“reopening of assessment”

Rubeena Shahin Khan, Jabalpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Jabalpur

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalerubeena Shahin Khan Vs. Ito, Ward1(3), 655, Chotu Miyan Ki Annexure Bldg, Talaiya, Khatek Mohlla, Aayakar Bhawan, Lokman Tilak Ward, Napier Town, Jabalpur-482001, Near Russel Chock, Madhyapradesh. Jabalpur-482001, Madhyapradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Awspk5404A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Poonam Chand Jain.Adv.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) /Cit (A) Passed U/Sec144 R.W.S 147 & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

same is based on the AIR/CIB information, without sufficient material on record for initiating the reopening proceedings. 7. That the reopening of assessment has been done without proper application of mind on the facts and circumstances of the case and passing the order u/s 144/147 in arbitrary manner is totally

Nalini Parwani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 249/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Nalini Parwani C/O. G.K Automobiles P. Ltd. Opp. Kabir Nagar, Gate No.2. Ring Road-2, Sondongri, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aeqpp5635N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.)

order of assessment issued by the Ld. AO u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 27/02/2016, and therefore reopening of assessment being a mere change of opinion was not justified. 2. The Ld lower authorities erred in law and in fact by not disposing the objection raised by appellant regarding ... only one condition has remained, viz., that where the AO has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. Therefore, post 1st April, 1989, power to reopen is much wider. However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words "reason to believe

Shri Arun Agrawal, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 214/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Arun Agrawal 85, Pandri Textile Market, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan :Acjpa2323D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.)

precedent for assumption of jurisdiction to commence the reassessment proceedings, he has to cross the hurdles attached with reassessment by way reasons for reopening of assessment, time limit for issue of notice and provision for obtaining sanction of higher authority in certain circumstances. d) The AO had supplied the reasons ... disentitle the AO to forgo the powers vested u/s 147 and 148 and therefore the AO rightly invoked the jurisdiction u/s 147 for reopening the assessment. e) The assessee during assessment proceedings complied but had not challenged the section under which the assessment proceedings were carrying on. f) Reliance

Preeti Singhvi L/H Shri Ajay Singhvi, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

appeal i.e. appellant has challenges the action of the AO in passing the order u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Reopening the assessment u/s 147 is illegal and that too on the basis of audit objection. 6.4.1 Validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s ... proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act. The appellant has contended that the initiation of proceedings was based on audit objection and reopening the assessment u/s 147 is illegal. The appellant has further stated that the reasons recorded for the initiations of the proceedings u/s 147 may not appear

M/S. Biraja Construction, Jajpur vs. ACIT (Central Circle), Cuttack

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.200 To 203/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 To 2016-2017) M/S Biraja Construction, Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Ganapatipur, Kodandapur, Jajpur-755001 Pan No. :Aadfb 6414 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.10.2022, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.:Bhubaneswar-2/10113/2012-13, 2/10380/2013-14, 2/10310/2014-15 & 2/10410/2015-16, For The Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, Respectively 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 27.02.2019. Notice U/S.153A Of The Act Came To Be Issued On 07.02.2020. The Return Came To Be Filed In Response To The Notice U/S.153A Of The Act On 19.03.2020. It Was The Submission That The 2

assessment order did not refer to any document unearthed during course of search, assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153A of the Act for reopening of assessment was without legal basis”. It was the submission that in the case of assessee, as no incriminating documents were unearthed during the course

M/S. Biraja Construction, Jajpur vs. ACIT (Central Circle), Cuttack

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.200 To 203/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 To 2016-2017) M/S Biraja Construction, Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Ganapatipur, Kodandapur, Jajpur-755001 Pan No. :Aadfb 6414 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.10.2022, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.:Bhubaneswar-2/10113/2012-13, 2/10380/2013-14, 2/10310/2014-15 & 2/10410/2015-16, For The Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, Respectively 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 27.02.2019. Notice U/S.153A Of The Act Came To Be Issued On 07.02.2020. The Return Came To Be Filed In Response To The Notice U/S.153A Of The Act On 19.03.2020. It Was The Submission That The 2

assessment order did not refer to any document unearthed during course of search, assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153A of the Act for reopening of assessment was without legal basis”. It was the submission that in the case of assessee, as no incriminating documents were unearthed during the course

M/S. Biraja Construction, Jajpur vs. ACIT (Central Circle), Cuttack

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.200 To 203/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 To 2016-2017) M/S Biraja Construction, Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Ganapatipur, Kodandapur, Jajpur-755001 Pan No. :Aadfb 6414 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.10.2022, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.:Bhubaneswar-2/10113/2012-13, 2/10380/2013-14, 2/10310/2014-15 & 2/10410/2015-16, For The Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, Respectively 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 27.02.2019. Notice U/S.153A Of The Act Came To Be Issued On 07.02.2020. The Return Came To Be Filed In Response To The Notice U/S.153A Of The Act On 19.03.2020. It Was The Submission That The 2

assessment order did not refer to any document unearthed during course of search, assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153A of the Act for reopening of assessment was without legal basis”. It was the submission that in the case of assessee, as no incriminating documents were unearthed during the course

M/S. Biraja Construction, Jajpur vs. ACIT (Central Circle), Cuttack

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.200 To 203/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 To 2016-2017) M/S Biraja Construction, Vs Acit, Central Circle, Cuttack Ganapatipur, Kodandapur, Jajpur-755001 Pan No. :Aadfb 6414 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 31.10.2022, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.:Bhubaneswar-2/10113/2012-13, 2/10380/2013-14, 2/10310/2014-15 & 2/10410/2015-16, For The Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, Respectively 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Facts In All The Cases Are Identical. It Was The Submission That There Was A Search On The Premises Of The Assessee On 27.02.2019. Notice U/S.153A Of The Act Came To Be Issued On 07.02.2020. The Return Came To Be Filed In Response To The Notice U/S.153A Of The Act On 19.03.2020. It Was The Submission That The 2

assessment order did not refer to any document unearthed during course of search, assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153A of the Act for reopening of assessment was without legal basis”. It was the submission that in the case of assessee, as no incriminating documents were unearthed during the course

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-1), Raipur vs. M/S Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd., Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.73/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sunil Sponge Pvt. Ltd. H. No.11, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Aahcs7999A ……""यथ" / Respondent

Court is reproduced as under: 6. We have considered the rival submissions. It is a settled position in law that the power to reopen an assessment within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, even when the assessment has been made cinder Section ... within a period of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. The only condition precedent for exercising the jurisdiction to reopen an assessment, is the Assessing Officer Auld have reasonable belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. This reason to believe that income chargeable

Yogesh Gunvantlal Ronvelia, Valsad vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.516/Srt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Shri Yogesh Gunvantlal Ronvelia Income Tax Officer, 704-B/Riddhi Siddhi Apartment, [International Taxation], Surat, Vs. Halar Road, Valsad-396001 107 Anavil Business Centre, Adajan Hajira Road, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Amvpr 5835 P (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rajesh Upadhyay, Ar िनधा"रती की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing 21/09/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 12/10/2023 आदेश / Order Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad [In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 30.05.2023, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer, Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 20.12.2018. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. Ld. Cit[A], Has Erred In Law & On Facts To Upheld A.O’S Reopening Of Assessee’S Assessment U/S 147 & Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of I.T Act. 2. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts To Uphold Addition Of Rs.9,00,000/- Out Of A.O’S Addition Of Rs.11,00,000/- Made On Account Of Cash Deposit In Assessee’S Bank Account With Central Bank Of India Ignoring The Evidences & Facts That Assessee’S Father Has Withdrawn Cash From The Said Bank Account Prior To Make Deposit.”

before NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the action of Assessing Officer. In respect of legal ground raised by the assessee challenging the reopening of assessment, the ld CIT(A) noted that the assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act on the ground that the assessee is a resident ... only a presumption that he had taxable income. However, ld CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee and held that reopening of assessment is on valid reasons and the reasons recorded do not contain any mistake/error, therefore, ld CIT(A) rejected the legal ground raised by the assessee

Bhavin Arunbhai Patel, Valsad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Vapi

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.456/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) Bhavin Arunbhai Patel, Vs. The Ito, Parvassa Road, Mota Waghchhipa, Ward – 1, Kila Pardi, Valsad – 396001, Vapi Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Arypp2459F (Appellant) (Respondent)

case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in reopening the assessment u/s. 147 after issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act and passing the reassessment order. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case ... No.3 raised by the assessee relates to the fact that learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in reopening the assessment u/s 147 after issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act and passing the reassessment order. The Ld. Counsel argued that reasons recorded