Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha

79 ITR 603Supreme Court of India1971#205 most cited

What is Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha authority for?

A valid reassessment under Section 147 requires concrete 'reasons to believe' that income has escaped assessment, not mere suspicion or a desire to conduct fishing and roving enquiries. If the first proviso to Section 147 applies, there must be a specific finding of the assessee's failure to disclose material facts, not just a mere charge of bogus expenses.

357

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha · Section 147 · Section 148 · reasons to believe · reopening assessment · fishing enquiries · roving enquiries · escapement of income · first proviso to Section 147 · failure to disclose material facts · sanction under Section 151

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 151Section 143(3)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 68Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 147(a)sanctioning authoritysection 151(2)sanction under section 151section 148(2)section 151(1)approval under section 151material facts necessary for assessmentsection 158bgfirst proviso to section 147live linksection 149(1)(b)

Judgments citing Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha

VIPUL AGRAWAL,GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH vs. ACIT, GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5066/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumarvipul Agrawal, Vs. Acit, 35, Chandrapuri, Hapur Chungi, Up Hapur, Road, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Abqpa6874P

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…has taken a view that merely rubber stamping of "Yes" would suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under: - "19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal [1971] 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee [1974] 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhary and Sons case [1977] 109 ITR 370 (Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which…

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

ITA 612/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(iiia)Section 11Section 139Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)

…quoting yes I am satisfied and without application of mind to accord sanction for issuing notice under section 148, reopening of assessment was invalid. 10. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble SC in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors. (SC) 79 ITR 603. The court was also of the opinion that the Commissioner had mechanically accorded permission. He did not himself record that he was satisfied that this was a fit case for the issue of a notice under section 148. Το question No. 8 in the report which read whether the Commissioner is satisfied that it is a fit case for the issue of notice under sec…

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

ITA 611/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(iiia)Section 11Section 139Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)

…quoting yes I am satisfied and without application of mind to accord sanction for issuing notice under section 148, reopening of assessment was invalid. 10. Similar view has been taken by Hon'ble SC in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors. (SC) 79 ITR 603. The court was also of the opinion that the Commissioner had mechanically accorded permission. He did not himself record that he was satisfied that this was a fit case for the issue of a notice under section 148. Το question No. 8 in the report which read whether the Commissioner is satisfied that it is a fit case for the issue of notice under sec…

JORSS BULLION PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4758/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Omkareswar Chidara

Section 69C

…undation of reasons is on wrong facts and therefore the entire notice is bad in law. Therefore, the entire assessment under Section 143(3) RWS 147 is bad in law. This principle is following in the following cases: (i) Chhugamal Rajpal V/s. S.P. Chaliha [1971] 79 ITR 603 (SC) (ii) Surani Steel Tubes Ltd. V/s. ITO [2022] 136 taxmann.com 139 (Gujarat) (iii) Kantibhai DharamshibhaiNarola V/s. ACIT [2021] 125 taxmann.com 348 [Guj] (iv) Harikishan SundarlalVirmani V/s. ITO [2017] 88 taxmann.com 548 (Guj) (v) Anwar Mohammed Shaikh V/s. ACIT [2023] 148 taxmann.com 288 (Вот) The copy of above judgements are attached herew…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(1), MUMBAI vs. JORSS BULLION PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 4004/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Omkareswar Chidara

Section 69C

…undation of reasons is on wrong facts and therefore the entire notice is bad in law. Therefore, the entire assessment under Section 143(3) RWS 147 is bad in law. This principle is following in the following cases: (i) Chhugamal Rajpal V/s. S.P. Chaliha [1971] 79 ITR 603 (SC) (ii) Surani Steel Tubes Ltd. V/s. ITO [2022] 136 taxmann.com 139 (Gujarat) (iii) Kantibhai DharamshibhaiNarola V/s. ACIT [2021] 125 taxmann.com 348 [Guj] (iv) Harikishan SundarlalVirmani V/s. ITO [2017] 88 taxmann.com 548 (Guj) (v) Anwar Mohammed Shaikh V/s. ACIT [2023] 148 taxmann.com 288 (Bom) The copy of above judgements are attached herew…

EXEL RUBBER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1894/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1894/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Exel Rubber (P) Ltd Vs. Dy.Cit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aaace4495J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 20/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11 Hyderabad, Dated 11/10/2025 For The A.Y 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 69A

…f the assessee for any of the years under consideration. In support of his Page 11 of 74 ITA No 1894 of 2025 Exel Rubber Private Ltd contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Chhuganmal Rajpal vs. SP Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of P Munirathnam /Chetty and P. Satyanarayana Chetty vs. Income Tax Officer (1975) 101 ITR 385. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the exercising power u/s 151 of the Act in a casual and routine or mechanical manner without application of mind i…

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

ITA 1874/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA M V PrasadFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

…or expenditure or an entry/entries in the books of account of the assessee for any of the years under consideration. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Chhuganmal Rajpal vs. SP Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of P Munirathnam /Chetty and P. Satyanarayana Chetty vs. Income Tax Officer (1975) 101 ITR 385. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the exercising power u/s 151 of the Act in a casual and routine or mechanical manner without application of mind i…

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD., HYDERABAD

ITA 1873/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos. 1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

…or expenditure or an entry/entries in the books of account of the assessee for any of the years under consideration. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Chhuganmal Rajpal vs. SP Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of P Munirathnam /Chetty and P. Satyanarayana Chetty vs. Income Tax Officer (1975) 101 ITR 385. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the exercising power u/s 151 of the Act in a casual and routine or mechanical manner without application of mind i…

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

ITA 1872/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA M V PrasadFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

…or expenditure or an entry/entries in the books of account of the assessee for any of the years under consideration. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Chhuganmal Rajpal vs. SP Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of P Munirathnam /Chetty and P. Satyanarayana Chetty vs. Income Tax Officer (1975) 101 ITR 385. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the exercising power u/s 151 of the Act in a casual and routine or mechanical manner without application of mind i…

VILAS POLYMER PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the six appeals i

ITA 1870/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1870 To 1875/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2014-2015 To 2019-2020 Vilas Polymer Private The Dcit, Limited, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Pin – 500 090 Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Aaacv9854A Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca M V Prasad राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18.02.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA M V PrasadFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

…or expenditure or an entry/entries in the books of account of the assessee for any of the years under consideration. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Chhuganmal Rajpal vs. SP Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of P Munirathnam /Chetty and P. Satyanarayana Chetty vs. Income Tax Officer (1975) 101 ITR 385. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the exercising power u/s 151 of the Act in a casual and routine or mechanical manner without application of mind i…

NILESH ASHANAND THACKER,BHUJ vs. ITO WARD 4, GANDHIDHAM (BHUJ)

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

ITA 377/RJT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.377/Rjt/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Nilesh Ashanand Thacker, बनाम Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4, / Near-Laxmi Vekari Mahakali Gandhidham (Bhuj-2)-370 201 Vs. Shopping Mall, Jublee Circle, Bhuj, Kutch-300 001(Gujarat) "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adhpt 8610R (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

…quoting “yes, I am satisfied” and without application of mind to accord sanction for issuing notice under section 148, reopening of assessment was invalid. Similar view has been taken by Hon’ble SC in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs. S.P. Chaliha & Ors. (SC) (79 ITR 603) stating that the court was also of the opinion that the Commissioner had mechanically accorded permission. He did not himself record that he was satisfied that this was a fit case for the issue of a notice under section 148. To question No. 8 in the report which read whether the Commissioner is satisfied that it is a fit case for the issue of not…

SANJAY RAWAT,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT CENTRAL CRICLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] Ita Nos.90, 95 & 104/Ddn/2024 [Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2013-14 & 2013-14] Sanjay Rawat Vs Acit 18S Ats Colony, Central Circle Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Ahopr5244E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Shri Shivam Garg, Adv. & Shri Raghav Sharma, Ca Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am :

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271

…alleged as belonging to him. Ld.AR submits that AO was not sure whether the so-called entries were related to the assessee or to some other person. He thus, submits that in terms of order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs S.P.Chaliha 79 ITR 603 (SC), such vague and contradictory reasons cannot be equated with reasons to believe and the re-assessment proceedings so initiated, is invalid. 9. Ld.AR further submits that AO has recorded the reasons on the basis of borrowed satisfaction, based on the information received from Investigation Wing in the case of Amit Sharma, Ram Asrey Sharma Gro…

SANJAY RAWAT,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun11 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] Ita Nos.90, 95 & 104/Ddn/2024 [Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2013-14 & 2013-14] Sanjay Rawat Vs Acit 18S Ats Colony, Central Circle Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Ahopr5244E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Shri Shivam Garg, Adv. & Shri Raghav Sharma, Ca Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am :

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271

…alleged as belonging to him. Ld.AR submits that AO was not sure whether the so-called entries were related to the assessee or to some other person. He thus, submits that in terms of order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs S.P.Chaliha 79 ITR 603 (SC), such vague and contradictory reasons cannot be equated with reasons to believe and the re-assessment proceedings so initiated, is invalid. 9. Ld.AR further submits that AO has recorded the reasons on the basis of borrowed satisfaction, based on the information received from Investigation Wing in the case of Amit Sharma, Ram Asrey Sharma Gro…

SH.SANJAY RAWAT,,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 104/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] Ita Nos.90, 95 & 104/Ddn/2024 [Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2013-14 & 2013-14] Sanjay Rawat Vs Acit 18S Ats Colony, Central Circle Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001 Uttarakhand Pan-Ahopr5244E Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. Shri Shivam Garg, Adv. & Shri Raghav Sharma, Ca Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am :

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 271

…alleged as belonging to him. Ld.AR submits that AO was not sure whether the so-called entries were related to the assessee or to some other person. He thus, submits that in terms of order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs S.P.Chaliha 79 ITR 603 (SC), such vague and contradictory reasons cannot be equated with reasons to believe and the re-assessment proceedings so initiated, is invalid. 9. Ld.AR further submits that AO has recorded the reasons on the basis of borrowed satisfaction, based on the information received from Investigation Wing in the case of Amit Sharma, Ram Asrey Sharma Gro…

SHREE MANGIRISH CO-OPERATIVE HSG LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-42(1)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 5936/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…the Ld. AO in initiating reassessment proceedings under section 147 by obtaining a mere mechanical sanction under section 151 from the Ld. PCIT, Mumbai, in violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC). 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of the Ld. AO, in issuing notice under section 148 in violation of the mandatory provisions of section 151A of the Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of the Ld. AO, in not providing the sanction note of the PCCIT, thereby violating the binding directions laid down by t…

KRISHAN KUMAR BANSAL,DELHI vs. CIT(A), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4076/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271ASection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2017-18] Krishan Kumar Bansal, Sh. Vs. Assessing Officer, Dinesh Kumar Bansal (Legal Ward-46(4), Heir of Late Sh. Krishan Kumar New Delhi Bansal), B-2/24A, Yamuna Vihar, Bhajan Pura, Delhi-110053 PAN :AFBPB2466B (Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Madhur Aggarwal, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18.11.2026 Date of Pronouncement 03.02.2026 ORDER PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM: This appeal by assessee is arising ou…

ANTHONETTE JOAQUIM ANTHONY,MUMBAI vs. ITO INT TAX WARD 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6531/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144BSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 69

…w, the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in initiating the assessment u/s 147 by obtaining a mere mechanical sanction u/s 151 from competent authority and thus violating the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case ChhugamalRajpal v. SP Chaliha (1971) 79 ITR 603. 3) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in initiating reassessment under section 147 by issuing invalid notice under section 148 on 22.03.2024 directing to file ITR "within 30 days from the issue of the notice". 4) In the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. Assessing O…

BHAVIKA BHUWALKA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(2), NOIDA, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8258/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad[Assessment Year: 2013-14] Bhavika Bhuwalka Vs. Ito C055, Iind Floor, Preet Ward-5 (1) (2) Vihar, Delhi Noida Pan No. Amnpb8209R Appellant Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 69

…has taken a view that merely rubber stamping of "Yes" would suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under: - "19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal [1971] 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee [1974] 93 ITR 130 (Calcutta) and Govinda Choudhury and Sons case [1977] 109 ITR 370 (Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in…

VIKAS CHANDRA HUF,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD-4(1)(1), ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/AGR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshvikas Chandra Huf, Vs. Cit(Appeals), D-117, Ramesh Vihar, Nfac, Delhi Ramghar Road, Aligarh Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakjv9476N Assessee By : Shri Pankaj Garg, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…has taken a view that merely rubber stamping of "Yes" would suggest that the decision was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said decision is reproduced as under: - "19. In respect of the first plea, if the judgments in Chhugamal Rajpal [1971] 79 ITR 603 (SC), Chanchal Kumar Chatterjee [1974] 93 ITR 130 (Cal) and Govinda Choudhary and Sons case [1977] 109 ITR 370 (Orissa) are examined, the absence of reasons by the Assessing Officer does not exist. This is so as along with the proforma, reasons set out by the Assessing Officer were, in fact, given. However, in the instant case, the manner in which…

M/S. SAGUN SALES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1194/KOL/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…ed assessment, he should have relevant material before him from which he could have drawn such conclusion. His vague imagination that there might have been some escapement of income from assessment is not sufficient [CHHUGANMAL RAJPAL VS. S. P. CHALIHA (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC)]. It is emphatically settled in this regard that there can be no doubt that the words "reason to believe suggest that the belief must be that of an honest and reasonable person based upon reasonable grounds and that the Assessing Officer may act on direct or circumstantial evidence but not on mere suspicion, gossip or rumour. The Ld. AO would…

Showing 1–20 of 357 · Page 1 of 18

...