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

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das

Shri Vijay Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4-2, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 59/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 59/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2011-12 Vijay Kumar Agarwal, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. 7/58, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Ward 4(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Advpa 6150 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Pravin Kr. Saraswat (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/05/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), Ajmer Dated 27/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Learned C.I.T. (A) Has Erred For Not Considering The Issue For Validity Of Issue Notice U/S 148 Of I.T. Act, 1961, While There Was No Escapement Of Income On Part Of Assessee. The Initiation Of Proceedings Was Only On Behest Of I.T.O. Ward 3(2), Who Has Intimated To A.O. For Advancement Of Loan Rs.53,95,000/- Given By Assessee To Pooja Agarwal, While Concern A.O. Has Accepted Said Loan In Her Hands After Detailed Examination. Hence Initiation Of 2

For Appellant: Shri Pravin Kr. Saraswat (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151

…uch a belief, does not confer valid jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer to take action u/s 147 and 148 as held in the case of Birla VXL Ltd. v. ACIT (1996) 217 ITR 1 (Guj.) 7 ITA 59/JP/2019_ Vijay Kr Agarwal Vs ITO 1.2.5 In ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC), the Hon’ble 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 t…

Krishna Ramesh Sharma, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent.Cir.-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 4915/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4915/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 ) Mrs. Krishna Ramesh बिधम/ Dcit-Central Circle 2(1) Sharma Mumba, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Flat No. 1101, Sadguru Pratistha Bhawan, M. K. Kalyan Building, Junction Of Road, Mumbai-400020. 13Th & 17 Road, Khar, Mumbai400052. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 4916/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Mr. Ramesh H. Sharma Dcit-Central Circle 2(1) Flat No. 1101, Sadguru Mumba, Old Cgo Building, Vs. Kalyan Building, Junction Of Pratistha Bhawan, M. K. 13Th & 17 Road, Khar, Road, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai400052. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaops5770R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anant Pai Revenue By: Shri Manpreet Singh Duggal (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/11/2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -48, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2010-11. Ita. No.4916/Mum/2018

For Appellant: Shri Anant PaiFor Respondent: Shri Manpreet Singh Duggal (Sr
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149

…ore, the reopening is also bad in view of the decision in the case of (i) Phool Chand Bajrang Lal Vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, 477 (ii) ALA Firm Vs. CIT 189 ITR 285, 298 (iii) Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society Vs. CIT 119 ITR 996, 1004 & ITO Vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437, 445. On appraisal of the above said finding, it is apparent that the assessment could only be reopened on account of disclosure of new matter of knowledge of fresh facts which were not present at the time of original assessment. It may constitute reason to believe that the income of escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act…