Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

329 ITR 110High Court2010#410 most cited

What is Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid if the Assessing Officer records satisfaction based on borrowed satisfaction or information without independently applying their mind and forming their own 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment. The AO must arrive at an independent conclusion, not merely act on a report from an investigation wing without due diligence.

217

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO · Section 147 · Section 148 · reopening assessment · borrowed satisfaction · non-application of mind · reason to believe · escapement of income · material facts · investigation report

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 68Section 142(1)Section 151Section 133(6)Section 144B

Issues it is cited on

live linkborrowed satisfactionsection 148(2)non application of mindmaterial facts necessary for assessmentbeyond four yearstangible materialsection 151(1)bogus ltcgkelvinatorreason to believeescapement of income

Judgments citing Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

G S BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 10(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6581/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] G.S.Buildwell Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito A-12, Swasthya Vihar, Ward-10(1) East Delhi, Delhi-110092. Delhi Pan-Aaccg1781H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri Rajesh Kr. Dhanistha, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08.04.2026

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

…G & G Pharma India Ltd 384 ITR 147 (Del.); - CIT vs Independent Media Pvt Ltd in ITA 108/2015 (Del); - Signature Hotels P. Ltd. Vs. ITO - [201 1] 338 ITR 0051 (Del); - CIT Vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. 325 ITR 285 (Del); - Sarthak Securities Co. P. Ltd. Vs. ITO 329 ITR 110 (Del); - CIT Vs. Supreme Polypropolene (P) Ltd.ITA No.266/2011 (Del); - CIT vs. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd 378 ITR 351 (Del.); - CIT vs. Greenworld Corporation 314 ITR 81 (SC); - M/s Synfonia Tradelinks P Ltd vs ITO (supra) (Del) Recently, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the landmark decision of CNB Finwiz VS DCIT 2025) 174 taxmann.co…

PALAK DESIGNER DIAMOND JEWELLERY,MAHIDHARPURA, SURAT vs. LD. AO, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 955/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 953 to 955/SRT/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17 to 2018-19) Palak Designer Diamond Jewellary Ld. Assessing Officer, Vs. 6/1704-5-6, Gundi Sheri, NFAC, Ratanjiparekh no Khancho, Delhi Mahidhapura, Surat-395003 [PAN : AALFP 3491 R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant represented by : Shri Biren Shah, AR Respondent represented by: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT (DR) & Shri Ajay Uke, Sr DR Date of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.02.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, V…

PALAK DESIGNER DIAMOND JEWELLERY,MAHIDHARPURA, SURAT vs. LD. AO, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 954/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 953 to 955/SRT/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17 to 2018-19) Palak Designer Diamond Jewellary Ld. Assessing Officer, Vs. 6/1704-5-6, Gundi Sheri, NFAC, Ratanjiparekh no Khancho, Delhi Mahidhapura, Surat-395003 [PAN : AALFP 3491 R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant represented by : Shri Biren Shah, AR Respondent represented by: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT (DR) & Shri Ajay Uke, Sr DR Date of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.02.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, V…

PALAK DESIGNER DIAMOND JEWELLERY,MAHIDHARPURA SURAT vs. LD. AO, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2016-17 is dismissed

ITA 953/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 953 to 955/SRT/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17 to 2018-19) Palak Designer Diamond Jewellary Ld. Assessing Officer, Vs. 6/1704-5-6, Gundi Sheri, NFAC, Ratanjiparekh no Khancho, Delhi Mahidhapura, Surat-395003 [PAN : AALFP 3491 R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant represented by : Shri Biren Shah, AR Respondent represented by: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT (DR) & Shri Ajay Uke, Sr DR Date of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.02.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, V…

LABH COMBINES PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2382/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

…ng Officer, has escaped Assessment. This is evidence of a fishing enquiry and not a reasonable belief that Income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment." 9. Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110, wherein it has been held as under: "The law postulates that AO (and not the Addl. Director of IT) to have reason to believe. Blind acceptance of the information furnished by the Addl. Director of IT cannot form reasons leading to the belief by the AO of any escapement of income. Your goodself has to independently apply his mind to the informati…

ROHIT MANCHAND,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 5(3)(2), GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5124/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 50cSection 54

…rials prior to forming reason to believe income has escaped assessment- No independent application of mind to information received from Directorate of Investigation and no prima facie opinion formed-reassessment order invalid. SARTHAK SECURITIES CO. (P) LTD. 329 ITR 110 (DEL.) No independent application of mind by the Assessing officer but acting under information from Inv. Wing-Notice U/s. 147 to be quashed. G.No.3 Approval U/s.151 Mechanical Without application of mind - Borrowed one A. Without application of mind - Approval order U/s.151 at Pg. No.64 of P/B. (64) - It is as under:- "I am satisfied that th…

DONA BUILDERS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5375/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

…. Brokers (P.) Ltd. (suptra) Brokers (P.) Ltd. (suptra) and Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Sarthak Securities Sarthak Securities The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Co. (P) Ltd., V. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del) Co. (P) Ltd., V. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del) where in Hon’ble where in Hon’ble High Court observed as u High Court observed as under: “At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessary to have established facts At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessary to have established facts At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessa…

DONA BUILDERS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5374/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

…ied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asst. CIT V. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (suptra) and Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd., V. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del) where in Hon'ble High Court observed as under: "At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessary to have established facts of escapement of income but what is necessary is that there is relevant material on which a reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. Conclusive proof was not germane at this stage but formation of belief…

DONA BUILDERS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5373/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

…ied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asst. CIT V. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (suptra) and Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd., V. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del) where in Hon'ble High Court observed as under: “At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessary to have established facts of escapement of income but what is necessary is that there is relevant material on which a reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. Conclusive proof was not germane at this stage but formation of belief…

DONA BUILDERS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5372/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

…ied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asst. CIT V. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (suptra) and Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd., V. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del) where in Hon'ble High Court observed as under: “At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessary to have established facts of escapement of income but what is necessary is that there is relevant material on which a reasonable person could have formed requisite belief. Conclusive proof was not germane at this stage but formation of belief…

DONA BUILDERS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5371/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

…. Brokers (P.) Ltd. (suptra) Brokers (P.) Ltd. (suptra) and Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Sarthak Securities Sarthak Securities The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Co. (P) Ltd., V. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del) Co. (P) Ltd., V. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del) where in Hon’ble where in Hon’ble High Court observed as u High Court observed as under: “At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessary to have established facts At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessary to have established facts At the stage of issuing notice, it is not necessa…

MAHAK DOSHI LEGAL HEIR OF LATE ADITYA DOSHI,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2(1),, KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2075/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH,KOLKATA SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.2075/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2011-12) Mahak Doshi, L/H of Aditya Doshi, 2A, 2nd Floor, 88A, Sarat Bose Road, Kolkata - 700026 [PAN: ADBPD4860H]..……..…...……………....Appellant vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata -700026................................. Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Sunil Surana, AR Department represented by : Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 18.12.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 23.12.2025 O R D…

AALEKHA SUPPLY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(3),, KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1286/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH,KOLKATA SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1286/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Aalekha Supply Pvt. Ltd., 74, Bentick Street, Lal Bazar, Kolkata - 700001 [PAN: AACCA7068C] ..……..…...……………....Appellant vs. ITO Ward 4(3), Kolkata, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Esplanade, Chowringhee North, Bow Barracks – 700069 ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Miraj D Shah, AR Department represented by : Monalisa Pal Mukherjee, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 18.12.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 23.12.2025…

ASSAM VALLEY FINANCE AND INVESTMENT PVT LTD,GUWAHATI vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 75/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm Assam Valley Finance & Dcit, Circle 1 Investment Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, Christian Basti, House No.1, Niligiri Path, G.S Road, Guwahati-781005, Vs. Zoo Road, Guwahati-781024 Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabca6974B Assessee By : Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI (Through Virtual Hearing at Kolkata) BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JM Assam Valley Finance and DCIT, Circle 1 Investment Pvt. ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, Christian Basti, House No.1, Niligiri Path, G.S road, Guwahati-781005, Vs. Zoo Road, Guwahati-781024 Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AABCA6974B Assessee by : Shri Miraj D Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, DR Date of hearing: 12.11.2025 Date of pronouncement: 18.12.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order…

SUSHIL MITRUKA,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2178/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…me has escaped assessment is a pre condition for re-opening the assessment and not a borrowed satisfaction from outside source as has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Sarthak Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer-Ward 7(3) [2010] 329 ITR 110 (Delhi, wherein it is held as under:- “3. Further, the alleged information provided by the Addl. DIT has been accepted as gospel truth without any verification by the Assessing Officer. The law postulates the Assessing Officer (and not the Addl. DIT) to have reason to believe. Blind acceptance of ITA Nos. 2178,1630,1630 & 1631/KOL/2025 Sushil Mi…

SUSHIL MITRUKA,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1631/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…me has escaped assessment is a pre condition for re-opening the assessment and not a borrowed satisfaction from outside source as has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Sarthak Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer-Ward 7(3) [2010] 329 ITR 110 (Delhi, wherein it is held as under:- “3. Further, the alleged information provided by the Addl. DIT has been accepted as gospel truth without any verification by the Assessing Officer. The law postulates the Assessing Officer (and not the Addl. DIT) to have reason to believe. Blind acceptance of ITA Nos. 2178,1630,1630 & 1631/KOL/2025 Sushil Mi…

SUSHIL MITRUKA,DARJEELING vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, , SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals\nof the assessee are allowed

ITA 1630/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita Nos.2178, 1630 & 1631/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17)\Nsushil Mitruka\Ng208, City Centre, Office Block,\Np.O. Matigara, Siliguri,\Ndarjeeling, Siliguri-734010,\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Ndcit, Circle 1,\Naaykar Bhawan, Matigara,\Nsiliguri-734004,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Accpa9340F\Nita No. 1613/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Years: 2017-18)\Ndcit, Circle 1,\Naaykar Bhawan, Matigara,\Nsiliguri-734004,\Nwest Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Nsushil Mitruka\Ng208, City Centre, Office Block,\Np.O. Matigara, Siliguri,\Ndarjeeling, Siliguri-734010,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Nassessee By\Nshri Sk Tulsian, Ar\Nrevenue By\Nshri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr\Ndate Of Hearing:\N03.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement:\N18.12.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\Nthese Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & Revenue Against\Nthe Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter\Nreferred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.08.2025, 27.05.2025 For A.Y.\N2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18. Since The Appeals Are Relating\Nto Same Assessee & Involves Commons Issues, Therefore All These\Nappeals Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Brevity.\Npage 2\Nita Nos.2178,1630,1630 & 1631/Kol/2025\Nsushil Mitruka; Ays 2014-15, 15-16, 16-17 & 17-18\Nfirst Of All We Shall Take Ita No. 2178/Kol/2025 A.Y. 214-15 For\Nadjudication.\Nα.Υ. 2014-15\Nita No. 2178/Kol/2025\N2.\Nthe Issue Raised In Ground No.1 Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A)\Nupholding The Reopening Of Assessment, Which Was Based Upon\Nborrowed Satisfaction Without Examining The Records & Without\Napplication Of Mind & Accordingly, The Reopening Of Assessment Bas\Nbad In Law.\N2.

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…as escaped\nassessment is a pre condition for re-opening the assessment and not\na borrowed satisfaction from outside source as has been held by the\nHon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Sarthak Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. vs.\nIncome-tax Officer-Ward 7(3) [2010] 329 ITR 110 (Delhi, wherein it\nis held as under:-\n"3. Further, the alleged information provided by the Addl. DIT has been accepted as\ngospel truth without any verification by the Assessing Officer. The law postulates the\nAssessing Officer (and not the Addl. DIT) to have reason to believe. Blind acceptance of\nPage 4\nITA Nos.2178,1630,1630 & 1631/KOL/202…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI vs. SUSHIL MITRUKA, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1613/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…me has escaped assessment is a pre condition for re-opening the assessment and not a borrowed satisfaction from outside source as has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Sarthak Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer-Ward 7(3) [2010] 329 ITR 110 (Delhi, wherein it is held as under:- “3. Further, the alleged information provided by the Addl. DIT has been accepted as gospel truth without any verification by the Assessing Officer. The law postulates the Assessing Officer (and not the Addl. DIT) to have reason to believe. Blind acceptance of ITA Nos. 2178,1630,1630 & 1631/KOL/2025 Sushil Mi…

SUMANGAL JEWELS P. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC-4(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2357/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2025AY 2009-2010
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…has escaped assessment is a pre condition for re-opening the assessment and not a borrowed satis- faction from outside source as has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Sarthak Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer- Ward 7(3) [2010] 329 ITR 110 (Delhi, wherein it is held as under:- “3. Further, the alleged information provided by the Addl. DIT has been ac- cepted as gospel truth without any verification by the Assessing Officer. The law postulates the Assessing Officer (and not the Addl. DIT) to have reason to believe. Blind acceptance of the information furnished by the Addl. DIT cann…

M/S. R S VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, CIRCLE 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1513/KOL/2025[1513]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S R.S. Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Circle 11(3), 3A, National Library Avenue, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Alipore, Kolkata-700027 Chowringhee Square, Vs. West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcr0739H Assessee By : Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Bonnie Deb Barma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Bonnie Deb Barma, DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM M/s R.S. Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. ITO, Circle 11(3), 3A, national Library Avenue, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Alipore, Kolkata-700027 Chowringhee Square, Vs. West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCR0739H Assessee by : Shri Giridhar Dhelia, AR Revenue by : Shri Bonnie Deb Barma, DR Date of hearing: 29.10.2025 Date of pronouncement: 11.11.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centr…

Showing 1–20 of 217 · Page 1 of 11

...
Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (329 ITR 110) — Cited in 217 Judgments | BharatTax