← 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

Tanvi Sandeep Mathur, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-7(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 20/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 151(2)Section 54

upholding the validity of Reopening of the assessment. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in Law and on facts in upholding reopening of assessment when approval under Section 151 of the Act is not obtained in prescribed manner. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred ... same is general in nature. As regards to ground no.2 relating to validity of reopening of the assessment and ground no.3 relating to reopening of assessment wherein the approval under Section 151 of the Act was not obtained in prescribed manner as contemplated by the assessee, the Ld. AR submitted

Bright Securities Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed with no order as to

ITA 465/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2024AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 144BSection 147Section 148

said addition, the appellant is in appeal and has raised 03 grounds which are adjudicated as under- 7. Ground no.1 is relating to reopening of assessment u/s.147 of the Act During the impugned AY, AO received information from the office of Deputy Director of Income Tax, Unit-1(1), Mumbai ... transactions in the return filed, the only option available with the AO on receipt of credible information from the Investigation Directorate was to reopen the assessment as provided in Section 147 of the Act and make the verification. As the appellant had not shown any details of such fictitious transactions

Nitesh Rajhans Singh, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer -26(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4114/MUM/2023[BAMPS4588L]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Laxmi Kant.Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

Subsequently, the Assessing Officer (AO) has received information from Kolkata Investigation Wing and after recording the reasons for reopening of assessment has issued notice u/sec 148 of the Act. In compliance to notice, the assessee has filed the letter to treat the return of income ... income filed in pursuance of the notice under section 148 of the Act. The AO provided the copy of reasons recorded for reopening the assessment as well as the statement/information on the basis of which the reassessment proceedings were initiated to the assessee. During the reassessment proceedings, it was observed

Shankar Sewani, New Market vs. Assessing Officer, Aaykar Bhawan

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 25/IND/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Shankar Sewani, Dcit-1(1), 10 Kala Niketan, Bhopal New Market, Vs. T.T. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adkps6959H Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.07.2024 O R D E R

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 234BSection 3

therefore the said levy be cancelled.” 3. The Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee has challenged the validity of reopening of assessment by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act in pursuant to the search and seizure action in case of Signature Group. Ld. AR has submitted that ... have considered rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The assessee has raised the issue of validity of 3 Shankar Sewani reopening of assessment in Ground No.1 and 2 of the grounds of appeal. This issue is purely legal in nature and goes to the root

Income Tax Officer, Ujjain vs. M.P. Police Sakh Shakari Sanstha Maryadit, Ujjain

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 174/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

dated 15.06.2017 for A.Y. 2015-16 issue with regards to allow ability to sec. 80P(2)(d) to the assessee and therefore, reopening of assessment is valid also the validity of notice u/s 147 was not challenged by the assessee during the re-opened proceeding u/s 147. ITA No.174/Ind/2024 ... dated 15.06.2017 for A.Y. 2015-16 issue with regards to allow ability to sec. 80P(2)(d) to the assessee and therefore, reopening of assessment is valid also the validity of notice u/s 147 was not challenged by the assessee during the re-opened proceeding

Income Tax Officer, Ujjain vs. M.P. Police Sakh Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Ujjain

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 173/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

dated 15.06.2017 for A.Y. 2015-16 issue with regards to allow ability to sec. 80P(2)(d) to the assessee and therefore, reopening of assessment is valid also the validity of notice u/s 147 was not challenged by the assessee during the re-opened proceeding u/s 147. ITA No.174/Ind/2024 ... dated 15.06.2017 for A.Y. 2015-16 issue with regards to allow ability to sec. 80P(2)(d) to the assessee and therefore, reopening of assessment is valid also the validity of notice u/s 147 was not challenged by the assessee during the re-opened proceeding

Samant Jerath, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-16 New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1704/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Dhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153C

principles enunciated by us and which explain how the period of six and ten AYs’ is liable to be computed, the reopening of assessment pertaining to AYs’ 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 would clearly fall beyond the ambit of ten A.Ys’ as provided under Section 153C

Samant Jerath, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1703/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ram Dhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153C

principles enunciated by us and which explain how the period of six and ten AYs’ is liable to be computed, the reopening of assessment pertaining to AYs’ 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 would clearly fall beyond the ambit of ten A.Ys’ as provided under Section 153C

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

ITA 1959/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 148

upholding the order passed u/s 144B, even when no time was given to appellant to furnish replies to the draft assessment order. Reopening of Assessment 2.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the la. CIT(A) erred in upholding the reopening proceedings even ... tangible material or information has been referred by the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessment, therefore, the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment merely on the basis of change of opinion on the same very material, which was available to him during the assessment proceedings

Parin Engineers, Mumbai vs. Ward 27(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1725/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2015-16
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(C)Section 271F

that the reassessment proceedings ITA no. 1725/MUM/2024 Parin Engineers were bad in law as the Assessing Officer did not provide reasons recorded for reopening of assessment proceedings. 2. On the facts, and in circumstances of the case, and in law, learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), NFAC erred

M/S Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- Ltu 2, Mumbai

ITA 1677/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 148

upholding the order passed u/s 144B, even when no time was given to appellant to furnish replies to the draft assessment order. Reopening of Assessment 2.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the la. CIT(A) erred in upholding the reopening proceedings even ... tangible material or information has been referred by the Assessing Officer for reopening of the assessment, therefore, the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment merely on the basis of change of opinion on the same very material, which was available to him during the assessment proceedings

M/S Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of India, Circle-(Ltu)-2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the a In the result, the appeal of the assessee for assessment year ssessee for assessment year

ITA 1676/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mr. C Naresh
Section 144B

given to appellant to furnish replies to the draft assessment order. was given to appellant to furnish replies to the draft assessment order. Reopening of Assessment Reopening of Assessment 2.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the la. 2.1 On the facts ... Officer of the assessment, therefore, the Assessing Officer has reopened the therefore, the Assessing Officer has reopened the therefore, the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment merely on the assessment merely on the basis of change of opinion on the same ion on the same very material, which was available

Income-Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Ankit Umakant Agarwal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 4462/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 69

appearing anywhere in the said statements as well. 8 ITA No.4462 /Mum/2024 Ankit Umakant Agarwal 7.The reasons recorded by learned assessing officer for reopening the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 was based on no material hence clearly unsustainable. There was no valid reason to reopen the completed assessment

Manoj Jain, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-29(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 50/KOL/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargshri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi dated 4.01.2023 for the AY 2010-11. 2. The assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment on legal issue assailing the order of Ld. CIT(A) affirming the said reopening of assessment which is invalidly done and is against the provisions ... assessee in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 4. In the appellate proceedings, the assessee challenged the reopening of assessment, however the same was held to be validly done by the AO. 5. The Ld. A.R vehemently submitted before us that the reopening of assessment

M/S. Steer America Inc., United States vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle -1(2), Bengaluru

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

ITA 833/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri Vasanth Kumar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Anjala Sahu, D.R
Section 144CSection 147Section 148

another. 3. Ground No.1 is general in nature, which does not require any adjudication. 4. Ground Nos.2 to 4 are with regard to reopening of assessment, which were not pressed before us. Accordingly, these grounds are dismissed as not pressed. 5. Ground Nos.5 to 10 are with regard to taxability

M/S. Steer America Inc., United States vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle -1(2), Bengaluru

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

ITA 832/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri Vasanth Kumar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Anjala Sahu, D.R
Section 144CSection 147Section 148

another. 3. Ground No.1 is general in nature, which does not require any adjudication. 4. Ground Nos.2 to 4 are with regard to reopening of assessment, which were not pressed before us. Accordingly, these grounds are dismissed as not pressed. 5. Ground Nos.5 to 10 are with regard to taxability

Antony Leo Sequeira, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, Grounds taken by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2010/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal & Shri Om Kandalkar , Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra & Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 132Section 148Section 250Section 68

assessment on the basis of the information received from the investigation wing and the documents submitted by the Appellant. The reasons for Reopening of assessment are, on the basis of the information received in the office of DDIT (Inv) Unit 6(2), Mumbai from the office of DOIT (Inv), Pune

Shish Pali, Noida vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Noida

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3400/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

No.3399 & 3400/Del/2019 AY: 2009-10 that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act. As alleged by the Assessing Officer, the assessee did not comply with the notices issued under sections ... No.3399 & 3400/Del/2019 AY: 2009-10 5. Before us, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the reopening of assessment has been made on unsubstantiated reasons to belief. Drawing our attention to the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment, he submitted that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment alleging

Shish Pali, Noida vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Noida

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3399/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

No.3399 & 3400/Del/2019 AY: 2009-10 that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act. As alleged by the Assessing Officer, the assessee did not comply with the notices issued under sections ... No.3399 & 3400/Del/2019 AY: 2009-10 5. Before us, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the reopening of assessment has been made on unsubstantiated reasons to belief. Drawing our attention to the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment, he submitted that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment alleging

DCIT Central Circle-II, Noida vs. Apple Commodities Ltd, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2240/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2239 & 2240/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2010-11 बनाम Dcit Apple Commodities Ltd., 701-A, 7Th Floor, Vs. Central Circle-Ii, 2Nd Floor, Arto Complex, Gd-Itl Tower, Plot No.B- Sector-33, Noida, 08, Uttar Pradesh. Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi. Pan No.Aadca0300K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection Nos. 122 & 123/Del/2019 (In Ita Nos. 2239 To 2240/Del/2019) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 बनाम Apple Commodities Ltd., Dcit 701-A, 7Th Floor, Vs. Central Circle-Ii, 2Nd Floor, Arto Complex, Gd-Itl Tower, Plot No.B-08, Netaji Subhash Place, Sector-33, Noida, Pitampura, New Delhi. Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aadca0300K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153C

requirement that the seized documents must belong to the assessee. Moreover, merely receipt of loans and share capital cannot be a ground for reopening of assessment u/s I53C of the Act. Every company will have some share capital and according to the methodology of the assessing officer if during ... language of section 153C of the Act and various judicial pronouncement cited herein above, it is abundantly clear that in order to reopen the assessment of other person u/s 153C of the Act for the assessment year earlier to the year of search, direct correlation must exist between existence