How many judgments cite ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das?

721 judgments on BharatTax cite ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (103 ITR 437), spanning 2001 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 151, Section 142(1), Section 68.

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 147 Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 151 Section 142(1)Section 68 Section 250 Section 132

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assets section 149(1)(c)section 4(2)section 201(3)section 147(a)section 158ba section 150 true and full disclosure live link unexplained jewellery section 148(2)beyond four years

Judgments citing ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Na vs. Ari Circle, Navsari

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2868/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2867-2869/Ahd/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2008-09 To 2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Shri Rajesh Khemchand Tharwani, Tax, Navsari Circle, Room L/H Lt. Shri Khemchandbhai Vs. No./302, Aaykar Bhavan, Nr. Kungmal Tharwani, Prop. Of K.K. Biscuit Bakery, 154-155, Gidc, Charpool Police Chowki, Kabilpore, Navsari-396445 Lunsikui, Navsari-396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalpt 1806 G (Assessee ) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3135/Ahd/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Shri Khemchand Kangumal Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tharwani, By L/R Rajesh Tax, Navsari Circle, Room No./302, Vs. Khemchand Tharwani, Prop. Of M/S Aaykar Bhavan, Nr. Charpool K.K. Biscuit Bakery, 154-155, Police Chowki, Lunsikui, Gidc, Kabilpore, Navsari-396445 Navsari-396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalpt 1806 G (Assessee ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Gautam – S. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

…regard is silent. 16. From the above details, it seems that the assessing officer is referring to certain material without describing them and quantifying the amounts contained therein. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO V/s Lakhmani Mewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437 summarized as to what constitutes "reason to believe" for the purpose of section 147 of the Act, as follows: “(a) The powers of the Assessing Officer to reopen an assessment, though wide, are not plenary. (b) The words of the statute are "reason to believe" and not "reason to suspect". (c) The reopening of an assessment after the lapse of many ye…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Na vs. Ari Circle, Navsari

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2867/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Gautam – S. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148

ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. M/S K.R. Pulp & Papers Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 5064/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…Court when proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act can be initiated on statements made by third person 49 ITA.No.5064/Del./2017 M/s. K.R. Pulp and Papers Ltd., New Delhi. on the account of "accommodation entry". In ITO versus Lakhmani Mewal Das, [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC), the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the High Court and held that there was nothing to show in the confession made by a third party related to the loan taken by the assessee much less a loan which was shown to have advanced by that person to the assessee and, therefore, live link or close nexus, which should be there between the mater…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Shubham Chemicals & Sovents Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5387/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Jaspal Singh Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mithun Shete, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ere already investigated during the original assessment proceedings, on the basis of same information, the assessment cannot be reopened again. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO v. Laxmi Mewal Dass reported in 103 ITR 437, I hold that the information available with the assessing officer was a mere suspicion. On the basis of that information, no belief can be formed. Since the original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) and reopening was made after 4 years, it was necessary on the part of the Ld. Assessing Officer to show that tax has escaped by reasons of failure…

M/S. Satyam Realtors P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC-5(4)Dy CIT CC-5(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 552/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

Section 147Section 148Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 552/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Vs. DCIT,CC-5(4) Satyam Realtors Pvt.Ltd. Room No.04, 3rd Floor Room No.1927, 19th Floor Capri,Op. HDIL Towers Air India Building Anant Kanekar Marg, Nariman Point Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 051 PAN : AACCS7290P (Appellant) (Respondent) None Assessee by Department by Shri T.Sankar, Sr.AR Date of Hearing 13.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement 25.03.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of…

M/S Globe Complex Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 230/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.230/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Globe Complex Pvt. Ltd...………………..............................…….……Appellant 528, Nayabad, Near Mini Bus Stand, Kolkata-700099.( [Pan:Aadcg4222A] Vs. Ito, Ward-5(4), Kolkata……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ca,Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shrigautammondal, Sr. Dr,Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing :February 01, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 16, 2022

Section 147Section 148Section 148aSection 151Section 250

…this aspect though the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by the court. The entire law as to what would constitute "reason to believe" had summed up by Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v LakhmaniMewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437. Reliance in this respect can also be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of 'CIT vs ParamjitKaur' (2008) 311 ITR 38 (P&H), wherein, making identical observations, the Hon'ble High Court held that the in the absence of sufficient material to I.T.A. No.230/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Globe Comple…

Sarita Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 382/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Girija

Section 10(38)

…eciurities Co.Ltd., vs. ITO reported in 329 ITR 110;  decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Oracle Systems Corporation, vs. DCIT reported in (2015)94 CCH 0045;  decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in 103 ITR 437;  decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Shyam R Pawar, reported in 229 Taxman 256;  decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT v M.Chinnaswamy, reported in 350 ITR 694;  decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of Farrah Marker vs.ITO in ITA no. 3810/Mum/2011decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of Sunil P…

Sarita Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 381/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Girija

Section 10(38)

Sarita Dudheria, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 380/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Girija

Section 10(38)

Snehalatha Singhi, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3153/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Snehalatha Singhi, The Deputy Flat No. 101, Commissioner Of Pride Elite, Income Tax, No. 10, Museum Road, Circle – 1 (1)(2), Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Ajmps0427Q Appellant Respondent : Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Girija, Assessee By Advocates : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 15-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 15-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 10.08.2018 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-1, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Under: The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 31/03/2015 For Year Under Consideration Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,31,57,680/-. Ld.Ao Observed That Assessee Has Claimed Exemption Under Section 10(38) Amounting To Rs.3,10,94,952/- Towards Sale Of Equity Shares. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Girija

Section 10(38)

…eciurities Co.Ltd., vs. ITO reported in 329 ITR 110;  decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Oracle Systems Corporation, vs. DCIT reported in (2015)94 CCH 0045;  decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in 103 ITR 437;  decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Shyam R Pawar, reported in 229 Taxman 256;  decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT v M.Chinnaswamy, reported in 350 ITR 694;  decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of Farrah Marker vs.ITO in  decision of Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in case of Sunil Prakesh vs.ACIT in I…

D.C.I.T., Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. Turtle Ltd., Howrah

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2620/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am]

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 3

…has to be some kind of cause & effect relationship between reasons recorded and the income escaping assessment. While dealing with this matter it is useful to bear in mind the following observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has taken note of the additional condition precedent required as per first proviso u/s 147 for reopening the assessment after four (4) years . The relevant portion has held as follows: “The reasons for the formation of the belief must have a rational connection with or relevant bearing of the formation of the bel…

Kalyan Jewels Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Waseem Ahmed & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Kalyan Jewells P.Ltd. Ito, Ward-2(1)(2) 49, Super Mall Vs Ahmedabad. Nr.Lal Bungalow, Ahmedabad 380 015 Pan : Aacck 4717 B

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Urjit Shah, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 179(1)Section 234

…fect relationship between reasons recorded and the income escaping assessment. While dealing with this aspect of the matter, it is useful to bear in mind the following observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das [(1976) 103 ITR 437], "the reasons for the formation of the belief must have 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 ITO and the formation 9 of this belief that there has been escapement of the income…

Alankar Commodeal (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1257/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1257/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Alankar Commodeal (P) Ltd..........................................…………………….……Appellant C/O Ca Bal Kishan Kedia, Bansal Complex, 1St Floor, Ram Nivas Talkies Chowk, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh-496001. [Pan: Aahca1771G] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata…………….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Kr. Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 16, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 01, 2022 Hearing Through Video Conferencing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.04.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act(Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Passing Order Ex-Parte. 2. That Under The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Bad In Law & Hence The Consequential Reassessment Order Is Also Illegal & Needs To Be Annulled. 3. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of A Sum Of Rs.2,50,50,000/- For The Share Capital Raised By The Assessee, Holding The Same To Be Unexplained Cash-Credit In Terms Of Sec.68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Addition Is Unjustified & Need To Be Deleted. 4. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Amend Or Withdraw Any Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250Section 68

…though the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by the court. The entire law as to what would constitute "reason to believe" has summed up by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer v.LakhmaniMewaldas (1976) 103 ITR 437. Reliance in this respect can also be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of 'CIT vs Paramjit Kaur' (2008) 311 ITR 38 (P&H), wherein the Hon'ble High Court held that the in the absence of sufficient material to form satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that income of the assessee had escaped assessment,…

Bharat Jha-HUF, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-37(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6834/DEL/2019[2013+-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 148Section 250Section 68

…considered at this stage as heid by Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd. V ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Green Arts (P) Ltd. V ITO (2005) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief-ITO V. LakhmaniMewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)..." 6.1 Therefore, I am of the considered view that if the subjectivity of 'reason to believe' cannot be subject matter of consideration of the appellate courts, the subjectivity in 'opinion' of the A.O. can never be subject matter of consideration of the appellate courts because certain incriminating material having some evidentiary value…

Krishna Devi, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 38(3), New Delhi

ITA 6356/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Krishna Devi, Vs Income Tax Officer, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Ward-38(3), New Delhi-110085 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abrpd0875E Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.01.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…considered at this stage as held by Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd. V ITO (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Green Arts (P) Ltd. V ITO (2005) 257 ITR 639 (Delhi). The assessee cannot challenge sufficiency of belief-ITO V. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)..." 4.14 Therefore, Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that if the subjectivity of 'reason to believe' cannot be subject matter of consideration of the appellate courts, the subjectivity in 'opinion' of the A.O. can never be subject matter of 28 Krishan Devi consideration of the appellate courts because certain incriminating material having s…

Smt. Anshita Vimal Jain, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(4), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 665/AHD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Mitish S. Modi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Deependra Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…s must have a live link with the formation of the belief. This is supported by Circular No.549 dated 31.10.1989 which clarified that the words “reason to believe” did not mean a change of opinion. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976 ]103 ITR 437 has lucidly explained the power of assessing officer to bring to tax income escaping assessment u/s.147 of the Act. The Hon’ble Court first held that the section provides that there must Assessment Year. 2007-08 Anshita Vimal Jain exist “reasons to believe” and not “reasons to suspect”. The following were the relevant observations: “The fact that…

D.C.I.T.Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Coal Sale Co.Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross-objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2364/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Hon’Ble Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…has to be some kind of cause & effect relationship between reasons recorded and the income escaping assessment. While dealing with this matter it is useful to bear in mind the following observation of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ITO vs. LakhmaniMewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has taken note of the additional condition precedent required as per first proviso u/s 147 for reopening the assessment after four (4) years . The relevant portion has held as follows: “The reasons for the formation of the belief must have a rational connection with or relevant bearing of the formation of the bel…

ACIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. National Bank for Agriculature and Rural Developement, Mumbai

ITA 4277/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () A.C.I.T-3(2)(2) National Bank For Agriculture & R. No. 674, 6Th Floor, Vs. Rural Development, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, C-24, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai -400 020 Complex,Bandra, Mumbai – 400 051 Pan No. Aaact4020G (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Jehangir Mistri, Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman, Cit D.R Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2021 Order Per Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, CIT D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36

…TR 456, 477; ITA No.4277/Mum/2016 A.Y. 2007-08 9 ACIT 3(2)(2)Vs. National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (ii) ALA Firm v. CIT189 ITR 285, 298; (iii) Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT119 ITR 996, 1004; and (iv) ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437, 445. 5.1.18 However, merely change of opinion in the mind of assessing officer on interpretation of law cannot be basis for forming 'reason to believe'. Section 147 does not empower the Assessing Officer to review on the same set of facts the assessment order which had already been framed merely by fresh application of to its own decision or to…

Ghanshyam, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3692/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3692/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ghanshyam, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Late Shri Hari Singh, Ward-1(2), R/O Village-Saddique Nagar, Ghaziabad Sehani, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aqhpg9011C Assessee By : Sh. Amit Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.11.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

…e not been carried out, which, if made, could have led to detection to an income escaping assessment, cannot be reason enough to hold the view that income, has escaped assessment. 14. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das [(1976) 103 ITR 437], “the reasons for the formation of the belief must have rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief.” 15. Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to the notice of the ITO and the formation of this belief that there has been escapement of the income…

Shri Rai Singh Sihag, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3-1, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 441/JPR/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Nov 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 441/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Rai Singh Sihag, Cuke I.T.O. Vs. B-105, Vaishali Nagar, Ward- 3(1), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Bgvps 4485 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta & Shri S.L. Jain (Advs.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By :Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/11/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 13/07/2017 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. The Reasons For Reopening Of The Assessment Not Valid :- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Ao Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Invoking Action U/S 147.The Notice For Reassessment Is So Hastily Issued Without Examining The Correct Factual & Legal Position. The Action For Reassessment Is Often Made Without Application Of Mind Fairly & Objectively The Ao. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 Itr 437 (Sc)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok kr. Gupta &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 68

…facts in invoking action u/s 147.The notice for reassessment is so hastily issued without examining the correct factual and legal position. The action for reassessment is often made without application of mind fairly and objectively the AO. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 (SC) 2 ITA 441/JP/2019_ Shri Rai Singh Sihag Vs ITO Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO 130 ITR 1 (SC) Bir Bahadur Gingh Sijwali Vs. ITA No. 3814/ De1/11 Amrik Singh Vs. ITO ward-1, Kapurthala, ITA No. 630(Asr)/2015. 2. Re-assessment is based on borrowed satisfaction :- That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. AO has grossly er…