← 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

Income Tax Officer 3(1), Bhopal, Metro Walk Building vs. Ramesh Kumar Sahu, Legal Heir of Smt. Rampyari Bai, Bhopal

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 509/IND/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiincome Tax Officer 3(1), Ramesh Kumar Sahu बनाम/ Bhopal L/H Of Late Smt. Ram Vs. Pyari Bai, 127 New Market, T.T. Nagar, Bhopal (Pan: Anhps5515N) (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Assessee By S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 253

said judgment order and contended that notice issued to a dead person for the purpose of reopening of assessment of a dead person is null and void and all the consequential proceedings arising there from in the name of deceased assessee are not sustainable. Consequently ... registration." 15. In view of the above and that various High Courts have observed that the notice issued to a dead person for reopening of assessment of a dead person is null and void, this Court holds that the notice and all Page 15 of 17 Ramesh Kumar Sahu

Huseni Stationery & Paper Mart, Godhra vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Godhra

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 1971/Ahd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1972/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139Section 144Section 148Section 271ASection 69A

Stationery & Paper Mart vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 2– 2. Learned CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in upholding reopening of assessment beyond three years for alleged escapement of income below Rs.50lakhs. 3. Learned CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in upholding

Huseni Stationery & Paper Mart, Godhra vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Godhra

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 1971/Ahd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1971/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139Section 144Section 148Section 271ASection 69A

Stationery & Paper Mart vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 2– 2. Learned CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in upholding reopening of assessment beyond three years for alleged escapement of income below Rs.50lakhs. 3. Learned CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in upholding

Sri. Biligiriranganathswamy Multi Purpose Co-Operative Society, Chamarajanagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chamarajanagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 927/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Hon’Ble

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B,”BANGALORE Before Shri Prashant Maharishi, Hon’ble Vice President & Shri Keshav

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 820/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the action of Id.AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arbitrarily. 1.1 That, Id. CIT(A) has erred in holding the transactions found noted in the documents found ... from a third party as pertaining to assessee and thus erred in confirming the reopening of assessment without forming independent reason of belief regarding escapement of income. Appellant prays that the reassessment proceedings so initiated on borrowed satisfaction and completed without disposing off objections raised by assessee is against

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 819/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the action of Id.AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arbitrarily. 1.1 That, Id. CIT(A) has erred in holding the transactions found noted in the documents found ... from a third party as pertaining to assessee and thus erred in confirming the reopening of assessment without forming independent reason of belief regarding escapement of income. Appellant prays that the reassessment proceedings so initiated on borrowed satisfaction and completed without disposing off objections raised by assessee is against

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 818/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the action of Id.AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arbitrarily. 1.1 That, Id. CIT(A) has erred in holding the transactions found noted in the documents found ... from a third party as pertaining to assessee and thus erred in confirming the reopening of assessment without forming independent reason of belief regarding escapement of income. Appellant prays that the reassessment proceedings so initiated on borrowed satisfaction and completed without disposing off objections raised by assessee is against

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commssioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 817/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the action of Id.AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arbitrarily. 1.1 That, Id. CIT(A) has erred in holding the transactions found noted in the documents found ... from a third party as pertaining to assessee and thus erred in confirming the reopening of assessment without forming independent reason of belief regarding escapement of income. Appellant prays that the reassessment proceedings so initiated on borrowed satisfaction and completed without disposing off objections raised by assessee is against

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 816/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the action of Id.AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arbitrarily. 1.1 That, Id. CIT(A) has erred in holding the transactions found noted in the documents found ... from a third party as pertaining to assessee and thus erred in confirming the reopening of assessment without forming independent reason of belief regarding escapement of income. Appellant prays that the reassessment proceedings so initiated on borrowed satisfaction and completed without disposing off objections raised by assessee is against

Sylvan Greens Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Bhala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 801C

That in absence of signature of the person who has recorded the reason on the annexure appended along with approval where reason for reopening the assessment mentioned the reopening of assessment by the Ld. AO is void ab- initio and is unsustainable in law and on facts and liable ... quashed. 2 ITA NO.414.JPR/2025 SYLVAN GREEN PRIVATE LTD VS DCIT,CIRCLE-6 , JAIPUR 2. That the Ld. AO seriously erred in reopening the assessment only on the basis of change of opinion while all the material on the basis of the Ld AO reopen the assessment had already been

ACIT, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Aristro Capital Markets Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 693/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

objections against the proceeding u/s 153C of the Act on multiple grounds. A rebuttal has been issued on merit by the AO justifying reopening of assessment u/s 153C of the Act and against the objections raised. The assessee had filed its replies later on in compliance to notice

ACIT, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Aristro Capital Markets Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 692/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

objections against the proceeding u/s 153C of the Act on multiple grounds. A rebuttal has been issued on merit by the AO justifying reopening of assessment u/s 153C of the Act and against the objections raised. The assessee had filed its replies later on in compliance to notice

ACIT, Circle-34, Kolkata vs. Vinod Kumar Lahoti, Kokata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2460/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

served on the assessee. Therefore, vide letter dated 12.02.2021, the assessee has submitted the details called for and raised his objection for reopening the assessment. The objection raised by the assessee has been rebutted. During the re-assessment proceedings, after examination of the details filed the AO found that ... appellant are discussed and decided as under: 6.1 Ground No.1 to 15: The Appellant in his written submission has primarily objected to reopening of assessment submitting that the reasons to believe for reponing are not valid, reopening has been made merely on the basis of statement of third person recorded

Arvind Bansal, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 44(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5495/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumararvind Bansal, Vs. Ito, 15, Second Floor, Sainik Ward-44(1), Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aarpb8185E

For Appellant: Sr. Pranshu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149ASection 68

notice issued u/s 148 of the Act on 30.06.2022 is barred by limitation. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee on the validity of reopening of assessment are allowed. 7. Since, reopening of assessment has been quashed, the adjudication of the other grounds raised by the assessee becomes academic in nature

Deepak Auto Sales Kunda Pratapgarh, Pratapgarh vs. Income Tax Officer Pratapgarh, Pratapgarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 69/ALLD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad24 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

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

being filed in the name of Satish Chandra Kesarwani as proprietor of the said firm. In this way the very basis of reopening of assessment is totally incorrect since there was no independent application of mind nor any proper satisfaction was recorded and simply by oversight since PAN number

Shri Salasar Balaji Developers Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, relevant grounds mentioned above are also allowed in toto

ITA 1188/JPR/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumarshri Salasar Balaji Developers Private Limited, A-13-14, Shyam Nagar, Benar Road, Nadi Ka Phatak, Jhotwara, Jaipur 302012 Pan No. Aaics 7960C ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, C.A., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 132Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Investigation Wing, Kolkata without applying his own mind to arrive at believe that income of the assessee has escaped assessment. Hence, the reopening of assessment only, at the instance of Investigation Wing, Kolkata and that too on vague reasons, is not valid in the eyes of law as held

Poonam Sen, Lucknow vs. ITO, Range 1(3), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 70/LKW/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Jul 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2008-09 Poonam Sen, Vs. Income Tax Officer, A-1/73, Viram Khand, Gomti Range-1(3), Lucknow Nagar, Lucknow-226010 Pan: Bacps7483J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Samrat Chandra, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Deepak Yadav, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.07.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)- Lucknow Dated 4.08.2020, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ito-1(3), Lucknow, Passed Under Section 147/144 Of The Income Tax Act. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. The Learned Cit(A), Has Erred In Law, In Confirming Order U/S 147/144 Of The 1.T. Act, 1961 In The Present Case As The Notice Issued U/S 148 By The Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bareilly (Here-In After Referred To As The Ito, Bareilly) Was Issued Without Any Jurisdiction & Thus As The Notice So Issued U/S 148 Itself Is Issued Without Jurisdiction The Culmination Of The Same In The Present Order Is Void-Ab- Initio & Bad-In-Law & Thus The Order May Kindly Be Annulled. Ii. On The Fact & In The Peculiar Circumstances Of The Present Case The Reasons So Recorded By The Ito, Bareilly Itself Are Vitiated As The Appellant Had Made A True & Fair Disclosure & That The Investment So Made Cannot Be Disclosed In The Return So Filed & Further As Per The Reasons Recorded The Income Escaping Assessment Is Of Rs.65,73,000/- & Whereas The Addition Towards Purchase Has Been Made Of Rs.16,92,000/- Only & Thus The Addition Is Devoid Of Any Merit & Needs To Be Quashed. Without Prejudice To Grounds Nos. I & Ii Above:

For Appellant: Sh. Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Deepak Yadav, DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW ‘B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

Omprakash Daruka, Raniganj vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Asansol

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 685/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.685/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Omprakash Daruka, Vs Ito, Ward-3(1), Asansol C/O S.N.Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2Nd Floor, Suite No.203, Off Hare Street Kolkata-700001 Pan No. : Acqpd 1122 L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Shankar Naskar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Respondent: Shri Shankar Naskar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 149Section 151

record his satisfaction and where the reasons recorded are vague and mechanical, the same are not valid reasons for reopening of assessment. The Hon'ble Court has held as under:- "Looked at in the light of the decisions placed before us and the law laid down therein, it is necessary

Pramod Lakra Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Kolkata vs. Urvashi Sarees Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 222/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

this Tribunal. 3. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined. At the outset, the Ld. AR contended that the reopening of assessment for AY 2015-16 was barred on account of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India ... cases where income escaping assessment amounts to ₹50 lakhs or more, assessments can be reopened within ten years. The new regime prohibits reopening of assessments that were time-barred under the old regime. The provisions of section 149 of the new regime are as under: 149. (1) No notice under

Urvashi Sarees Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1946/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: ITAT, Kolkata were collected and prepared | | 18.01.2025 | 2nd Appeal was filed |

Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

this Tribunal. 3. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined. At the outset, the Ld. AR contended that the reopening of assessment for AY 2015-16 was barred on account of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India ... cases where income escaping assessment amounts to ₹50 lakhs or more, assessments can be reopened within ten years. The new regime prohibits reopening of assessments that were time-barred under the old regime. The provisions of section 149 of the new regime are as under: 149. (1) No notice under