What is Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO authority for?

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are valid even after a scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3), provided the Assessing Officer forms a reason to believe, based on definite, specific, and reliable information, that income escaped assessment due to the assessee's failure to fully and truly disclose material facts.

How many judgments cite Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO?

396 judgments on BharatTax cite Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO (203 ITR 456), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO come up under?

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

Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO (203 ITR 456)

Kailash Chand Yadav, 100, Kalu Baba Ki Dhani, Sheoshinghpur, Akoda, Phulera-303338 vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 82/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar(Adv.)&For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

…e assessment deserves to be quashed. The following case laws are quoted in support: - (i) GANGA SARAN & SONS (P) LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ORS. 130 ITR 1 (SC) Action u/s 148 is not warranted on mere suspicion or rumour. (ii) Phoolchand Bajrang Lal vs. CIT 203 ITR 456 (SC) It is opened to an assessee to establish that there in fact existed no belief of that the belief was not bonafide one or was based on vague irrelevant and not specific information. (iii) JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS. vs. GEORGE WILLIAMSON (ASSAM) LTD. 258 ITR 126 (Gau) Reassessment—Full and true disclosure—Reason to believe—For exe…

Nagpur Power & Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/MUM/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Nagpur Power & Industries Ltd V. Acit – 3(2)(2) 20Th Floor, Nirmal Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacn5438N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Surinder Mehra Department Represented By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade & Shri Chetan Kacha

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Nagpur Power & Industries Ltd v. ACIT – 3(2)(2) 20th Floor, Nirmal Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACN5438N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Surinder Mehra Department Represented by : Dr. Mahesh Akhade & Shri Chetan Kacha Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 11.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the asses…

Shri Murlimanohar Ramkishan Mundhra, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2)(1), Surat

In the result, ground No. 1 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 158/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.158/Srt/2023 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Physical Court) Murlimanohar Ramkishan Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), (Old Ward- Mundhra, 301 To 308, Vs 1(2)(3) Surat, Aayakar Third Floor, Shree Krishna Market, Near Metro Tower, Bhavan, Majura Gate, Ring Road, Surat-395002 Surat-395001 Pan No: Aflpm 6057 P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sudhir Surana, Ca & Shri Om Prakash Soni, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr अपील पंजीकरण/Appeal Instituted On 03.03.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03.05.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 18.07.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Ld. Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 13.01.2023 For Assessment Year 2013-14, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 30.11.2018. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal:- Murllimanohar R Mundhra “1. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts Confirming The Reassessment Proceeding Initiated By The Ld. Ao, Without Properly Appreciating The Submission Of The Appellant.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 57

…aised objection. The objection of assessee was duly disposed of in a speaking order. In the order of disposing, the Assessing Officer 10 Murllimanohar R Mundhra specifically recorded that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal Vs ITO (199) 203 ITR 456 (SC), it was clearly held that Assessing Officer acquired jurisdiction to re-open the assessment under section 147 if on the basis of information coming to his possession subsequently, he has reasoned, which he must record to believe that reason of omission or failure on the part of assessee to make a true and fully disclosed or material fact for…

Eci Engineering & Construction Company Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 968/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…laims, but also of falsity, of shifting stands and misrepresentation of facts before the Revenue Authorities to evade the taxation. Reliance is placed on the following decisions in this regard: > Phoolchand Bajrang Lal and others Vs. Income Tax Officer (1993) 203 ITR 456 SC 7. It is clear from above mentioned AO's report and the Additional CIT's comments thereon, that there is no change of opinion, but it is a fraudulent claim of exemption U/s 10 (38), for which the assessee itself had later admitted the mistake and offered the LTCGs for taxation. So, the raising of such frivolous and inadmissible additional grou…

DCIT, Circle-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Eci Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…laims, but also of falsity, of shifting stands and misrepresentation of facts before the Revenue Authorities to evade the taxation. Reliance is placed on the following decisions in this regard: > Phoolchand Bajrang Lal and others Vs. Income Tax Officer (1993) 203 ITR 456 SC 7. It is clear from above mentioned AO's report and the Additional CIT's comments thereon, that there is no change of opinion, but it is a fraudulent claim of exemption U/s 10 (38), for which the assessee itself had later admitted the mistake and offered the LTCGs for taxation. So, the raising of such frivolous and inadmissible additional grou…

Kings Infra Ventures Ltd, Thevara vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1 (2), Kochi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 25/COCH/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Apr 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainkings Infra Ventures Ltd. Asstt. Commissioner Of A-1, 1St Floor, Atria Apartment Income Tax, Opp. Gurudwara Temple Vs. Circle - 1(2) Perumanur Road Kochi Thevara, Kochi [Pan:Aaccv3411D] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. Advocate Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

…TO v. Purushottam Das Bangur[1997] 224 ITR 362 (SC);Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. ITO [1991] 191 ITR 662 (SC); Brij Mohan Agarwalv. Asst. CIT [2004] 268 ITR 400 (All), or any reliable source for that matter (Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO [1993] 203 ITR 456 (SC);IAC v. VIP Industries Ltd. [1991] 191 ITR 661 (SC)), could be a valid basis/ground for reopening an assessment, what we wonder in law prevents the assessing authority to initiate reassessment proceedings on the basis of a finding by an appellate authority, the domain and scope of whose power in the matter of assessment is plenary. No doubt,…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(8), Surat vs. Sanjaykumar Devkishan Panwar, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 588/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.569/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Sanjaykumar Devkishan Panwar, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(8), 207, 2Nd Floor, 6/2060/61 Vedant Surat. Building Bojabhai Ni Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aovpp8989A (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.588/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2008-09) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(8), Vs. Sanjaykumar Devkishan Panwar, 207, 2Nd Floor, 6/2060/61 Vedant Surat. Building Bojabhai Ni Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aovpp8989A (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Vijayvargia, Ca Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 03/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20/02/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…has mind and recorded the conclusion that the purchases claimed were non-genuine and therefore bogus, (clearly meaning that what was disclosed was false and untruthful). 17. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the statement made by the assessee at the time of original assessment and, therefore, h…

Sanjaykumar Devkishan Panwar, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(8), Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 569/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.569/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Sanjaykumar Devkishan Panwar, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(8), 207, 2Nd Floor, 6/2060/61 Vedant Surat. Building Bojabhai Ni Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aovpp8989A (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.588/Srt/2019 Assessment Year: (2008-09) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(8), Vs. Sanjaykumar Devkishan Panwar, 207, 2Nd Floor, 6/2060/61 Vedant Surat. Building Bojabhai Ni Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat – 395003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aovpp8989A (Revenue)/(Appellant) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Vijayvargia, Ca Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 03/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20/02/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…has mind and recorded the conclusion that the purchases claimed were non-genuine and therefore bogus, (clearly meaning that what was disclosed was false and untruthful). 17. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the statement made by the assessee at the time of original assessment and, therefore, h…

Gyan Chand Sharma, Palwal vs. ITO Ward - 1(3), Faridabad

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

ITA 1586/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Gyan Chand Sharma, Vs Ito, H.No.436, Adarsh Colony, Ward-1(3), Palwal, Haryana. Faridabad. Pan-Bhgps2052E Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Ms. Maimun Alam, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 02.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.02.2023

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…inference. Reliance is placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of RAYMOND WOLLEN MILLS LTD. Vs. ITO 2361TR 34 (SC) and ACIT VS. RAJESH JHAVERI STOCK BROKERS (P) LTD. 291 ITR 500 (SC), PHOOL CHAND BAJRANG LAL AND ANOTHER VS. ITO & ANOTHER 203 ITR 456 (SC) and Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD. v ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND ANOTHER [2008] 302 ITR 275 (MAD.). The Pr.CIT has gone through the entire material on record and has applied her mind before giving approval u/s 151 of the Act. 16. In view of the facts and discussion as above, it is held…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(7), Surat vs. Shri Anil Pukhraj Jain, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 89/SRT/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.89/Srt/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), Anil Pukhraj Jain, Room No.414, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Prop. Of Aakruti Stone, 206-2Nd Floor, Tulsi Building, Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Vs. Somnath Mahadev Ni Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat – 395009. (Appellant) (Respondent)/ "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahapj8569Q ""या"ेप सं Cross Objection No.10/Srt/2021 (A/O Ita No.89/Srt/2017) िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) Anil Pukhraj Jain, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), Room No.414, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Prop. Of Aakruti Stone, 206- 2Nd Floor, Tulsi Building, Vs. Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Somnath Mahadev Ni Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat – 395009. Appellant/Co-Objector (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahapj8569Q िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23/12/2022 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23/ 01/2023

Section 143(3)

…quested for copy of reasons recorded, which was provided to the assessee in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (259 ITR 19).The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of ITA 89/SRT/2017 & CO. 10/SRT/2021/AY.2008-09 Anil Pukhraj Jain acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the statement made by…

Bikash Deb, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 388/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.357 & 388/Ctk/2019 /2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010 10 & 2010-11 Bikash Dev Bikash Dev, Flat No.101, Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-2(1), Haraprity Haraprity Apar Apartment, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Vivekananda Vivekananda Marg, Marg, Old Old Town, Bhubaneswar. Town, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Ahepd 0737 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv K.K.Bal, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01 /01/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 21(5)

…ue as is claimed. An opportunity is given for making a clean breast of the affairs, and one need not be apprehensive unless he has skeleton in his cupboard. I may quote from the decision of the supreme Court reported in phool chand Bajrang Lal vs. ITO [f 993] 203 ITR 456 as following : "one of the purposes of section 147 appears to us to be to ensure that a party cannot get away by willfully making a false or untrue statement at the time of original assessment and when that falsity comes to notice, to turn around and say 'you accepted my lie, now your hands are tied and you can do nothing'. It would be a travesty…

Bikash Deb, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT Circle- 2(1), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 357/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.357 & 388/Ctk/2019 /2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010 10 & 2010-11 Bikash Dev Bikash Dev, Flat No.101, Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-2(1), Haraprity Haraprity Apar Apartment, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Vivekananda Vivekananda Marg, Marg, Old Old Town, Bhubaneswar. Town, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Ahepd 0737 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv K.K.Bal, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01 /01/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 21(5)

…ue as is claimed. An opportunity is given for making a clean breast of the affairs, and one need not be apprehensive unless he has skeleton in his cupboard. I may quote from the decision of the supreme Court reported in phool chand Bajrang Lal vs. ITO [f 993] 203 ITR 456 as following : "one of the purposes of section 147 appears to us to be to ensure that a party cannot get away by willfully making a false or untrue statement at the time of original assessment and when that falsity comes to notice, to turn around and say 'you accepted my lie, now your hands are tied and you can do nothing'. It would be a travesty…

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Dhanpriya Prints Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 52/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…we are of considered opinion that not only there existed new information with the AO from the credible sources, but also that he has applied his mind and recorded the reasons. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the statement made by the assessee at the time of original assessment and, therefore, h…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Betex India Limited, Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 174/SRT/2021[2008-9]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…we are of considered opinion that not only there existed new information with the AO from the credible sources, but also that he has applied his mind and recorded the reasons. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the statement made by the assessee at the time of original assessment and, therefore, h…

Betex India Limited, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 171/SRT/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…we are of considered opinion that not only there existed new information with the AO from the credible sources, but also that he has applied his mind and recorded the reasons. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the statement made by the assessee at the time of original assessment and, therefore, h…

Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer WD.-2(2)(2), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 185/SRT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

…usion that the assessee is engaged in penny stock transaction. (clearly meaning that what was disclosed in the return of income by the assessee was false and untruthful). 20. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12 & 2012-13 Damodar Jajoo & Jashodadevi R. Jajoo acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the sta…

Damodar Jajoo, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, WD.2(2)(1), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 184/SRT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

…usion that the assessee is engaged in penny stock transaction. (clearly meaning that what was disclosed in the return of income by the assessee was false and untruthful). 20. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12 & 2012-13 Damodar Jajoo & Jashodadevi R. Jajoo acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the sta…

Damodar Jajoo, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, WD.2(2)(1), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 183/SRT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.183 To 184/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Damodar Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(1), 429-432, Golden Point, Nr. Bsnl Surat. Office, Falsawadi, Ring Road, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aawpj4341H (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.185/Srt/2021 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(2), 429-432, Golden Point, Ring Surat. Road, Falsawadi, Begampura, Surat-395002, Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqpj7257E (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms Richa Tosniwal, Ca & Shri Harishankar Tosniwal, Ca Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 21/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09/12/2022

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

…usion that the assessee is engaged in penny stock transaction. (clearly meaning that what was disclosed in the return of income by the assessee was false and untruthful). 20. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phul Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO 203 ITR 456, was considering the question of reassessment beyond the period of four years in the case of an assessee firm; and had held that in case of 183 to 185/SRT/2021/AYs.2011-12 & 2012-13 Damodar Jajoo & Jashodadevi R. Jajoo acquiring fresh information specific in nature and reliable, relating to the concluded assessment, which went to falsify the sta…

DCIT.Central Cir.- 3(3), Surat vs. Anjana Exports, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 536/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.516/Srt/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Anjana Exports, Vs. The Dcit, Circle-3(3), 1, Kohinoor Society, Opp. Gk Chambers, Surat. Varachha Road, Surat-395006. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadfa0943R आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.536/Srt/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-3(3), Vs. Anjana Exports, Surat. 1, Kohinoor Society, Opp. Gk Chambers, Varachha Road, Surat-395006. (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadfa0943R Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 12/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14 /11/2022

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.516/SRT/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Anjana Exports, Vs. The DCIT, Circle-3(3), 1, Kohinoor Society, Opp. GK Chambers, Surat. Varachha Road, Surat-395006. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AADFA0943R आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.536/SRT/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) The DCIT, Circle-3(3), Vs. Anjana Exports, Surat. 1, Kohinoor Society, Opp. GK Chambers, Varachha Road, Surat-395006. (Appellant)…

Ajanta Exports, Surat vs. DCIT.Central Cir.- 3(3), Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 516/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.516/Srt/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Anjana Exports, Vs. The Dcit, Circle-3(3), 1, Kohinoor Society, Opp. Gk Chambers, Surat. Varachha Road, Surat-395006. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadfa0943R आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.536/Srt/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) The Dcit, Circle-3(3), Vs. Anjana Exports, Surat. 1, Kohinoor Society, Opp. Gk Chambers, Varachha Road, Surat-395006. (Appellant)/(Revenue) (Respondent)/(Assessee) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadfa0943R Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 12/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14 /11/2022

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.516/SRT/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) Anjana Exports, Vs. The DCIT, Circle-3(3), 1, Kohinoor Society, Opp. GK Chambers, Surat. Varachha Road, Surat-395006. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AADFA0943R आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.536/SRT/2019 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Court Hearing) The DCIT, Circle-3(3), Vs. Anjana Exports, Surat. 1, Kohinoor Society, Opp. GK Chambers, Varachha Road, Surat-395006. (Appellant)…

Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO

What is Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Phool Chand Bajrang Lal v. ITO

Kailash Chand Yadav, 100, Kalu Baba Ki Dhani, Sheoshinghpur, Akoda, Phulera-303338 vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Jaipur

Nagpur Power & Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.-3(2)(2), Mumbai

Shri Murlimanohar Ramkishan Mundhra, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2)(1), Surat

Eci Engineering & Construction Company Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

DCIT, Circle-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Eci Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

Kings Infra Ventures Ltd, Thevara vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1 (2), Kochi

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(8), Surat vs. Sanjaykumar Devkishan Panwar, Surat

Sanjaykumar Devkishan Panwar, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(8), Surat

Gyan Chand Sharma, Palwal vs. ITO Ward - 1(3), Faridabad

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(7), Surat vs. Shri Anil Pukhraj Jain, Surat

Bikash Deb, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

Bikash Deb, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT Circle- 2(1), Bhubaneswar

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Dhanpriya Prints Pvt. Ltd., Surat

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Betex India Limited, Surat

Betex India Limited, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat

Jasodadevi Rajaram Jajoo, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer WD.-2(2)(2), Surat

Damodar Jajoo, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, WD.2(2)(1), Surat

Damodar Jajoo, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, WD.2(2)(1), Surat

DCIT.Central Cir.- 3(3), Surat vs. Anjana Exports, Surat

Ajanta Exports, Surat vs. DCIT.Central Cir.- 3(3), Surat