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 367,518 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

Rms Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Limited Jaipur, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 244/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 250

…ation received by him from the DDIT (Inv.) and cannot act on on borrowed satisfaction. [S. 143(1), 148]" 16 ITA No. 243 Το 246/JPR/2025 RMS Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Ltd., Jaipur. 3.3.7 Hon'ble Supreme Court in ITO v. LakhmaniMewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 held that: "The reasons for the formation of the 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 escap…

Rms Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Limited Jaipur, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 243/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 250

…ion received by him from the DDIT (Inv.) and cannot act on on borrowed satisfaction. [S. 143(1), 148]" 16 ITA No. 243 Το 246/JPR/2025 RMS Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Ltd., Jaipur. 3.3.7 Hon'ble Supreme Court in ITO v. LakhmaniMewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 held that: "The reasons for the formation of the 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 esca…

Shri Parin Seventilal Shah, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3690/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…he reopening was made in a haste manner. The Id CIT(A) also overlooked that facts that information in the insight portal per se cannot be treated tangible material in absence of further inquiry. 8. We find that Hon'ble Apex Court in ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 SC held that the power under section 147 is no doubt are wide, but at the same time it cannot be said to be a plenary power. The words in statute are “reasons to believe" and not “reasons to suspect". The assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 must only on the basis of existence of cogent materials. The existence of cogent material must nec…

Narendra Kachrulal Abad, Jalna vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Jalna

In the result, appeal of the assessee partly allowed

ITA 866/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.866/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Narendra Kachrulal Abad, V The Income Tax Officer, Abad House, Nal Galli, S Ward-1, Jalna. Kadrabad, Jalna – 431203. Maharashtra. Pan: Acspa9531C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hari Krishan – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Renge –Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Aurangabadpassed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2009-10 Dated 30.03.2019, Emanating From Order U/S.143(3) R.W.S 147Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 03.11.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Concise Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…2,602/-. 2.2 Ld.AR for the Assessee relied on the following case laws and filed a short note on each case law : o PCIT Vs. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd.(2018) 93 taxmann.com 153/167 DTR 290(Bom HC) o S.Narayana Vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 o ITO Vs. LakhmaniMerwal Das 103 ITR 437 o CIT V. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (2012 248 CTR 33 (Del)(HC) o CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co Ltd (2015) 128 DTR 217 (Del) (HC) o Pr. CIT vs. G. Pharma India Ltd. (2017) 384 ITR 147 (Del) (HC) o CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 300 (Del) (HC) Meenakshi Oversea's Pvt Ltd (2017) 395 ITR 677 CIT (Del) (HC) o CIT vs. Fai…

Pramod Gupta, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward - 46(5), New Delhi

Accordingly the appeal of the assessee succeeds. The same is allowed

ITA 3648/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklaassessment Year: 2010-11 Pramod Gupta, Vs Ito, B-44, Pinnacle, Sector-43, Ward-46(5), Dlf Phase-05, New Delhi. Gurgaon – 122 009. Pan: Aanpg2866P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate & Shri V. Rajakumar, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68Section 69C

…is settled that reopening should be on the basis of live link or close nexus which should be there before the AO to form a belief regarding escapement of income. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decisions in:- (i) ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC); (ii) ITO vs. Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. (1977) 106 ITR 1 (SC); (iii) CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (20101) 320 ITR 561 (SC); (iv) ITO vs. Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (2011) 338 ITR 51 (Del); (v) PCIT vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. (2016) 384 ITR 147 (Del); (vi) PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 (Del); & (vii) CC…

Brand India Real Estate Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…assistance by way of disclosure. It is for him to decide what inferences of facts can be reasonably drawn and what legal inferences have ultimately to be drawn. iv) In the matter of Income Tax Officer, I Ward Distt. VI, Calcutta V/s. LakhmaniMewal Das, (1976) 103 ITR 437, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under: “Production before the Income-tax Officer of the account books or other evidence from which material evidence could with due diligence amount to disclosure contemplated by law. The duty of the assessee in any case does not extend beyond making a true and full disclosure of primary facts. Once he h…

Mo. Shariph Kureshi, Sikar vs. ITO Ward-4 Sikar, Sikar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 366/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

…" and not "reason to suspect". The word “believe” has to be understood in contradistinction of suspicion or opinion. Belief indicates something concrete or reliable. Kindly refer Gangasharan& Sons Pvt. Ltd. 130 ITR 1 (SC), and ITO v. LakhmaniMewal Das, (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC). 9 Mo. Shariph Kureshi, Sikar. 4.2The belief of the Officer should be as to escapement of income and the belief should not be a product of imagination or speculation. There must be reason to induce the belief. 4.3Further, the belief must be of an honest and reasonable person based upon reasonable grounds. The officer may act on direct or…

Yadav Rice Mills, Muktsar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Bathinda

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

ITA 415/ASR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Ms. Deepali Aggarwal

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…on the issue of reopening of the assessment as discussed below. 7.5 Reliance is placed on the following judicial precedents rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court: 1. Kalyanji Mavji & Co., vs CIT [1976] 102 ITR 287 (SC): 2. ITO vs Lakshmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) & 3. Raymond Woolen Mills vs ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC): 7.6 Also, reliance is placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the following cases: (i) Peass Ltd. Industrial Engineers (P.) [2016] 76 taxmann.com 122 (Gujarat): in this case, it is held that-vs. DCIT "Where in case of assessee, return was processed under sec…

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 500/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…equently to be erroneous, mere change of opinion with regard to that inference would not justify initiation of action for 52 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal reopening assessments: See Income-tax Officer v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC). The words "omission or failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that year" postulate a duty on the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment. What facts are material and necessary for assessment will differ from case to case. In every assessment procee…

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 497/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आंकड़ुठरधारी आइटीएए सं.र@ITA Nos.493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 Mahendra Kumar Goyal चुके Vs. ACIT/DCIT Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Central Circle-03, Jaipur लेखा संख्याल्लेय सं.जीआइआर सं.पान@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G अपीलार्थी@Appellant प्रत्यार्थी@Respondent निर्धारीती की आर से@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की आर से@ R

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 496/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 493/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

Mahesh Chand Garg, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal stands allowed

ITA 3376/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 Mahesh Chand Garg, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), B-209, Lohia Nagar, Cgo Complex, Ghaziabad-201001 Ghaziabad-201001 Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Aarpg8728N) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Neelesh Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…e. He relied upon the following various case laws :- - ITAT, SMC Bench decision in the case of Shri Mahavir Prasad vs. ITO, Rewari in ITA No. 924/Del/2015 (AY 2007-08). - Hon’ble Supreme Court of India decision in the case of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437. - Munni Devi vs. ITO, Rewari ITA No. 3534/Del/2014. - Bir Bahadur Singh reported at 68 SOT page 197 - Harmeet Singh in ITA No. 1939/Del/2016 - Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Indo Arab Air Services (2015) 64 taxmann.com 257 6. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the authorities below. 7. I have hear…

Anusha Finvest Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 985/JPR/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Harsh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

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

…itrary and unsustainable in law. 9. The believe towards escapement in the instant case is only pretense and a mere doubt and suspicion towards probable escapement though worded as ‘reasonable to believe’. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) has underscored that the word of the statute ‘reason to believe’ are not ‘reason to suspect’. The vague feeling or suspicion of the Assessing Officer towards possible escapement would not permit to reopen a completed assessment in defiance of statutory requirement of substantial nature. The notice issued under Section 148(1) is thus ultra vi…

Laurels Properties Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-1(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1179/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 250

…in the matter of Indian Oil Corporation v.ITO (159 ITR 956) (SC), decision of Hon'ble Judicature of Bombay High Court in the matter of Balakrishna H. Wani vs. ITO 321 ITR 519 (Bom), decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of ITO vs. Lakshmi Mewal Das (103 ITR 437)(SC). 12. Even on the merits of the additions are concern, we noticed from the records that assessee company had made purchase and sale of the options with regard to various scrips, which have been made through duly registered broker of SEBI namely Matri Mangal Trading P Limited, vide dematerialised accounts. Moreover, the entire purchase and sal…

Income Tax Officer Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Kapil Arun Agrawal, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 672/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.672/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Income Tax Officer Kapil Arun Agrawal बनाम/ Ward-3(3)(2) B-130 Pushp Industrial Park V/S. Ahmedabad Near Shital Cinema, Gomtipur Rakhial Ahmeabad – 390 021 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Agupa 1914 H (अपीलाथ)/ Appellant) (*+ यथ)/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ravindra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/09/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…and thereby in starting proceedings u/s 147 is open to challenge in a court of law. The entire law as to what would constitute "reason to believe" has been summed up by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Income Tax Officer vs. Lakhmani Mewaldas” (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, making identical observations, the Hon'ble High Court has held that in the absence of sufficient material to form satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that income of the…

Aakash Developers, Thane vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Thane

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1767/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…n the assessment order. The Ld.AR thus submitted that there is a gross violation of principle of natural justice in the present facts of the case. 4.3 He placed reliance on following decision in support of this contention: “i) ITO-vs-Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) [1976] ii) PCIT-vs-Shodiman Investments (P.) Ltd., 422 ITR 337 (Bombay) [2018] iii) PCIT-vs-Meenakshi Overseas (P.) Ltd., 395 ITR 677 (Delhi) [2017]” 4.4 On the contrary, the Ld.DR relied on the orders passed by the authorities below. We have perused the submissions advance by both sides in the light of record placed before us. 5. Perusal of…

Hansaben Girishbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed on this legal ground

ITA 1279/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1279/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Hansaben Girishbhai Shah The Dy.Cit बनाम/ 139, V.R. Shah Smruti Circle-2(1)(1) V/S. Shikshan Mandir Ahmedabad – 380 015 Opp. Yogeshwar Nagar Society Nr. Dharnidhar Derasar Vasna Ahmedabad – 380 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aajpd 7188 H (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 27/03/2024 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-2018. Hansaben Girishbhai Shah Vs. Dy.Cit, Cir-2(1)(1) Asst.Yeaar 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ah vs. Dy.CIT, Cir-2(1)(1) Asst.Yeaar 2017-18 open to challenge in a court of law. The entire law as to what would constitute "reason to believe" has been summed up by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Income Tax Officer vs. Lakhmani Mewaldas” (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, making identical observations, the Hon'ble High Court has held that in the absence of sufficient material to form satisfaction of the Assessing Officer that income of the…

Sri Dhrub Narayan Parihast, Deoghar vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Deoghar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 51/RAN/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi18 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: S/ S/Hri George Mathan & Ratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year : 2009-2010 Sri Dhrub Narayan Parihast, Sri Dhrub Narayan Parihast, Vs. Income Tax Office, Ward- Income Tax Office, Ward S/O. S/O. Shri Shri Deo Deo Narayan Narayan 3(1), Deoghar Parihast, Parihast, Dhanuk Dhanuk Tola, Tola, Jousagarhi, Deoghar. Jousagarhi, Deoghar. Pan/Gir No. .Bmrpp 9353 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv Poddar, Adv Revenue By : Shri Khub Chand Pandya,, Ld Sr Dr Revenue By , Ld Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 18/08/202 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/08/2 2025 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Ord This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Ord Cit(A), Cit(A), Dhanbad Dhanbad Dated 19.9.2019 In Appeal No.Cit(A),Dhanbad/10147/2016 Dhanbad/10147/2016-17 For The Assessment Year For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar, Shri Devesh Poddar, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee. Shri Appeared For The Assessee. Shri Khub Chand Pandya, Ld Sr Dr Ld Sr Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue. Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Khub Chand Pandya,, ld Sr DR

Section 148

…the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Jharkhand in Tax Appeal No.36 of 2020 dated 21.11.2022 in the case of the assessee’s mother has quashed the reopening by referring the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO vs Lakhmani Mewal Das, (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) as also the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Naveen Kumar Jaiswal vs Income Tax Department –W.P.(T) No.675 of 2022 (Ranchi) reported in 2022 SCC Online Jhar 189. It was the submission that as the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has quashed the identical reasons recorded for P a g e 6 | 9 Assessment Year : 2009-2…

Hasmukhbhai Raghubhai Goriya, Old Dhuva vs. Income Tax Officer, Morbi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 195/RJT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.195/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Hasmukh Raghubhai Goriya, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Morbi Village: Old Dhuva, Taluka: J.K. Chamber, National High Way-8A, Wakaner, District: Morbi- Near Ravi Residency Hotel, Lalpar, 363622 Morbi-363642 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Awupg 3221 D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…ns 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 exist “reasons to believe“ and not “reasons to suspect”. The following were the relevant observations: “The fact that the words "definite information" which were…