← All Phrases

“reassessment proceedings”

ReassessmentSections 147-151Sections 147-1518,150 judgments

The decision most relied on for reassessment proceedings is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), cited in 1,673 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reassessment proceedings

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

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.

ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das
103 ITR 437 · 1976 · Supreme Court
721
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings, the 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment must be based on some material and not mere suspicion, establishing a live link between the information and the belief. Furthermore, for reassessment beyond four years, there must be a specific finding of the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts.

Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar
268 ITR 332 · 2004 · High Court
695
citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147, by issuing a notice under Section 148, must be judged solely on the reasons originally recorded by the Assessing Officer. These recorded reasons cannot be supplemented, improved upon, or modified at any later stage.

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.

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT
336 ITR 136 · 2011 · High Court
398
citing judgments

In reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148, the Assessing Officer can assess other income not specified in the original notice if the initial ground for reopening assessment is found to be valid. However, if the income for which the assessment was initially reopened is found not to have escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer cannot proceed to assess any other income.

Judgments citing reassessment proceedings

Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2970/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

that this sum has been omitted to be claimed in the return of income has been amply demonstrated by the Assessee. Even in the reassessment proceedings the AO has no answer to the claim of the Assessee in this regard and has merely observed in his order that there

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai

ITA 2943/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

that this sum has been omitted to be claimed in the return of income has been amply demonstrated by the Assessee. Even in the reassessment proceedings the AO has no answer to the claim of the Assessee in this regard and has merely observed in his order that there

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai

ITA 2894/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

that this sum has been omitted to be claimed in the return of income has been amply demonstrated by the Assessee. Even in the reassessment proceedings the AO has no answer to the claim of the Assessee in this regard and has merely observed in his order that there

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai

ITA 2893/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

that this sum has been omitted to be claimed in the return of income has been amply demonstrated by the Assessee. Even in the reassessment proceedings the AO has no answer to the claim of the Assessee in this regard and has merely observed in his order that there

Shri Inamul Haq, Saharanpur vs. ITO, Saharanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3300/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Inamul Haq S/O Sh. Mohd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Yamin, Vill.Megh Chhappar, Ward-2. Ambalaa Road, Saharanpur (U.P) Saharanpur Pan: Aaiph2840K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(4)

contentions, it is crystal clear that the additional grounds of appeal nos. 1 & 2 are regarding exercise of jurisdiction by non-jurisdictional Ld.AO. Undisputedly, reassessment proceedings were initiated by the ITO, Ward-3, Saharanpur whereas the assessment order under Section 147/143(3) dated 17.03.2015 was passed by the ITO, Ward

Dilip Dayabhai Dhoriyani, Morbi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Morbi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 401/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.401/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2017-18) Dilip Dayabhai Dhoriyani, Income Tax Officer, Prop. Of Sairam Enterprise, Ceramic बनाम/ Ward-1, Morbi Plaza Shop No.0808 A National Income Tax Office, Morvi- 363 Vs. Highway, Trajpur, Morbi-363 642 642(Gujarat) "थायीलेखासं जीआइआरसं /. /. Pan/Gir No Asxpd1808J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M:

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

regime was up to 21.06.2022. However, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 12.07.2022, which is clearly time barred, hence reassessment proceedings may be quashed. 10.The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further on second technical issue submitted that the approval taken by the Ld.PCIT ( Principal Commissioner ... Ld.PCIT ( Principal Commissioner of Income Tax), for reopening the assessee`s case, under section 147/148 of the Act is bad in law, hence, reassessment proceeding should be quashed. 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also on third technical issue submitted that amount escaped for assessment, as per assessing officer

Nitu Khadariya, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Ncrb Building

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1360/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 69A

applicable because it is a matter of assumption of valid jurisdiction in the matter or to validly initiate the reassessment proceedings against the assessee. It is not a case of succession to exercise jurisdiction by one ITO to another ITO. Since, reasons have been recorded for reopening of the assessment ... that assumption of jurisdiction by the AO is illegal and bad in law. The AO at Guwahati had not validly assumed jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings against the assessee. This view is further supported by judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hynoup Food & Oil Industries

Gurpreet Singh, Shahjahanpur vs. ITO-1(4), Shahjahanpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/LKW/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow09 Oct 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 147Section 69A

That the learned ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Chandigarh has erred on facts and in law in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in initiating the reassessment proceedings, its continuation and I.T.A. No.391/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 2 culmination vide order u/s 147/143(3) of the I. T. Act dated 04/12/2018 which

Bhawani Developers, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-4(1), Lucknow-New

Appeal is disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid

ITA 253/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 68

intended to establish a substantive basis for the exercise of reassessment powers. Moreover, section 144B of the Act lacks provisions for initiating reassessment proceedings. While the roles for assessment within the NFAC are assigned, it does not explicitly include any procedural provisions to govern the pre- issuance stages

Shree Nakoda Synthetics Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Cir 4-(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 756/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalshree Nakoda Synthetics The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Private Limited, Of Income Tax, 2, New Cloth Market, Circle-4(1)(1), Outside Raipur Gate, Ahmedabad. Sarangpur, Ahmedabad-380002. [Pan :Aagcs5568 J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar Respondent By: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68

operated by Shri Bihani, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had received Rs. 15,04,362/- during the relevant year. 3.1 During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notices seeking details and explanations regarding various credits in the assessee’s bank account, with specific reference to cheques received

Nitaben Girishbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, while upholding the validity of reopening, we set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) on merits and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication in accordance with law

ITA 1560/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Nitaben Girishbhai Patel The Ito, Ward-3(3)(2) 33/B, Swi Park, Private Plot Vejalpur Madhuvrund Society Ahmedabad. Ghatlodiya, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aappp 5738 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Assessee By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 271ASection 69A

response, the assessee e- filed her return on 07/02/2022 declaring the same income of Rs.69,60,580/- 2.2 During the course of reassessment proceedings, it was noticed by the Ld. AO that during Financial Year 2016-17, the assessee had purchased and sold 21,185 shares of M/s Kushal ... addition of Rs.13,78,078/- u/s 69A towards unexplained investment. Thus, the addition ultimately made has no nexus with the reasons recorded, rendering the reassessment proceedings bad in law. Reliance was placed on various judicial pronouncements including the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court

Kanigere Ramegowda Ningaraju, Hassan vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Hassan

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

ITA 1046/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri V Shivarama Iyer, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 263Section 269SSection 45

issued and In response, the assessee Page 2 of 6 filed return of income declaring a sum of ₹95,200.00 only. In the reassessment proceedings, the assessee explained the source of cash deposits of ₹59,00,000 in the bank account by stating that

Urmish M. Udani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1962/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal/Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

read with section 147 of the Act is bad in law. The learned AR by referring to the assessment order submitted that, during the reassessment proceedings, the AO issued two notices under section 143(2) of the Act, however, none of them is a valid notice ... rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In the present case, consequent to the survey action under section 133A of the Act, reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 24/11/2010. It is undisputed that

Urmish M. Udani, Mumbai vs. Aci 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6144/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal/Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R
Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

09/06/2017, pertaining to AY 2009-10. 2. The grievance of the assessee can be summarized as under:- "1. Rejection of additional evidence application. 2. Reassessment proceedings without jurisdiction. 3. Addition on basis of wrong balance sheet. 4. Denial of Telescoping. 5. Taxation of Directors remuneration. 6. Capital gain on sale ... High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs K.M. Pachayappan (2008) 304 ITR 264, quashed the reassessment proceedings. In the facts before the Hon'ble High Court, the Assessee filed a return of income under section 139(4) of the Act on March

DCIT, Bhilai vs. Jilla Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Rajnandgaon

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 1/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Dhody, CAFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37

case of assessee thereafter was reopened as certain observations had emerged on verification of the records of assessee. The reassessment proceedings were completed with further additions to the income assessed u/s 143(3) with regard to (i) Addition for double claim of deduction for Provision for Bad Debts amounting

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur vs. Shivani Cotton Industries Private Limited, Guntur

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 460/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

petition filed by the assessee, under Rule 27 of IT Rules, 1963 submitted that, the assessee has taken a legal ground challenging the reassessment proceedings including the issue of notice under section 148 of the Act before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) has not decided

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Vizag Re-Bars Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 428/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.428/Viz/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dy. Cit – Circle – 3(1) Vs. M/S. Vizag Re-Bars Private Limited 35, 50-92-35, Sankara Matam Road Plot No. 1 Ida, Edulapaka Bonangi, Opposite Reliance Fresh Parawada Mandal – 531021 Beside Reliance Fresh, Near By Main Road Andhra Pradesh Madhuranagar, Dwaraka Nagar Visakhapatnam – 530016 [Pan:Aabcv2581M] Andhra Pradesh (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

without obtaining the approval of the specified authority under section 151(ii) of the Act and we find substance in the same. Admittedly, the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act has been amended by the Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021. The substituted Sections 147 to 159 and Section ... Income Tax Act (IT Act) by the Finance Act, 2021, radical and reformative changes are made governing the procedure for reassessment proceedings. Amended sections 147 to 149 and section 151 of the IT Act prescribe the procedure governing initiation of reassessment proceedings. However, for several reasons, the same gave rise

Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(1), Guntur vs. Potti Kumara Naga Venkata Sai Chakravarthy, Guntur

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 368/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

petition filed by the assessee, under Rule 27 of IT Rules, 1963 submitted that, the assessee has taken a legal ground challenging the reassessment proceedings including the issue of notice under section 148 of the Act before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) has not decided

Income Tax Officer, Guntur vs. Madhusushana Venkata Subba Rao Potti, Guntur

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 367/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

petition filed by the assessee, under Rule 27 of IT Rules, 1963 submitted that, the assessee has taken a legal ground challenging the reassessment proceedings including the issue of notice under section 148 of the Act before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) has not decided

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur vs. Ms.Vijayasai Lakshmi Srinivasa Cotton Mills, Guntur

In the result, appeals ITA

ITA 359/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

petition filed by the assessee, under Rule 27 of IT Rules, 1963 submitted that, the assessee has taken a legal ground challenging the reassessment proceedings including the issue of notice under section 148 of the Act before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) has not decided