Narayanappa v. CIT

63 ITR 219Supreme Court of India1967#503 most cited

What is Narayanappa v. CIT authority for?

The approval required from a higher authority under section 153D of the Income Tax Act is an administrative act, not a quasi-judicial one. Consequently, an opportunity of hearing is not required to be given to the assessee at the stage of obtaining such approval, provided the approving authority is competent.

187

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Narayanappa v. CIT · 63 ITR 219 · section 153D · administrative act · quasi-judicial act · approval from higher authority · opportunity of hearing · JCIT approval · judicial scrutiny · search assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 151Section 250Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153D
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 114(e)section 43(3)section 147(a)section 151(1)section 158bbkelvinatorsection 153bwithin four yearssection 158bcsection 151(2)live linksection 158bg

Judgments citing Narayanappa v. CIT

A.C.I.T, Wardha Circle, Wardha vs. M/S Kapil Solvex Pvt .Ltd, Yavatmal

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

ITA 221/NAG/2017[2009-20010]Status: Trans-OutITAT Pune26 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…ised the AR of the assessee about the reasons recorded U/s 147 of the Act. The assessment cannot be annulled on the ground that reasons for re-opening were not provided to the assessee as held by the Apex Court in the case of S. Naraynappa and Others vs. CIT (63 ITR 219). When the assessee knows the reasons for reopening, non communication of the reasons is not fatal. This Issue was examined at length by Honourable Delhi ITAT in the case of Gurinder Kaur (105 TTJ 198 & 288 ITR (AT) 207). The decision of Honourable Supreme Court in the case of G K N Driveshafts was also discussed elaborately therein. The observati…

Aadhunik Infrastructure Development Private Limited, Jalgaon vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jalgaon

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

ITA 439/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…hich form the basis of re-opening Assessment and its reasons which would evidence the linkage/ nexus to the conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment. This is a settled position as observed by the Supreme Court in S. Narayanappa v/s. CIT 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/s. Lakhmani Merwal Das 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…

M/S. Krishna Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 7(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/KOL/2023[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Aug 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Judicial Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…form the basis of re-opening Assessment and its reasons which would evidence the linkage/nexus to the conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment. This is a settled position as observed 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 Don (19761 19) ITR 437 had laid down that the reasons to believe must have rational connection wuh or relevant bearing on the formation of belief Le there must be a live li…

Padam Kumar Goyal, Tonk vs. ITO Ward-Tonk, Income Tax Department, Tonk

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 581/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Kataria (C.A)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…lal Patel 148 CTR (Guj.). The sufficiency of reasons cannot be looked into by courts and there must be recording of prima facie belief has also been held in cases of Raymond woollen mills 236 ITR 34 (SC), Phool Chand Bjaranglal 203 ITR 456 (SC), KR Sadayappan 63 ITR 219 (SC). In case of Multi Screen Media (P) Ltd. 324 ITR 54 (Bom) the Bombay High Court after considering the decision in case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) has observed as under: "where the AO purports to exercise power under s.147 within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the condition…

Alosha Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 356/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member)

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

…ITA No. 356/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2011-2012) Alosha Marketing Pvt. Ltd. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 356/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Alosha Marketing Pvt. Ltd.,……………..………Appellant 62A, Hazra Road, Kolkata-700019 [PAN:AACCA1930G] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,.…Respondent Circle-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances by: Shri N.S. Saini, A.R., appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Arup Chatterjee, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing : May…

Himalaya Distilleries Ltd., Sikkim vs. ITO, WD-3(1), Gangtok, Sikkim

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 758/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 757 & 758/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Himalaya Distilleries Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 3(1), Majitar Vs Gangtok Rangpo – 737136 [East Sikkim] [Pan : Aacch6217P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somanth Ghosh, A/R Revenue By : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Evenly Dt. 29/05/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) For Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14. 2. As The Issues Raised In Both These Appeals Of The Assessee Are Common, They Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. Perusal Of The Grounds Of Appeal Indicate That Apart From The Grounds Raised On Merit, A Common Legal Ground Has Been Raised Challenging The Validity Of The Re-Assessment Proceedings On Account Of Wrong Assumption Of Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act & That The Re-

For Appellant: Shri Somanth Ghosh, A/RFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 10Section 147Section 148Section 250

…sonable grounds. It is settled that the expression "reason to believe" does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction on the part of the Income-tax Officer. The belief must be held in good faith, It cannot be merely pretence [S. Narayanappa -VS- C.I.T. (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC)]. It is also not in dispute that the Ld. Assessing Officer has failed to prove that the income of the appellant has escaped assessment for the assessment year under dispute. The specious action conceived by the Ld. Assessing Officer to anyhow 9 I.T.A. No. 757 & 758/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Himalaya Distilleries Ltd. justif…

Himalaya Distilleries Ltd., Sikim vs. ITO, WD-3(1), Gangtok, Sikim

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 757/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 757 & 758/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Himalaya Distilleries Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 3(1), Majitar Vs Gangtok Rangpo – 737136 [East Sikkim] [Pan : Aacch6217P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somanth Ghosh, A/R Revenue By : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Evenly Dt. 29/05/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) For Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14. 2. As The Issues Raised In Both These Appeals Of The Assessee Are Common, They Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of This Common Order. 3. Perusal Of The Grounds Of Appeal Indicate That Apart From The Grounds Raised On Merit, A Common Legal Ground Has Been Raised Challenging The Validity Of The Re-Assessment Proceedings On Account Of Wrong Assumption Of Jurisdiction U/S 147 Of The Act & That The Re-

For Appellant: Shri Somanth Ghosh, A/RFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 10Section 147Section 148Section 250

…sonable grounds. It is settled that the expression "reason to believe" does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction on the part of the Income-tax Officer. The belief must be held in good faith, It cannot be merely pretence [S. Narayanappa -VS- C.I.T. (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC)]. It is also not in dispute that the Ld. Assessing Officer has failed to prove that the income of the appellant has escaped assessment for the assessment year under dispute. The specious action conceived by the Ld. Assessing Officer to anyhow 9 I.T.A. No. 757 & 758/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Himalaya Distilleries Ltd. justif…

Om Kothari Foundation, Jaipur, Rajasthan vs. ITO (E), Ward-1, Jaipur, Jaipur Rajasthan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 59/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Anish Maheshwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl.CIT
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 164(2)

…ilal Pute 148 CTR (Guj.). The sufficiency of reasons cannot be looked into by courts and there must be recording o prima facie belief has also been held in cases of Raymond woollen mills 236 ITR 34 (SC), Phool Chand Bjarangla 203 ITR 456 (SC), K. R Sadayappan 63 ITR 219 (SC). In case of Multi Screen Media (P) Ltd. 324 ITR 54 (Bom) the Bombay High Court after considering the decision in case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) has observed as under: "where the AO purports to exercise power under 1.147 within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the condition…

Om Kothari Foundation, Jaipur, Rajasthan vs. ITO, (Exemption) Ward-1, Jaipur, Rajasthan

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 57/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anish Maheshwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl.CIT
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 164(2)

…l Putel 148 CTR (Guj.). The sufficiency of reasons cannot be looked into by courts and there must be recording of prima facie belief has also been held in cases of Raymond woollen mills 236 ITR 34 (SC), Phool Chand Bjaranglal 203 ITR 456 (SC), K. R Sadayappan 63 ITR 219 (SC). In case of Multi Screen Media (P) Ltd. 324 ITR 54 (Bom) the Bombay High Court after considering the decision in case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC) has observed as under: "where the AO purports to exercise power under 1.147 within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the condition…

Ram Dhan Yadav, Chomu Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO 7(3), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 369/JPR/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Soni (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69B

…the belief of the AO was purely subjective and cannot be said to be in good faith. Any assumption of jurisdiction on the basis of subjective satisfaction which is devoid of bona fide intent is held to be unjustified in the case of S Narayanappa vs CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC). • i. The selection of the case was solely based on the information Passed/ received from superior Authority ACIT HQ. ii. The A.o. has not applied independent mind to reach to the satisfaction as required for initiating proceedings u/s 147. iii. The information was originated from third Party which remained unexamined and unverified by the Ao…

Ram Dhan Yadav, Chomu Jaipur vs. ITO, WD 7(3), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 366/JPR/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2024AY 2007-2008

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Soni (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69B

…the belief of the AO was purely subjective and cannot be said to be in good faith. Any assumption of jurisdiction on the basis of subjective satisfaction which is devoid of bona fide intent is held to be unjustified in the case of S Narayanappa vs CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 (SC). • i. The selection of the case was solely based on the information Passed/ received from superior Authority ACIT HQ. ii. The A.o. has not applied independent mind to reach to the satisfaction as required for initiating proceedings u/s 147. iii. The information was originated from third Party which remained unexamined and unverified by the Ao…

Bharat De vs. Hi Dagha, Thanevs.ITO Ward 3(1), Kalyan

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3315/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Kalpesh Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Kumar Meena, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…g officer to act is not a justifiable issue as held by Hon'ble assessing officer to act is not a justifiable issue as held by Hon'ble assessing officer to act is not a justifiable issue as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 Supreme Court in case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 Supreme Court in case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 6.4 Examining a similar issue in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal 6.4 Examining a similar issue in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal 6.4 Examining a similar issue in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and anothe…

Bharat De vs. Hi Dagha, Thanevs.ITO Ward 3(1), Kalyan

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3314/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Kalpesh Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Kumar Meena, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

…g officer to act is not a justifiable issue as held by Hon'ble assessing officer to act is not a justifiable issue as held by Hon'ble assessing officer to act is not a justifiable issue as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 Supreme Court in case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 Supreme Court in case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219 6.4 Examining a similar issue in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal 6.4 Examining a similar issue in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal 6.4 Examining a similar issue in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and anothe…

Vilson Roofing Products Private Limited, Kolhapur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kolhapur

The appeal of the assessee is DISMISSED

ITA 956/PUN/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 956/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Vilson Roofing Products Pvt. Ltd., 1St Lane, Opp. Prataprao Jagdale Hall, Rajarampuri, Kolhapur, Pin – 416 008 . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan: Aaccv0661M

For Appellant: Mr Sharad Vaze [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr M G Jasnani [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 68

…whether the grounds are adequate or not is not a matter for the court to investigate because sufficiency of the ground which induced assessing officer to act is not a justifiable issue as held by Hon‟ble Supreme Court in case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT (1967) 63 ITR 219. ITAT-Pune Page 5 of 14 Vilson Roofing Products Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.956/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2009-10 12.4 Examining a similar issue in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and another v ITO (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC) where Assessing Officer located at Ajamgarh in UP after receiving information of accommodation entry from the ITO Calcutta re-opened the case u…

Standard Tele Towers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

ITA 9761/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 9761/Del/2019, A.Y. 2010-11 M/s. Standard Tele Towers Pvt. Vs. DCIT, Ltd. , C-37, Ground Floor, Circle 24(2), East of Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi PAN : AAJCS9262N Appellant Respondent Appellant by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Kajal Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 20.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 19.07.2023 ORDER Per Anubhav Sharma, JM : The appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against th…

M/S. Pantime Finance Co. P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-13(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 636/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2023AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…form the basis of re-opening Assessment and its reasons which would evidence the linkage/nexus to the conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment. This is a settled position as observed 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…

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

…form the basis of re-opening Assessment and its reasons which would evidence the linkage/nexus to the conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment. This is a settled position as observed 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 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. the…

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

…form the basis of re-opening Assessment and its reasons which would evidence the linkage/nexus to the conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment. This is a settled position as observed 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…

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

…form the basis of re-opening Assessment and its reasons which would evidence the linkage/nexus to the conclusion that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment. This is a settled position as observed 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…

Mukesh Mendiratta, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-41(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7138/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Mukesh Mendiratta, Vs Ito, 188, Avtar Enclave, Ward-41(3), New Delhi-110088. New Delhi. Pan-Aappm0057J Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 44A

…non-speaking order, has no merit and therefore it is dismissed. 5.3.3. The following decisions of Hon'ble Courts clearly mentioned that sufficiency of reasons in initiation of reassessment proceedings is not necessary: - In the case of S. Narayanappa vs. CIT 63 ITR 219 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that "The sufficiency of the grounds which induced the ITO to act is not a justifiable issue. It is of course open for the assessee to contend that the ITO did not hold the belief that there had been such non- disclosure. In other words, the existence of the belief can be challenged by the assessee but not the suffic…