ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das

103 ITR 437Supreme Court of India1976#70 most cited

What is ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das authority for?

For reassessment proceedings, the 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment must be based on some material and not mere suspicion, establishing a live link between the information and the belief. Furthermore, for reassessment beyond four years, there must be a specific finding of the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts.

721

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,735 Indian tax judgments — from 2001 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das · Section 147 · Section 148 · reason to believe · reassessment · escaped income · failure to disclose material facts · live link · beyond four years · material facts · bogus claim

Also reported as

2 SCC 302153 Taxmann 282

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 151Section 142(1)Section 68Section 250Section 132
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 147(a)section 158basection 150true and full disclosurelive linkunexplained jewellerysection 148(2)beyond four years

Judgments citing ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das

Shri Anilbhai Hiralal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1329/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Parmar, CIT.D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…preme Court in S. Narayanappa v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 219, that it is open to examine whether the reason to believe has rational connection A.Y. 2008-09 16 with the formation of the belief. To the same effect, the Apex Court in ITO v. Lakhmani Merwal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 had laid down that the reasons to believe must have rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of belief i.e. there must be a live link between material coming the notice of the Assessing Officer and the formation of belief regarding escapement of income. If the aforesaid requirement are not met, the Assessee is entitled to cha…

Tata Motors Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (Ltu), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7543/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…bserved by the Supreme Court in S. Narayanappa v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 219, that it is open to examine whether the reason to believe has rational connection with the formation of the belief. To the same effect, the Apex Court in ITO v. Lakhmani Merwal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 had laid down that the reasons to believe must have rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of belief i.e. there must be a live link between material coming the notice of the Assessing Officer and the formation of belief regarding escapement of income. If the aforesaid requirement are not met, the Assessee is entitled to cha…

Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai vs. The Tata Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7359/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…bserved by the Supreme Court in S. Narayanappa v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 219, that it is open to examine whether the reason to believe has rational connection with the formation of the belief. To the same effect, the Apex Court in ITO v. Lakhmani Merwal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 had laid down that the reasons to believe must have rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of belief i.e. there must be a live link between material coming the notice of the Assessing Officer and the formation of belief regarding escapement of income. If the aforesaid requirement are not met, the Assessee is entitled to cha…

DCIT, Chennai vs. B.V.Reddy Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1914/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1914/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. B.V. Reddy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, New No. 21/Old No. 10A, First Floor, Corporate Circle 1(2), Umayal Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 010. [Pan:Aaccn2252L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04.11.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, Dated 29.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-11 On 13.10.2010 Admitting Total Income Of ₹.15,50,25,060/-. The Assessing Officer Has Completed The Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…as any omission or failure on the part of the assessee in disclosing fully and truly the material facts for assessment. The relevant head-notes in the judgement delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 103 ITR 437 are reproduced as under: “The reasons for the formation of the belief contemplated by section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the reopening of an assessment must have a rational connection or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief. Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur vs. Bagadiya Brothers Private Limited, Raipur

Accordingly the appeals filed by the revenue for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are dismissed and the cross-objection/Additional cross-objections filed by the assessee for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are allowed ...

ITA 75/RPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 223 & 224/Rpr/2019 Co Nos.27 & 28/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 75/Rpr/2020 Co No. 02/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 151

…as explained in Raman and Co. (supra) and whether from that information he could have formed the belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. As explained by the Supreme Court in the case of Income Tax Officer V/s. Lakhmani Mew & Das, [(1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)], the reasons for formation of such belief must have a rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief. Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of the Income Tax Officer and the formation of his belief that there has been escapement of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur vs. Bagadiya Brothers Private Limited, Raipur

Accordingly the appeals filed by the revenue for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are dismissed and the cross-objection/Additional cross-objections filed by the assessee for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are allowed ...

ITA 224/RPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 223 & 224/Rpr/2019 Co Nos.27 & 28/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 75/Rpr/2020 Co No. 02/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 151

…as explained in Raman and Co. (supra) and whether from that information he could have formed the belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. As explained by the Supreme Court in the case of Income Tax Officer V/s. Lakhmani Mew & Das, [(1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)], the reasons for formation of such belief must have a rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief. Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of the Income Tax Officer and the formation of his belief that there has been escapement of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur vs. Bagadiya Brothers Private Limited, Raipur

Accordingly the appeals filed by the revenue for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are dismissed and the cross-objection/Additional cross-objections filed by the assessee for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are allowed ...

ITA 223/RPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 223 & 224/Rpr/2019 Co Nos.27 & 28/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 75/Rpr/2020 Co No. 02/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 151

…as explained in Raman and Co. (supra) and whether from that information he could have formed the belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. As explained by the Supreme Court in the case of Income Tax Officer V/s. Lakhmani Mew & Das, [(1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)], the reasons for formation of such belief must have a rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief. Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of the Income Tax Officer and the formation of his belief that there has been escapement of…

The Dy CIT (It)-Circle-3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Manish Vijay Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 494/MUM/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR
Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM ITA No. 493/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year 2007-08) Manish Vijay Mehta The DCIT Flat No.E-26, Circle 3(3)(2) 7th Floor, E-48, Room No.1607, 16 th Venus Apartments Floor, Dr. R.G. Thadani Marg, Vs. Air India Building Sea Face (South), Nariman Point Worli, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 018 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADPM7278D CO No. 155/Mum/2021 (Arising in ITA No. 494/Mum/2021 A.Y.2006-07) CO No. 156/Mum/2021 (Arising in ITA No. 493/Mum/2021 A.Y.2007-08) Manish Vijay Mehta The DCIT Flat No. E-…

The Dy CIT (It)-Circle-3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Manish Vijay Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 493/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR
Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM ITA No. 493/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year 2007-08) Manish Vijay Mehta The DCIT Flat No.E-26, Circle 3(3)(2) 7th Floor, E-48, Room No.1607, 16 th Venus Apartments Floor, Dr. R.G. Thadani Marg, Vs. Air India Building Sea Face (South), Nariman Point Worli, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 018 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADPM7278D CO No. 155/Mum/2021 (Arising in ITA No. 494/Mum/2021 A.Y.2006-07) CO No. 156/Mum/2021 (Arising in ITA No. 493/Mum/2021 A.Y.2007-08) Manish Vijay Mehta The DCIT Flat No. E-…

The Dy CIT (It)-Circle-3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Urvi Manish Mehra, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 492/MUM/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR
Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM ITA No. 493/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year 2007-08) Manish Vijay Mehta The DCIT Flat No.E-26, Circle 3(3)(2) 7th Floor, E-48, Room No.1607, 16 th Venus Apartments Floor, Dr. R.G. Thadani Marg, Vs. Air India Building Sea Face (South), Nariman Point Worli, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 018 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADPM7278D CO No. 155/Mum/2021 (Arising in ITA No. 494/Mum/2021 A.Y.2006-07) CO No. 156/Mum/2021 (Arising in ITA No. 493/Mum/2021 A.Y.2007-08) Manish Vijay Mehta The DCIT Flat No. E-…

The Dy CIT (It)-Circle-3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Urvi Manish Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the learned Assessing Officer and CO of the assessee for both the years are dismissed

ITA 491/MUM/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash, DR
Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM ITA No. 493/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year 2007-08) Manish Vijay Mehta The DCIT Flat No.E-26, Circle 3(3)(2) 7th Floor, E-48, Room No.1607, 16 th Venus Apartments Floor, Dr. R.G. Thadani Marg, Vs. Air India Building Sea Face (South), Nariman Point Worli, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 018 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADPM7278D CO No. 155/Mum/2021 (Arising in ITA No. 494/Mum/2021 A.Y.2006-07) CO No. 156/Mum/2021 (Arising in ITA No. 493/Mum/2021 A.Y.2007-08) Manish Vijay Mehta The DCIT Flat No. E-…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Snowshine Realtors Pvt.Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1443/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…ITA Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 & CO 103 & 104/Bang/2018 ITA No.1443/Bang/2018 & CO No.105/Bang/2018 M/s. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Snowshine Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 ACIT Central Circle- M/s. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37th B Cross, 28th Main, 9th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 PAN NO : AACCK9866F APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O.…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1442/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…ITA Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 & CO 103 & 104/Bang/2018 ITA No.1443/Bang/2018 & CO No.105/Bang/2018 M/s. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Snowshine Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 ACIT Central Circle- M/s. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37th B Cross, 28th Main, 9th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 PAN NO : AACCK9866F APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O.…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1-(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1441/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…ITA Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 & CO 103 & 104/Bang/2018 ITA No.1443/Bang/2018 & CO No.105/Bang/2018 M/s. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Snowshine Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 ACIT Central Circle- M/s. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37th B Cross, 28th Main, 9th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 PAN NO : AACCK9866F APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O.…

DCIT 13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Pebble Bay Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the application of the assessee under rule 27 is ...

ITA 5744/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- M/S Pebble Bay Developers Tax-13(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Room No. 218, Vs. Raheja Chambers, Linking Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Road, Main Avenue Santacruz Mumbai-400020. (West), Mumbai-400054. Pan No. Aaccg 1645 E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Vranda Matkari, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Nishit Gandhi, Ar Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda Matkari, DR
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 69C

…is so because the formation of belief by the Assessing officer is within his subjective satisfaction officer is within his subjective satisfaction - refer Supreme Court's decision refer Supreme Court's decision in the case of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), Phool in the case of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), Phool in the case of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), Phool Chand Bajrangl Chand Bajranglal vs. ITO (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC), ITO vs. Select al vs. ITO (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC), ITO vs. Select Pvt. Ltd. (1996) 217 ITR 597, 599 (SC) and Dalurband Coal Com…

Keystone Realtors Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 951/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. Naresh KumarFor Respondent: Sh. Anil. S. Sant, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 132(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…establish the escapement of Income. Keystone Realtors Pvt. Ltd. The existence of reason is enough in this regard; reliance is placed on following case laws of the Apex Court. a. Kalyanji Maji & Co. v/s CIT (SC) 102 ITR 287 b. ITO v/s Lakhmani Mewal Das (SC) 103 ITR 437 c. Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another v/s ITO & Anr. (SC) 203 ITR 456 d. Sri Krishna (P) Ltd. v/s CIT (SC)221 ITR 538 e. Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v/s ITO (SC) 191 ITR 662 Apart from above facts emerging in this case, there are various case laws which support reopening of assessment on similar facts Same of there are being quoted…

R.Rajagopal Tondaiman, Trichy vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Trichy

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

ITA 525/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.525/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sri R. Rajagopal Tondaiman, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Old No. 4-D, New No. 22, Collector Income Tax, Office Road, Trichy 620 001. Central Circle 1, Trichy. [Pan:Afbpr0712E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Viswanathan, Ca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Trichy, Dated 30.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Is A Hereditary Of Raja Of Pudukottai & Stated That He Is Assessed To Tax In The Status Of Huf & Individual. The Property At Cenotaph Road, Chennai Was Given To M/S. Doshi Housing Ltd. On A Development Agreement Entered Into On 30.01.2006 Through A Power Of Attorney. The Assessing Officer Has 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Viswanathan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

…on the part of the assessee in disclosing fully and truly the material facts for assessment. The relevant head-notes in the judgement delivered by 10 I.T.A. No.525/Chny/20 the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 103 ITR 437 are reproduced as under: “The reasons for the formation of the belief contemplated by section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the reopening of an assessment must have a rational connection or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief. Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material…

Ayyappa Seva Samgham Bombay, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-53, Mumbai

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

ITA 699/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2022AY 2010-11
Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…s receipts income must have escape assessment in the hands of the assessee trust. We would also like to place our reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Income-Tax Officer v/s Lakhamani Mewaldas 5 Ayyappa Seva Samgham Bombay (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) which held that to reopening an assessment after a lapse of many years is to be construed strictly were the AO should have “reason to believe” and not “reason to suspect” that income has escape assessment. The relevant extract of the said decision cited as under: The power of the Income-Tax officer to reopen assessment, though wide, are not…

Shradha Estate Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1626/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrikuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalshradha Estate Pvt. Ltd., 3, New Bake Bihari Building, 24Th Road, Khar (West), Opp. Khar Tel Ex, Mumbai-40052. Pan: Aabcs4961J ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-5(3)(2), Room No. 583, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Sh. Ashish Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 143(2)

…nd formation of belief about escapement of income. The material used in the reasons recorded should have a rational connection with, or a relevant bearing on the formation of the belief and not extraneous or irrelevant [Refer- ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC)]. Delhi ITAT in the case of Sanat Kumar v. ACIT [IT Appeal No 1881 (Delhi) of 2018, dated 14th June 2019 observed that the meticulous paper work of routing the transaction through banking channel is futile because the results are altogether beyond human probabilities. Neither in the past nor in the subsequent years has assessee indulged into…

Magan Veer, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward 1(4), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 2995/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 Magan Veer, Vs. Ito, C/O Sanjeev Anand & Associates, Ward-1(4), 77, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad. Pan: Azapv5055H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somil Agarwal & Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Mithalesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 Order

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Mithalesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148

…tenanced, nor sustainable in law. " 9.4 Similarly the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Paramjit Kaur (supra) while relying the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ITO & Ors Vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) reported in 103 ITR 437 (SC) held as under: " that the Assessing Officer had not examined the information received from the survey circle before recording his own satisfaction of escaped income and initiated reassessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer had thus acted only on the basis of suspicion and it could not be said that it was based on belief that the income c…