← 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

Kiran Amishkumar Thakrar, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(2)(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee, is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 247/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115bSection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234aSection 27Section 270aSection 272a(1)(d)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN

Kunal Vyas, Indore vs. ITO 4(1), Ind, Main Building, Indore

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 201/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Sijariya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 148Section 68Section 69

violation of mandatory procedure and principles of natural justice. The learned CIT(Appeals), however, dismissed the appeal. The CIT(Appeals) held that the reopening of assessment was based on tangible information regarding cash deposits and property purchase and that due procedure under section issued notice

Khazana Stores Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1506/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No. 1506/Ahd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Khazana Stores Pvt. Ltd. The Ito Gf 2 Commerce House 2 बनाम/ Ward 2(1)(1) Judges Bunglow Road, V/S. Ahmedabad 380 015 Bodakdev, Ahmedabad 380 054 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaack 7880 R (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S.N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ars Revenue By : Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 23/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As 'Cit(A)'] Dated 07/07/2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Assessee, In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia &For Respondent: Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

mentioned reasons recorded for re- opening of the assessment as under: "The assessee's case has selected/pushed through Insight Portal for reopening of assessment u/s.147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for FY 2016-17 relevant to AY 2017- 18 which was flagged by the DGIT(System), New Delhi ... Khazana Stores Pvt.Ltd. vs. ITO Asst. Year 2017-18 5 I have, therefore, reason to believe that this is a fit case for reopening the assessment u/s.147 of the Act and for issue of notice u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act 1961.” 5. 1. Referring to the above reproduced

Arcoy Industries (India) Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 427/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of his income for the year under consideration. He accordingly, reopened the assessment. However, he finally made the impugned addition of Rs.40,02,325/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of bogus loan taken from Dishman Group holding ... commission expense made by the assessee to the said concern. The Ld. AR has submitted that the AO in this case had reopened the assessment without verifying and corelating the said information with the accounts/assessment records of the assessee. That the AO though, in the reasons recorded, had ITA Nos.424

Arcoy Industries (India) Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby

ITA 426/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of his income for the year under consideration. He accordingly, reopened the assessment. However, he finally made the impugned addition of Rs.40,02,325/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of bogus loan taken from Dishman Group holding ... commission expense made by the assessee to the said concern. The Ld. AR has submitted that the AO in this case had reopened the assessment without verifying and corelating the said information with the accounts/assessment records of the assessee. That the AO though, in the reasons recorded, had ITA Nos.424

Arcoy Industries (India) Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 425/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of his income for the year under consideration. He accordingly, reopened the assessment. However, he finally made the impugned addition of Rs.40,02,325/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of bogus loan taken from Dishman Group holding ... commission expense made by the assessee to the said concern. The Ld. AR has submitted that the AO in this case had reopened the assessment without verifying and corelating the said information with the accounts/assessment records of the assessee. That the AO though, in the reasons recorded, had ITA Nos.424

Arcoy Industries (India) Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the captioned four appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 424/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 68

disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment of his income for the year under consideration. He accordingly, reopened the assessment. However, he finally made the impugned addition of Rs.40,02,325/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of bogus loan taken from Dishman Group holding ... commission expense made by the assessee to the said concern. The Ld. AR has submitted that the AO in this case had reopened the assessment without verifying and corelating the said information with the accounts/assessment records of the assessee. That the AO though, in the reasons recorded, had ITA Nos.424

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata vs. Siddheshwari Vyapaar Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2280/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.2280/Kol/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Years :2012-2013) Dcit, Central Circle-1(2), Vs Siddheshwarivyapaar Pvt Ltd Kolkata 2Nd Floor, 159, Ravindra Sarani Kolkata-700007 Pan No. :Aancs 2337 J (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) रधजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Cit-Dr निर्धाररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shrisoumitra Choudhury & Rainak Jain, Advocates सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenueagainst The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Dated 06.05.2025For The Assessment Year2012-2013. 2. The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Barred By 69 Days. Considering The Submissions Of The Ld. Cit-Dr & Looking To The Facts Of The Case, We Condone The Delay Of 69 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Revenue & The Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing. 3. The Only Issue Raised In This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.6,82,00,000/- Made U/S.68 Of The Act On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credits Received From Shell Entities In The Guise Of Share Capital.

For Appellant: ShriSoumitra Choudhury and Rainak Jain, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

aforesaid parties and also the genuineness of the transactions entered into with the said parties. The various courts have consistently held that reopening of assessments cannot be initiated solely for the purpose of making inquiries or verifying transactions without any prima facie evidence of income escapement. In this case ... Delhi High Court observed that if the Assessing Officer (AO) did not apply his mind at the time of recording the reasons for reopening the assessment, a subsequent post-mortem exercise of analyzing the materials will not rectify an inherently defective reopening. The court held that a reopening based

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

hearing, the assessee pressed Ground No. 2 which is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) upholding the assessment wherein the AO made reopening the assessment on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing without any tangible material or applying his own mind that income of the assessee ... believe and can only a case of borrowed satisfaction and non application of mind to the information received. In our opinion, the reopening of assessment is not permissible on the basis of such reasons. We note that the AO has not even mentioned on which account, the assessee’s income

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

Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)]. 2. The only issue raised by the assessee during the course of hearing is against the invalid reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act by the AO which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). 3. After hearing the rival contention and perusing ... notice u/s 148 of the Act as well as assessment framedto be invalid and nullity. Therefore, considering these facts and circumstances the reopening of assessment is void ab initio and invalid in the eyes of law on the ground of non application of independent application of mind to the information

Navasakthi Townships Developers Pvt. Ltd., Cuddalore vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Cuddalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2921/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. K. Ilaiyaraja, Addl. CITFor Respondent: 17.12.2025
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

since it has been issued contrary to law and is against the ‘Rule of Law’; which impugned action of the JAO vitiates the reopening of assessment for AY 2018-19 by issuance of impugned notice dated 31.03.2022 u/s.148 of the Act and is therefore held to be illegal

Manoranjani, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-8(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2920/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. K. Ilaiyaraja, Addl. CITFor Respondent: 17.12.2025
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69A

since it has been issued contrary to law and is against the ‘Rule of Law’; which impugned action of the JAO vitiates the reopening of assessment for AY 2018-19 by issuance of impugned notice dated 31.03.2022 u/s.148 of the Act and is therefore held to be illegal

Sellandi Balasundaram, Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-1, Namakkal

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2899/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. Lakshmi VentatramanFor Respondent: Mr. K.Ilaiyaraja, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

Namakkal, had issued notice u/s.148 of the Act on 29.02.2024 [a copy of which has been placed before us], and pursuant to it, reopened the assessment for AY 2020-21 u/s.147 of the Act and thereafter, the Assessment Unit Income Tax Department passed the re/assessment order on 15.02.2025 making certain ... since it has been issued contrary to law and is against the ‘Rule of Law’; which impugned action of the JAO vitiates the reopening of assessment for AY 2020-21 by issuance of impugned notice dated 29.02.2024 u/s.148 of the Act and is therefore held to be illegal

Komaripalayam Pacs Ltd., Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-2., Namakkal

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2891/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. Lakshmi VentatramanFor Respondent: Mr. K.Ilaiyaraja, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

Namakkal, had issued notice u/s.148 of the Act on 30.03.2023 [a copy of which has been placed before us], and pursuant to it, reopened the assessment for AY 2019-20 u/s.147 of the Act and thereafter, the Assessment Unit Income Tax Department passed the re/assessment order on 16.01.2024 making certain ... since it has been issued contrary to law and is against the ‘Rule of Law’; which impugned action of the JAO vitiates the reopening of assessment for AY 2019-20 by issuance of impugned notice dated 30.03.2023 u/s.148 of the Act and is therefore held to be illegal

Gunasekaran Karpagam, Erode vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Erode

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2849/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.S.Senthil KumarFor Respondent: Mr. K.Ilaiyaraja, Addl.CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151A

issued notice u/s.148 of the Act on 30.03.2022 [a copy of which has been placed before us], and pursuant to it, reopened the assessment for AY 2018-19 u/s.147 of the Act and thereafter, the Assessment Unit Income Tax Department passed the re/assessment order on 09.03.2023 making certain additions ... since it has been issued contrary to law and is against the ‘Rule of Law’; which impugned action of the JAO vitiates the reopening of assessment for AY 2018-19 by issuance of impugned notice dated 30.03.2022 u/s.148 of the Act and is therefore held to be illegal

Albert Sheela, Vellore vs. ITO, Ward-1, Vellore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2831/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. Ilaiyaraja, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 54

since it has been issued contrary to law and is against the ‘Rule of Law’; which impugned action of the JAO vitiates the reopening of assessment for AY 2018-19 by issuance of impugned notice dated 31.03.2022 u/s.148 of the Act and is therefore held to be illegal

Estate of Vandravan P Shah, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comissioner of Income Tax, Circle 19(3), Mumbai

In the result all the three captioned appeals are dismissed

ITA 5401/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

For Respondent: Ms. Shivani Shah
Section 147Section 148Section 35A

opinion and there was no concrete evidence of escapem concrete evidence of escapement of income for reopening of ent of income for reopening of assessment under section 143(3). The contention of the assessment under section 143(3). The contention of the assessment under section 143(3). The contention

Gdr Finance and Leasing P. Ltd, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 802/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S Gdr Finance & Leasing Vs. Assessment Unit, Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 323, Agrawal Plaza, Nfac. Dda Community Centre, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi – 110 088. Pan: Aaacg2363D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate; Shri Rupinder Aggarwal, Shri R.P. Mall, Shri Uma Shankar, Ms Suman Verma & Ms Vidushi Aggarwal, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025 Order Per Vimal Kumar, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250

been made by the AO; whereas the addition made was in respect of an allegation which was not the subject matter of reopening of assessment and as such no addition could have been made. 3. That the learned CIT(A) has further failed to appreciate that the instant proceedings under

Jakson Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, CC-4, Delhi

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

ITA 5014/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Mrs. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Nagar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Bhanu Mandal, SR. DR
Section 115JSection 147Section 15Section 250Section 37(1)Section 69CSection 80G

issuing a notice under section 148. The purpose behind this procedural check is to save the assessee o harassment resulting from the mechanical reopening of assessments Sri krishna (P.) Ltd. v. 110d Taxman 315/221 ITR 538 (SC)V[1996] 9 SCC 534. A table representing the prescription under

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Jakson Limited, Delhi

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

ITA 5010/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Mrs. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Nagar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Bhanu Mandal, SR. DR
Section 115JSection 147Section 15Section 250Section 37(1)Section 69CSection 80G

issuing a notice under section 148. The purpose behind this procedural check is to save the assessee o harassment resulting from the mechanical reopening of assessments Sri krishna (P.) Ltd. v. 110d Taxman 315/221 ITR 538 (SC)V[1996] 9 SCC 534. A table representing the prescription under