← All Phrases

“reopening of assessment”

ReassessmentSections 147-151Sections 147-1514,262 judgments

The decision most relied on for reopening of assessment is GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO (259 ITR 19), cited in 1,349 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reopening of assessment

GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO
259 ITR 19 · 2003 · Supreme Court
1,349
citing judgments

When a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons for reopening upon the assessee's request and must dispose of the assessee's objections to the notice by passing a speaking order.

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.
291 ITR 500 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,030
citing judgments

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO
236 ITR 34 · 1999 · Supreme Court
862
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings under Section 148, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material to have a reason to believe income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or evaluation of the sufficiency and correctness of such material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice.

CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.
216 CTR 195 · 2008 · Supreme Court
854
citing judgments

If an assessee company receives share application money from alleged bogus shareholders and provides their details to the Assessing Officer, no addition can be made under Section 68 in the company's hands; the Department must proceed against the shareholders by reopening their individual assessments.

CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.
331 ITR 236 · 2011 · High Court
694
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

CIT v. RRJ Securities Ltd.
380 ITR 612 · 2016 · High Court
689
citing judgments

Completed assessments can be interfered with under Section 153A or 153C only on the basis of incriminating material unearthed during the search, necessitating a direct correlation between the discovered material and the power to assess or reopen concluded assessments.

Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal
444 ITR 1 · 2022 · Supreme Court
524
citing judgments

Notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income-tax Act between April 1, 2021, and May 4, 2022, must be treated as notices issued under the new Section 148A(b) of the amended law. This requires the Assessing Officer to follow the procedure prescribed under the amended reassessment provisions, including issuing an order under Section 148A(d) before a fresh notice under Section 148.

PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.
395 ITR 677 · 2017 · High Court
471
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated solely based on an investigation wing/appraisal report, without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment, are beyond jurisdiction, bad in law, and void ab initio.

Judgments citing reopening of assessment

Vairavan Muthuraman, Chennai vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Karaikudi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2328/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2328/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Vairavan Muthuraman, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of New No. 45, First Main Road, Shenoy Income Tax, Nagar (West), Chennai. Circle, 1, Karaikudi. [Pan:Abapm0217G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Samantha Mullamudi, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 12.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 08.07.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate Submits That Ld. Cit(A) Did Not Give Any Finding On The Legal Issue Of Reopening Of Assessment Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In 2

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Samantha Mullamudi, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 37

outset, the ld. AR Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate submits that ld. CIT(A) did not give any finding on the legal issue of reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in 2 I.T.A. No.2328/Chny/24 short] raised by the assessee. He vehemently argued that there ... part of assessee to disclose material facts nor any fresh material had arisen leading to any income escaping assessment, thereby, the reopening of assessment is unsustainable and untenable in law. Further he submits that the issues of house rent allowance claimed under section 37 of the Act, lorry hire charges

Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ltu-2, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1571/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1570 & 1571/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Indian Overseas Bank, The Principal Commissioner Of 763, Anna Salai, V. Income Tax, Anna Road, Chennai -4, Chennai – 600 002. Chennai -600 034. [Pan: Aaaci-1223-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. C. Naresh, Ca : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh, CA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

incorrect assertion of the Ld.PCIT. This fact is revealed from perusal of the documents filed before us that the AO had reopened the assessment with a reason to believe that the following issues which are escaped income for the A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18 and completed the reassessment: Assessment year ... reassessment orders. The AO issued notice u/s.143(2) of the Act on 10.02.2022 for the A.Y. 2016-17 by providing the reasons for reopening the assessment to verify the following issues: - Amortisation on Investments - Sale of assets to ARC - Foreign currency translation reserve 8.1 It is observed that

Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai vs. DCIT, Ltu-2, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1570/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1570 & 1571/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 Indian Overseas Bank, The Principal Commissioner Of 763, Anna Salai, V. Income Tax, Anna Road, Chennai -4, Chennai – 600 002. Chennai -600 034. [Pan: Aaaci-1223-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. C. Naresh, Ca : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh, CA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

incorrect assertion of the Ld.PCIT. This fact is revealed from perusal of the documents filed before us that the AO had reopened the assessment with a reason to believe that the following issues which are escaped income for the A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18 and completed the reassessment: Assessment year ... reassessment orders. The AO issued notice u/s.143(2) of the Act on 10.02.2022 for the A.Y. 2016-17 by providing the reasons for reopening the assessment to verify the following issues: - Amortisation on Investments - Sale of assets to ARC - Foreign currency translation reserve 8.1 It is observed that