Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. Income-tax Department

455 ITR 539Reported decision2023#10215 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2026.

Also reported as

2022 SCC OnLine JHAR 189

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 1961Section 69CSection 147Section 148Section 153D

Issues it is cited on

section 132(4a)(i)section 132(5)section 292c(1)(i)section 100section 153(c)(1)section 94abatement of assessmentanonymous donationsection 153(c)section 164third party informationonus of proof

Judgments citing Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. Income-tax Department

SALUJA STEEL AND POWER PVT. LTD.,,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C, C., DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 287/RAN/2025[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jan 2026

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 156

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, र ाँची न्य यपीठ, र ाँची IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.287/RAN/2025 (निि ारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Saluja Steel and Power Pvt. Ltd, Vs. ACIT, Central Circle Mahtodih, Tundi Road, Giridih, Dhanbad Jharkhand-815302 स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : AAICS 6610 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate & Shri Debashish Chatterjee, Adv राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Dat…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE S/ S/HRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment 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. .…

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2938/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…154 (Raj) BanswaraSyntex Ltd. v. ACIT x) 174 ITR 741 (Cal) Equitable Investment Co. (P) Ltd. xi) W.P. NO. 2192/2009 dated 20.8.2011 (Uttarakhand) M/s National Petroleum Construction Co. vs. UOI xii) 319 ITR 282 (Guj) Gujarat Fluorochemicals Ltd. v. DCIT xiii) 455 ITR 539 (Jhar) Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO xiv) 456 ITR 316 (Kar) CIT v. Canara Bank 8.1 Similar view has been expressed in the context of section 153C of the Act in the following judicial pronouncements: i) 439 ITR 154 (Bom) Jainam Investments v. ACIT (115-224 of JPB) ii) 439 ITR 168 (Bom) Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (pages 125-137 of JPB) iii) 45…

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2937/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…154 (Raj) BanswaraSyntex Ltd. v. ACIT x) 174 ITR 741 (Cal) Equitable Investment Co. (P) Ltd. xi) W.P. NO. 2192/2009 dated 20.8.2011 (Uttarakhand) M/s National Petroleum Construction Co. vs. UOI xii) 319 ITR 282 (Guj) Gujarat Fluorochemicals Ltd. v. DCIT xiii) 455 ITR 539 (Jhar) Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO xiv) 456 ITR 316 (Kar) CIT v. Canara Bank 8.1 Similar view has been expressed in the context of section 153C of the Act in the following judicial pronouncements: i) 439 ITR 154 (Bom) Jainam Investments v. ACIT (115-224 of JPB) ii) 439 ITR 168 (Bom) Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (pages 125-137 of JPB) iii) 45…

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2936/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…154 (Raj) BanswaraSyntex Ltd. v. ACIT x) 174 ITR 741 (Cal) Equitable Investment Co. (P) Ltd. xi) W.P. NO. 2192/2009 dated 20.8.2011 (Uttarakhand) M/s National Petroleum Construction Co. vs. UOI xii) 319 ITR 282 (Guj) Gujarat Fluorochemicals Ltd. v. DCIT xiii) 455 ITR 539 (Jhar) Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO xiv) 456 ITR 316 (Kar) CIT v. Canara Bank 8.1 Similar view has been expressed in the context of section 153C of the Act in the following judicial pronouncements: i) 439 ITR 154 (Bom) Jainam Investments v. ACIT (115-224 of JPB) ii) 439 ITR 168 (Bom) Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (pages 125-137 of JPB) iii) 45…

ANIL CHAUDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2935/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…154 (Raj) BanswaraSyntex Ltd. v. ACIT x) 174 ITR 741 (Cal) Equitable Investment Co. (P) Ltd. xi) W.P. NO. 2192/2009 dated 20.8.2011 (Uttarakhand) M/s National Petroleum Construction Co. vs. UOI xii) 319 ITR 282 (Guj) Gujarat Fluorochemicals Ltd. v. DCIT xiii) 455 ITR 539 (Jhar) Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. ITO xiv) 456 ITR 316 (Kar) CIT v. Canara Bank 8.1 Similar view has been expressed in the context of section 153C of the Act in the following judicial pronouncements: i) 439 ITR 154 (Bom) Jainam Investments v. ACIT (115-224 of JPB) ii) 439 ITR 168 (Bom) Ananta Landmark (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (pages 125-137 of JPB) iii) 45…

SAGAR BABANRAO AWATADE,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PANVEL, PANVEL

Appeal is allowed

ITA 79/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraआयकर अपील सं. /Ita No.79/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Goyal &For Respondent: Smt. Neha Deshpande
Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…te are "reason to believe" and not ”reason to suspect”. It is therefore essential that before such action is taken the requirement of law should be satisfied. Further, this court in the case of Naveen Kumar Jaiswal v. Income-tax Department reported in [2023] 455 ITR 539 ([2023] 455 ITR 0539) (Jharkhand) ; 2022 SCC Online Jhar 189 W.P. (T) No. 675 of 2022 (Ranchi), has held at paragraphs 11 and 12 has held as under (page 543 of 455 ITR): "It is well settled principles with regard to reassessment. A reassessment proceeding is to be adjudged on the basis of ’reason to believe" disclosed to the assesses and the sai…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL vs. LATE SHRI SHIV KUMAR GARG (THROUGH SMT. SULOCHNA GARG L/H), DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2159/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…under section 148 of the said Act seeking to reopen an assessment. These reasons cannot be improved upon and/or supplemented much less substituted by affidavit and/or oral submissions.” 25. The Hon'ble Jharkand High Court in the case of Naveen Kumar Jaiswal 455 ITR 539 had the occasion to consider a similar quarrel. The relevant findings read as under: “7. The law is now no more res integra that the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the Assessing Officer. No substitution or deletion is permissible. No additions can be made to those reasons. No Inference can be allowed to be drawn based o…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KARNAL, HARYANA vs. JAI BHAGWAN GARG, HARYANA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2158/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…under section 148 of the said Act seeking to reopen an assessment. These reasons cannot be improved upon and/or supplemented much less substituted by affidavit and/or oral submissions.” 25. The Hon'ble Jharkand High Court in the case of Naveen Kumar Jaiswal 455 ITR 539 had the occasion to consider a similar quarrel. The relevant findings read as under: “7. The law is now no more res integra that the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the Assessing Officer. No substitution or deletion is permissible. No additions can be made to those reasons. No Inference can be allowed to be drawn based o…

RELIABLE REALTECH (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1974/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…under section 148 of the said Act seeking to reopen an assessment. These reasons cannot be improved upon and/or supplemented much less substituted by affidavit and/or oral submissions.” 25. The Hon'ble Jharkand High Court in the case of Naveen Kumar Jaiswal 455 ITR 539 had the occasion to consider a similar quarrel. The relevant findings read as under: “7. The law is now no more res integra that the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the Assessing Officer. No substitution or deletion is permissible. No additions can be made to those reasons. No Inference can be allowed to be drawn based o…

DECENT REALTECH (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KARNAL

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1973/DEL/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153A

…under section 148 of the said Act seeking to reopen an assessment. These reasons cannot be improved upon and/or supplemented much less substituted by affidavit and/or oral submissions.” 25. The Hon'ble Jharkand High Court in the case of Naveen Kumar Jaiswal 455 ITR 539 had the occasion to consider a similar quarrel. The relevant findings read as under: “7. The law is now no more res integra that the reasons are required to be read as they were recorded by the Assessing Officer. No substitution or deletion is permissible. No additions can be made to those reasons. No Inference can be allowed to be drawn based o…