← 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

Narayanan Varalakshmi, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(5), Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2382/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. Krishna Murthy AT, J.C.I.TFor Respondent: 23.10.2025
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

Ramasamy Kandasamy, Karur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2023/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2023/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. Ramasamy Kandasamy, The Ito, No.4/76, Sf No.927, Sukkaliyur, Ward-1, Karur-639 003. Karur. [Pan: Ajgpk 4945 H]

For Appellant: Mr.H. Yeshwanth KumarFor Respondent: Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151

formation of belief that income has escaped assessment. Sufficiency of such information cannot be gone into while deciding the issue of validity or reopening. The Assessing Officer can also not make enquiries as no proceedings were pending before him for the relevant assessment year. In the above view ... matter, we are in agreement with the finding of the Ld. CIT (A) that the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act was valid." From the above discussion the appellant has failed to demonstrate any irregularity or procedural laps on the part of the AO. Therefore, a contention

Sharad Panwar, Shahdara, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Vikas Bhawan, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

ITA 3927/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.3927/ िद"ी /2025 (िन.व. 2012-13) Sharad Panwar, B-527, Mig Dda Flats, East Of Loni Road, Shahdara, Delhi 110093 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Bcrpp-9210-P बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-58(3), R. No. 317, D-Block, Vikas Bhawan, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 Assessee By : None Department By: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 28.06.2024, For Assessment Year 2012-13 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 288 Days. The Assessee Has Filed An Application Supported By An Affidavit Citing Reasons Causing Delay In Filing Of Appeal. After Perusal Of The Same, We Are Satisfied That Delay In Filing Of Appeal Is Not Intentional, The Delay Has Been Caused For The Reasons Stated In Petition Which Appears To Be Bonafide. Thus

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 2(41)Section 56(2)(vi)Section 69A

account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee with HDFC Bank Ltd. In First Appellate proceedings, the assessee assailed reopening of assessment as well as addition on merits. The CIT(A) vide impugned order granted part relief to the assessee on merits and restricted the addition

Jd Jewellers, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-58(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2908/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumarjd Jewellers, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O. Cs Anand, Adv, Ward-58(3), N-81, First Floor (Part- Delhi B), Defence Colony, Bhishma Pitamah Marg, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaffj2188K

For Appellant: Shri C. S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT ) . 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The issue involved is reopening of assessment for the Assessment Year 2017-18. For this purpose, the Learned AO obtained approval under section 151 of the Act from the Learned PCIT

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 153/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

section 151 of the Act is to introduce a supervisory check over the work of the AO, particularly, in the context of reopening of assessment. The law expects the AO to exercise the power under section 147 of the Act to reopen an assessment only after due application of mind

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 152/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

section 151 of the Act is to introduce a supervisory check over the work of the AO, particularly, in the context of reopening of assessment. The law expects the AO to exercise the power under section 147 of the Act to reopen an assessment only after due application of mind

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 151/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

section 151 of the Act is to introduce a supervisory check over the work of the AO, particularly, in the context of reopening of assessment. The law expects the AO to exercise the power under section 147 of the Act to reopen an assessment only after due application of mind

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 150/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

section 151 of the Act is to introduce a supervisory check over the work of the AO, particularly, in the context of reopening of assessment. The law expects the AO to exercise the power under section 147 of the Act to reopen an assessment only after due application of mind

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 149/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

section 151 of the Act is to introduce a supervisory check over the work of the AO, particularly, in the context of reopening of assessment. The law expects the AO to exercise the power under section 147 of the Act to reopen an assessment only after due application of mind

Dileep K Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, CC-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 148/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153D

section 151 of the Act is to introduce a supervisory check over the work of the AO, particularly, in the context of reopening of assessment. The law expects the AO to exercise the power under section 147 of the Act to reopen an assessment only after due application of mind

Rajendrasinh Ranjitsinh Jadeja, Khakhadabela, Paddhari vs. ITO WD 2(1)(4), RKT, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed, to the extent indicated above

ITA 459/RJT/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.459/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Rajendrasinh Ranjitsinh Jadeja Vs. Ito Ward 2 (1) (4), Khakhadabela, Paddhari, Aayakar Bhawan, Race Course Rajkot - 360110 Ring Road, Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agvpj2529E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Gaurang Khakhar, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am ; Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Dated 26/07/2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Dated 25/11/2009 U/S 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. That The Reasons Recorded U/S 147 Of The I.T. Act, 1961 By The Ld. A.O. Were Merely Based On The Suspicion & Without Any Tangible Material So As To Suggest Any Escapement Of Income. Hence The Reassessment Proceedings Are Liable To Be Quashed Rajendrasinh Ranjitsinh Jadeja

For Appellant: Shri Gaurang Khakhar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

suggest any escapement of income. Hence the reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed Rajendrasinh Ranjitsinh Jadeja, 2. The ld. AO erred in reopening the assessment itself by issue of Notice u/s 148 of IT Act, since only material available before the Id.AO was the information of assessee having Cash ... submission and the various decisions of the Courts including those relied upon by the assessee. Since, the assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment and also challenged the reasons for reopening of the assessment, therefore, it is appropriate to go through the reasons recorded by the assessing officer, which

Sheetal Bathla, Kota vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2) Kota, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 215/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Shsrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy expression "reason to believe" exposing Assessee for reopening of assessment. Notice for reopening of assessment was not in consonance and in conformity with under Section 147 and made specified notice vulnerable. High Court pointed

Vijit Singh, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 3(2) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1246/JPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Nov 2025AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT
Section 147Section 234ASection 250

fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy expression "reason to believe" exposing Assessee for reopening of assessment. Notice for reopening of assessment was not in consonance and in conformity with under Section 147 and made specified notice vulnerable. High Court pointed

Navdeep Medical Store, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 6(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1322/AHD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gaurang Khakhhar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

business turnover, the stock position, and the regularity of cash deposits, it is clear that the same represents routine business receipts. The reopening of assessment was based on incorrect information that the assessee had deposited Rs.1.87 crores, whereas the actual deposits were only Rs.29.78 lakhs. No independent tangible material

Vedanta Ltd (Earlier Known As Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd.), Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 26(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2406/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ravi Sharma & Jaskaran SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment in the return of income. Thus, reopening of assessment beyond four years is invalid. He further submitted that in the reasons, there is no reference to any fresh material which has came into possession ... Assessing Officer that led to reopening of assessment. The solitary reason for reopening of assessment is that the assessee has not claimed additional depreciation for plant and machinery. The ld. Counsel asserted that even on merits, the assessee has a strong case as the assessee claimed depreciation on plant

Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department, Visakhapatnam vs. Quality Steel Shoppe Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the Cross Objection No

ITA 454/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.454/Viz/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Quality Steel Shoppe Ward-2(1), Private Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaacq1115D (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 18/Viz/2024 (In आ.अपी.सं /454/Viz/2024) ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Badicala Yadagiri
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

achieve the ultimate object of simplifying the tax administration, ease compliance and reduce litigation. 6.3 But prior to pre-Finance Act, 2021, while reopening an assessment, the procedure of giving the reasons for reopening and an opportunity to the assessee and the decision of the objectives were required ... with effect from 01.04.2023. In taxing statutes, intendment cannot be assumed unless specifically expressed in the provision enacted by the legislature. Therefore, the reopening of assessment without sanction/approval of the specified authority in accordance with Section 151 of the Act was bad in law. Consequently, reassessment order dated 16.01.2024 also

Neetu Hurkat, Pali vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 957/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Javed Khan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 263

carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The reasons recorded on 31.01.2022 by the Assessing Officer for the reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act are as under:- "2. Brief details of Information collected/ received by the AO: In this case, information was reflected ... Society v. CIT (1979) 119 ITR 996 (SC) held that an audit objection constitutes mere opinion and cannot form the basis either for reopening an assessment or for revision under section 263. The same view has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. Reliance Communication

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Nellore vs. Venkata Ramanamma Sakamuri, Nellore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue being devoid and bereft of any substance is dismissed

ITA 482/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

have gone through the assessment order and record available. Brief facts of the case are that the case pertains to the reopening of assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2018-19, triggered by substantial cash deposits, withdrawals, and liquor purchases by the assessee ... appeal, citing health and mental distress. 4.4 I have gone through the assessment order and record available. In the instant case, there is reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on flagged transactions indicating substantial cash deposits, cash withdrawals, and liquor purchases during

Naganna L/R for Late Rangegowda, Hassan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hassan

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

ITA 267/BANG/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

biased/non-judicious way is bad in law and is to be quashed. 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) has also erred in confirming the reopening of assessment by Id. AO. The conditions precedent for issue of notice u/s 148 of the IT. Act, 1961 having not been satisfied, the reopening of assessment ... hence the Id. CIT(A) should have instead of confirming the assessment order, quashed the reopening of assessment. 3.2 In any case, the passing of the order without complying with the legal and statutory requirements of reassessment proceeding also makes the order bad in law and such order is liable

Omnitel Technologies Private Limited, Gurugram Haryana vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -3(1), Gurugram, Gurugram Haryana

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

ITA 326/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Omnitel Technologies Private Vs. Dcit, Circle-3(1), Ltd., B-220, Florence Marvel, Gurugram Sushant Lok-Iii, Sector 57, Haryana Gurugram (Haryana) Pin: 122 002 Pan :Aafca2421B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

preferred present appeal with following grounds: 3 “1. Because the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has wrongly, against the Law confirmed the Reopening of Assessment u/s 148 ignoring the fact that the case was completed u/s 143(3) and there was no material information suppressed or omitted on part ... goods. The audit balance sheet, at page 14 of paper books, mentioned late delivery charges. Mere change of opinion was no ground for reopening the assessment. 4 5.1 Reliance was placed on judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of “Jamna Auto Industries