Debashis Moulik v. ACIT

370 ITR 660High Court2015#8441 most cited

What is Debashis Moulik v. ACIT authority for?

An Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment under Section 147 by relying on facts, information, or documents that were already available or could have been easily discovered during the original assessment under Section 143(3). This is because reopening the assessment based on a mere change of opinion or previously available material is not permissible.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Debashis Moulik · ACIT · 370 ITR 660 · Section 147 · Section 148 · reassessment · change of opinion · reasons to believe · escaped income · Section 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 10(23C)Section 115BBCSection 12AASection 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153

Judgments citing Debashis Moulik v. ACIT

S K N Sikshan Sansthan, Bhadhadhar vs. Dy. Commissioner Income Tax (Central)-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 445/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumarskn Shikshan Sansthan, 1, N. H. 11 Bhadhadar Sikar 332 315 Pan No.: Aamts 1103L ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Shafi Mohammad, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 57

…reasonable time, that on receipt of reasons, the assessee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the AO is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. Similarly, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashish Moulik (370 ITR 660) has held that at the time of issuance of a notice under section 148 of the Act, the AO should have reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for any AY., that the assessee is entitled to counter those reasons by filing a reply, that it has to be adjudicated upon by the AO by a reasoned order, before he proceeds t…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation & Tra vs. Joy Partnership Mining Centre

ITAT/71/2018HC Calcutta15 Nov 2021

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani

Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A

…as accepted by him in the assessment completed under section 143(3). The contention raised by the ld. D.R. in this regard, even otherwise runs contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashis Moulik vs. ACIT reported in 370 ITR 660, wherein the assessment originally completed under section 143(3) was sought to be reopened by the Assessing Officer on the basis of new facts discovered from the assessment records and it was held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court that the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer merely on the basis of change of opinion, which was…

Kalpataru Electricals, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-50(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 759/KOL/2015[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2019AY 2004-2005

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ce, according to Ld. AR, there was no tangible material the AO ought not to have reopened the assessment and for that he relied on the following orders: i) Ashok Kumar Tandon Vs. ACIT (2014) 34 ITR (Trib.) 381 (ITAT, Del.); ii) Debashis Moulik Vs. ACIT (2015) 370 ITR 660 (Cal); iii) Common Cause (A Registered Society) And Others Vs. Union of India & Ors. (2017) 394 ITR 220 (SC); iv) ACIT Vs. Marvel Associates (2018) 92 taxmann.com 109 (Visakhapatnam Trib.) 3 Kalpataru Electricals, AY 2004-05 Relying on the aforesaid orders of the Tribunal and Hon’ble High courts & Supreme Court the Ld. AR contended that the act…

Wallace Sports and Research Foundation, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 3, Chennai

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

ITA 2057/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Respondent: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.R
Section 143(3)

…lso there is no finding that the AO’s stand in the reasons recorded , can in any manner be construed as suggesting that the income escapement on account of the assessee not disclosing the material facts. 14.2 In the case of Debashis Moulik Vs. ACIT in [2015] 370 ITR 660 (Cal) held that escapement of income could not be used to reopen an 20 assessment on facts, information, documents which were before the AO or could have been easily found by him while making the assessment. 15. The AO cannot say that yesterday he was ignorant, and he is wise today as all the materials are available before him, when he was fr…

P Praveen Kumar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corporate Circle-5(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2212/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.RFor Respondent: 21.11.2017
Section 143(3)Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, B/‘SMC’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B/“SMC” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी. चं" पूजार" लेखा सद"य , के सम" । BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.2212/Mds./2017 (Assessment Year : 2010-11 ) Shri P.Praveen Kumar, The DCIT, Vs. 443, (N.138) Mint street, Non-corporate circle 5(1), Sowcarpet, Chennai-79. Chennai-6. PAN AAPPP 8156 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr.S.Sridhar,Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT, D.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : 21.11.2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of hearing : 06.12.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of…

K.R.Jayaram, Chennai vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

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

ITA 1698/CHNY/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Mr.Arjunraj, C.A ""For Respondent: Mr.K.Ravi, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

…Dishman Pharmaceuticals And Chemicals Ltd. Vs. DCIT in [2012] 346 ITR 245 (Guj) ii) CIT Vs. Ashley Services Ltd. in [2014] 369 ITR 209 (Mad) iii) Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Ltd. Vs. ACIT in [2006] 287 ITR 25 (Mad) iv) Debashis Moulik Vs. ACIT in [2015] 370 ITR 660 (Cal) v) Bapalal And Co. EXPORTS Vs. JCIT(OSD) in [2007] 289 ITR 37 (Mad) ITA No.1698/Mds./16 :- 8 -: vi) INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. Shri Haresh Chand Agarwal, HUF in ITA No.282/Agra/2013 vide order dated 20.12.2013 wherein held that:- 5. We have considered rival submissions and material available on record. Hon’ble full Bench of Delhi High Co…

Shri Debabhash Dey, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD, 56(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1242/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 44A

…e was accepted by him in the assessment completed under section 143(3). The contention raised by the ld. D.R. in this regard, even otherwise runs contrary to the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashis Moulik –vs.- ACIT reported in 370 ITR 660, wherein the assessment originally completed under section 143(3) was sought to be reopened by the Assessing Officer on the basis of new facts discovered from the assessment records and it was held by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court that the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer merely on the basis of change of opinion, which was not p…

D.C.I.T Cir - 7, Kolkata. vs. M/S Bch Electric Ltd( Formerly M/S Bhartia Industries Limited), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 634/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Vishwanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 148

…pinion, which is not permissible in law as held, inter alia, by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Kelvinator of India Limited reported in 320 ITR 561 and by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashis Moulik –vs.- ACIT reported in 370 ITR 660. He also contended that the assessment originally completed under section 143(3) for the year under consideration was reopened by the Assessing Officer after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year and as per the first proviso to section 147, it was incumbent upon the Assessing Officer to point out specifically in the reasons…

D.C.I.T Cir - 2, Kolkata vs. M/S West Bengal Fisheries Corporation Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 476/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Vishwanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)

…e was accepted by him in the assessment completed under section 143(3). The contention raised by the ld. D.R. in this regard, even otherwise runs contrary to the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashis Moulik –vs.- ACIT reported in 370 ITR 660, wherein the assessment originally completed under sectin 143(3) was sought to be reopened by the Assessing Officer on the basis of new facts discovered from the assessment records and it was held by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court that the assessment was reopened by the Assessing Officer merely on the basis of change of opinion, which was not pe…

ITO, Ward-56(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Nopany & Sons, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1258/KOL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ited reported in 320 ITR 561, the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the I.T.A. No. 1258/KOL./2012 Assessment year: 2004-2005 & C.O. NO. 91/KOL/2012 (in ITA No. 1258/KOL/2012) Assessment year: 2004-2005 Page 4 of 9 case of Debashis Moulik –vs.- ACIT reported in 370 ITR 660 and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT –vs.- Tupperware India (P) Limited reported in 236 Taxman 494 to contend that the reopening of assessment originally made under section 143(3) by the Assessing Officer without there being any new tangible material coming to his possession was based on mere change of opinion, which is not per…

DCIT, Cir-9(1), New Delhi vs. M/S Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5819/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…pinion, which is not permissible in law as held, inter alia, by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Kelvinator of India Limited reported in 320 ITR 561 and by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashis Moulik –vs.- ACIT reported in 370 ITR 660. He, therefore, strongly supported the impugned order of ld. CIT(Appeals) on this preliminary issue and urged that the same may be upheld. I.T.A. No. 5819/DEL./2012 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 5 of 8 7. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material available on record. In order to appreciate the stand take…

Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle 11, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed as indicated above and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 398/KOL/2008[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 8Section 80HSection 80I

…pinion, which is not permissible in law as held, inter alia, by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Kelvinator of India Limited reported in 320 ITR 561 and by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashis Moulik –vs.- ACIT reported in 370 ITR 660. He also invited our attention to a letter dated 23.03.2006 issued by the Assessing Officer (copy placed at pages 73 I.T.A. No. 398/KOL./2008 Assessment year: 2000-2001 & I.T.A. No. 537/KOL/2008 Assessment Year : 2000-2001 Page 8 of 13 & 74 of the paper book) and submitted that even though the Assessing Officer has made an attempt to further s…

Mahendra C. Gala, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19(3), Mumbai

ITA 6590/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2015AY 2002-03
For Appellant: Shri Rajesh SanghaviFor Respondent: Shri Maurya Pratap-(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…in a reasonable time,that on receipt of reasons,the assessee is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the AO is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order.Similarly,the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Debashish Moulik (370 ITR 660)has held that at the time of issuance of a notice under section 148 of the Act,the AO should have reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment for any AY.,that the assessee is entitled to counter those reasons by filing a reply,that it has to be adjudicated upon by the AO by a reasoned order,before he proceeds to mak…

Debashis Moulik v. ACIT (370 ITR 660) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax