etawah

In the result,both the appeals in ITA No

ITA 137/AGR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 234B

…tion 69 of the Act, and such fact alone cannot be a reason for ‘escapement of income’ and to clothe the learned Assessing officer with jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148 of the Act. ITAT, Delhi in the case of BirBahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO(2015) 68 SOT 197 (Delhi –Trib.) wherein it was held that (page 2 – 6):- “8. Let us, in the light of this legal position, revert to the facts of the case before us. All that the reasons recorded for reopening indicate is that cash deposits aggregating to Rs 10,24,100 have been made in the bank account of the assessee, but the mere fact that these deposits have bee…

Tristar Securities Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 976/AHD/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jan 2019AY 2006-07
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ITA No. 976/Ahd/2015 Tristar Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2006-07 Page 1 of 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar, VP and Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM] Assessment Year: 2006-07 Tristar Securities Pvt. Ltd. ............…………......Appellant C-102, Samastha Appt., Opp. ATIRA, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad - 380015 [PAN : AAACT 5664 L] Vs. Income Tax Officer ...........................Respondent Ward-8(1), Ahmedabad Appearances by: SN Divatia, for the Appellant GC Daxini, for the Respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 31.12.2018 Date of pronouncing the ord…

Satyadev Singh, Mathura vs. ITO 3(4), Mathura

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 243/AGR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenashri Satyadev Singh, Village Vs..Ito,3,(4), Jaiswa, Post Bakla, Mathura. Mathura. Panno.Ahbps7182D (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…he so called ‘Reasons’ do not show any application of mind on the part of the ‘AO’ to show that any income liable to Tax has escaped Assessment warranting recourse to Notice u/s 148 of the IT Act’. The assessee relied on: ‘Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO’, 68 SOT 197 Delhi and (i) ‘Saraf Gramodyog Sansthan vs. ITO’, 108 ITD 115 (Agra). (ii) Though the assessee’s reliance on these decisions has been taken note of at 5. page 4 of the impugned order, they have not been dealt with by the ld. CIT(A). The issue raised by the assessee has, thus, not been decided. 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended t…

Sanjeev Jain, Haridwar vs. ITO, Roorkee

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed on ground No

ITA 3812/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishisanjeev Jain, Vs. Ito, M/S. Arihant Ayurvedic Centre, Ward-2, Town Mangalpur, Tehsil Roorkee, Roorkee, Haridwar Pan:Arepj2566R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 50CSection 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sanjeev Jain, Vs. ITO, M/s. Arihant Ayurvedic Centre, Ward-2, Town Mangalpur, Tehsil Roorkee, Roorkee, Haridwar PAN:AREPJ2566R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA Revenue by: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21/09/2017 Date of pronouncement 16/10/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against order of the ld CIT(A)-I, Dehradun dated 04.03.2013 for the Assessment Year 2007-08 raisi…

Shri Sunil Kumar Saraswat, Mathura vs. ITO 1(3)(4), Mathura

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 109/AGR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 131(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…e of notice u/s 148 is considered necessary, after having approval from Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range-3 Mathura.” 3. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee relied on the following case laws: “a) Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO reported as (2015) 68 SOT 197 (Delhi -Trib) (APB, 16 to 20). b) Amrik Singh vs. ITO reported as (2016) 159 ITD 329 (Amritsar -Trib) (APB, 21 to 34). c) Praveen Kumar Jain vs. ITO Order dated 17.12.2015 in ITA no.1331/Del/2015 (ITAT, Delhi) (APB 35 to 44).” 4. The ld. CIT(A), however, has held as under: I.T.A No. 109/Agra/2017 5 “I find that the appellant had not filed a…

Namrata Dilip Mukkawar, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3641/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2006-07 Ms. Namrata Dilip Mukkawar, Income Tax Officer 17(3)(3), Flat B/5/6/, 1St Floor, Piramal Chambers, Suleman Manzil, Vs. Lalbaug, Dadar-East, Mumbai - 400012 Mumbai-400 014 Pan: Aefpm-5400-B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle Hariya, A.R. Revenue By : Shri M.C. Omialingshen, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 20.04.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.07.2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omialingshen, D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

…it would be void and inoperative. Ld. A.R. also submitted that it is non application of mind by the AO and simply reopened the assessment order. The Ld. A.R. also relied upon the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO 68 SOT 197 (Delhi) wherein it was held that merely if the deposit found in the savings bank account does not indicate that these deposits constitute an income which has escaped assessment. The reasons recorded for reopening the assessment do not make out a case that the assessee was engaged in some business and the income from such a business has not been re…

Harmeet Singh, Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal stands allowed

ITA 1939/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2008-09 Harmeet Singh Vs. Ito, Ward-36(1), C/O Kapil Goel, Adv. New Delhi F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi – 110 085 (Pan: Bhrpa6630P) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…sessee, I am of the considered view that the reopening in the case of the assessee for the asstt. Year in dispute is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. My view is supported by the following judgments/decisions:- A. Bir Bahadur Singh Sijawali reported in 68 SOT 197 (Del) wh3rien it has been held as under:- "Section 68, read with sections 147 and 148, of the lncome-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits (Bank deposit) - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessee deposited certain sum in his saving bank account but no return of income was filed by him - Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 on ground that there…

Sh. Pritam Kumar Sharma, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 6748/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., Sh. AshishFor Respondent: Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…o the AO and addition made on this account is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence, the same needs to be deleted. My aforesaid view is fully supported by the following decisions :- 7 “ITAT Delhi in the case of Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITA [2015] 68 SOT 197 (Delhi - Trib.) All that the reasons recorded for reopening indicate is that cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 10,24,100 have been made in the bank account of the assessee, but the mere fact that these deposits have been made in a bank account does not indicate that these deposits constitute an income which has escaped assessment. The reasons r…

Shri Zahid Hassan, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Muzaffarnagar

In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3873/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench ‘Smc-3’, New Delhi Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddya.Y 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. B. Ramanjaneyulu, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 69

…ssessee, I am of the considered view that the reopening in the case of the assessee for the asstt. Year in dispute is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. My view is supported by the following judgments/decisions:- A. Bir Bahadur Singh Sijawali reported in 68 SOT 197 (Del) wh3rien it has been held as under:- "Section 68, read with sections 147 and 148, of the lncome-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits (Bank deposit) - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessee deposited certain sum in his saving bank account but no return of income was filed by him - Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 on ground that there was…

Munni Devi, Rewari vs. ITO, Rewari

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal stands allowed

ITA 3534/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2007-08 Munni Devi Vs. Ito, Ward-2 W/O Sh. Mohar Singh, Rewari Vill. & Po Asia-Ki-Gorawas, Rewari (Pan: Bivpd3594G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. & Sh. Piyush Kr. Kamal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…sessee, I am of the considered view that the reopening in the case of the assessee for the asstt. Year in dispute is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. My view is supported by the following judgments/decisions:- A. Bir Bahadur Singh Sijawali reported in 68 SOT 197 (Del) wh3rien it has been held as under:- "Section 68, read with sections 147 and 148, of the lncome-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits (Bank deposit) - Assessment year 2008- 09 - Assessee deposited certain sum in his saving bank account but no return of income was filed by him - Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 on ground that ther…

Vinod Maheshwari, Modinagar vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1498/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…duced subsequent to the reopening will not rescue an inherently defective reopening order from invalidity .” 4. The ld. counsel for the assessee also relied on the order of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali vs. ITO (2015) 68 SOT 197 URO (Del) to the proposition that mere deposit in bank cannot lead to the conclusion, or even inference, that income has escaped assessment. 5. Respectfully following the judgements of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court and the decision of the Tribunal in the cases cited above as the assessment is bad in law, I quash the same. 5 6. In the…