“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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur vs. M/S Jagannathdas Harichandmal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Raigarh

In the result appeal of revenue is partly allowed in terms of our observations herein above

ITA 106/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.106/Rpr/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Jagannathdas Harichandmal Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Sadar Bazar, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan: Aaccj2840G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal, Dated 16.03.2022 Which In Turn Arises From The Order By Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Dated 30.12.2018 For A.Y.2012-13. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: “ 1. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, While Holding Assessment Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of Act As Invalid & Void-Ab-Initio, The Ld. Cit(A) Completely Ignored The Fact That During The Course Of Survey, The Assessee Failed To Discharge Its Burden In Establishing 'The Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transactions As Required U/S 68 Of The Income Tac Act. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Reassessment Proceeding Are Based On Fresh Facts/Information Rather Than Change Of Opinion. 2. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Confirmation Of Concealment Of Income/Disclosure Made In Statement Recorded During Survey U/S 133A Of Act Is An Information, Though Not Conclusive, Which May Be Used In Regular Assessment Or Reassessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

materials towards certain items of income escaped in the hands of the assessees. Even if, the reasons relied on by the AO to reopen the assessments were later found to be unsustainable, still, the reopening of the assessments as such, does not have become vitiated. As far as these cases ... materials available before the AO to make out cases of escapement of income. A reason must be formed by the AO to reopen an assessment on the basis of material or information recognised under law. 8 Even if reassessments are held to be valid, still no additions could be made

Rajkumari Gupta, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Statue Circle

Appeal is allowed

ITA 334/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Jain (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 3Section 48Section 50CSection 50c

Rajkumari Gupta vs. ITO grounds:- “1. That the learned commissioner of income tax has erred in not mentioning any detail comment on reopening of assessment. Profit from sale of property was already shown by us in return of income therefore there was no tax evasion. The reopening of case

M/S. Soham Estate, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1, Thane

ITA 690/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Dr. K. ShivaramFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

notice dated 26/11/2018, issued under Section 148 of the Act, the Appellant filed return of income on 24/12/2018. Thereafter, on receiving reasons recorded reopening of assessment, the Appellant filed objections before the Assessing Officer on 09/12/2019. The Assessing Officer passed the reassessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section ... Appellant, advancing arguments on Additional Ground No. 1.1 above, submitted that the Assessing Officer had failed to dispose of the objections to reopening of assessment filed by the Appellant before passing the reassessment order, dated 25/12/2019, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act, and therefore

ACIT, Circle-8(2), New Delhi vs. Experion Hospitality Pvt Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8775/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 148Section 68

obligation to establish the source of source. 7. Learned AR has pointed out that for the same issue there was reopening of assessment u/s 147 for A.Y. 2012-13 and the assessment has been completed without any addition. It will be beneficial to reproduce relevant part of the said assessment

Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Meerut vs. PCIT, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1148/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 263Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

view of modus operandi adopted and huge difference in credits and other adverse materials and findings. In view of this, the ld. AO reopened the assessment by issuing a notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.3.2019 with due permission from ld. PCIT Meerut. According to the ld. PCIT, during ... said to be erroneous. 11. In the present case, the ld. AO is not doing the original assessment. This is the case of reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act after issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. We have to see the reasons for recording reopening

M/S Citi Plaza, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Jalandhar

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

ITA 356/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

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

Section 147Section 148Section 250

filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against that order. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal and gave direction to the AO to reopen the assessment for the asst. yr. 1998-99 to I.T.A. No. 356/Asr/2017 12 Assessment Year: 2006-07 look into the source of investment afresh ... Bhaghubabu (supra) we conclude that Ld. CIT(A) has no power under the provision of law for giving any direction to AO for reopening of assessment. The appeal before Ld. CIT(A) is confined to the particular I.T.A. No. 356/Asr/2017 21 Assessment Year: 2006-07 assessment year which is before

ACIT Circle-59(1), New Delhi vs. Neeraj Kumar Singhal, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 283/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

relevant finding given by court is as under : 12. It is clear that the escapement of income by itself is not sufficient for reopening the assessment in a case covered by I.T.A. No.283/Del/2021 8 the first proviso to Section 147 of the said Act unless and until there is failure ... assessing officer to draw the proper conclusions from it. If the wrong conclusion was drawn, then it is no ground for reopening an assessment. Because the assessing authority previously held another opinion as to the legal effect of certain primary facts, and the assessing authority later on took a different

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

other words, if the Assessing Officer, for whatever reason, has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, it confers jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. It is, however, to be noted that both the conditions must be fulfilled if the case falls within the ambit of the proviso to section ... address as available with the banking company however, no such steps were taken, therefore, service of notice was not complete and reopening of assessment was invalid. It is consistent view of the Courts that not mere issuance of notice of reopening of assessment but its service on the assessee, that

Anil, Meerut vs. ITO Ward - 1(1), Meerut

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1703/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2009-10

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

purchased. This fact was duly stated in reply filed by the assessee. 5.2. So far question of validity of initiation of proceedings for reopening of assessment is concerned, AO was having some information regarding purchase of immovable property. The assessee had not filed his return of income. Therefore

Jagdish Manilal Desai, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 462/SRT/2023[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Surat05 Sept 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.462/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2007-08) (Virtual Hearing) Jagdish Manilal Desai (Huf), Vs. The Ito, Prop. Hemal Gems, 104, 3Rd Ward – 1(3)(2), Floor, Keshav Jyot Apartment, Surat Lal Bunglow, Athwalines, Surat – 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabhj3074D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 27.03.2015. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: “(I) Reopening of Assessment: (1) The learned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming reopening when the necessary conditions for valid reopening were not satisfied. ITA.462/SRT/2023/AY.2007-08 Jagdish Manilal Desai

DCIT-Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. S D Corporation Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide ITA Nos

ITA 6204/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.6191 To 6194, 6204 & 6033 /Mum/2019 (A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Mahita NairFor Respondent: Dharmesh Shah &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

Corporation Pvt. Ltd. “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified, in holding that reopening of assessment was due to change of opinion, when, the same was on appreciation of facts on records, in the light of information received, leading to formation ... belief, that income had escaped assessment and consequent reopening of assessment in accordance with the provisions u/s 147? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in reversing the action of the AO in reducing the WIP (Inventory) and restoring

DCIT-Circle-3(3) (1), Mumbai vs. S D Corporation Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide ITA Nos

ITA 6194/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.6191 To 6194, 6204 & 6033 /Mum/2019 (A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Mahita NairFor Respondent: Dharmesh Shah &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

DCIT-Circle-3(3) (1), Mumbai vs. S D Corporation Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide ITA Nos

ITA 6193/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.6191 To 6194, 6204 & 6033 /Mum/2019 (A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Mahita NairFor Respondent: Dharmesh Shah &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

DCIT-Circle-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. S D Corporation Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide ITA Nos

ITA 6192/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.6191 To 6194, 6204 & 6033 /Mum/2019 (A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Mahita NairFor Respondent: Dharmesh Shah &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

DCIT-Circle-3(3) (1), Mumbai vs. S D Corporation Private Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide ITA Nos

ITA 6191/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.6191 To 6194, 6204 & 6033 /Mum/2019 (A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Mahita NairFor Respondent: Dharmesh Shah &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

DCIT Circle 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. S D Corporation Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue vide ITA Nos

ITA 6033/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.6191 To 6194, 6204 & 6033 /Mum/2019 (A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2011-12 To 2014-15)

For Appellant: Mahita NairFor Respondent: Dharmesh Shah &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

Shri Hitesh Jawrilal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-21(1)(4), Mumbai

ITA 1450/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Vajani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Laxmi Kanth, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Revenue contended that for reopening the AO should have prima- facie material and having sufficient prima-facie material the AO has rightly reopened the assessment and relied upon the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 8. It is a matter of record that the assessment was reopened ... examine the reasons recorded by the AO for reopening it is apparently clear that the AO has not applied his mind for reopening the assessment rather relied upon the borrowed satisfaction/information received from DGIT (Inv.), Ahmedabad. Even in the reasons recorded it is nowhere recorded by the AO that

Lakshman Tools Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 2136/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

Rs.2,26,77,146/- from two parties, i.e., M/s. Radhika Enterprises and M/s. S.K. Trading. Based on such information, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessments under section 147 of the Act. 4. In course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to prove the genuineness ... additions before learned first appellate authority, however, the additions were confirmed. 5. Before us, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that reopening of assessments under section 147 of the Act is invalid, as, there is no material before the Assessing Officer to form belief that the income has escaped

Lakshman Tools Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 2135/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2009-10 With Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

Hasmukhbhai B. Patel HUF, Mumbai vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

ITA 702/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth a/wFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meshram

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the Id. A.O. erred in reopening the assessment u/s 147 by issue of notice u/s 148 which is merely due to change of opinion and therefore the reopening is bad in law. 2. On the facts and circumstances ... case and in law the Id. A.O. erred in reopening the assessment u/s 147 by issue of notice u/s 148 dated 26.03.2019 which is barred by limitation in view of the first proviso to section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant