“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

Ajay Garg, Dehradun vs. ACIT Central Circle Dehradun, Dehradun

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 200/DDN/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 250

Bench has held that non-supply of the information alongwith notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act would be a fatal error and consequent reassessment proceedings are invalid. He therefore, prayed that the consequent notice issued u/s 148 of the Act deserves to be hold ... furnished to an assessee along with the reasons to believe. The statutory scheme encapsulated in the Act provides that reassessment proceedings cannot be triggered till the Assessing Officer has reasons to believe that income, which is otherwise chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment and the reasons recorded

Shri Vibhu Grover, Kotdwara vs. PCIT, Dehradun

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 110/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalvibhu Grover, Pcit, M/S Grover Sales Corporation, Dehradun. Garage Road, Kotdwara, Vs. Pauri-246169 Pan:Agdpg5842R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anil Jain, Adv. Department By Shri S.K. Chaterjee, Cit-Dr

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

shape of bogus purchases from proprietorship firms of Sh. Manoj Kumar, Dayanand Parasar and Sh. Pawan Mishra. Thereafter, the during the course of reassessment proceeding, it is found that assessee has not entered into any transactions with these three persons and accordingly, the income declared by the assessee was accepted ... notice u/s 148, the AO has recorded reason for reopening which are available at PB 21 to 22. The assessee during the course of reassessment proceedings before the AO clearly established that no transaction whatsoever was made of Rs. 6.00 lacs. With these three persons and in support, copy

Neeraj Kumar Sethi, Delhi vs. ITO, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)

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

ITA 9/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia, C.A

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Bogus SALES Supported by Sales made to Riddhi Siddhi invoice and Ledger A/c Same PAN number Ashok Gupta 1,00,78,110.00 8. During reassessment proceedings, queries were raised and written submissions were filed , books produced, stock registers examined depicting inflow and outflow of goods traded , copies of purchase ... along with copies of ledger as appearing in books of assessee, copies of SCN dated 27/03/2022, and submitted that in the instant case the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of information of alleged bogus purchase and sales , passed on by the DDIT(Inv), arising from a recorded statement

Nasa Agro Industries Private Limited, Fazilka vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-II, Bathinda

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 236/ASR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Y. K. Sud & Sh. P. K. Anand, CAs

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153cSection 250

grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in Form No. 36 are as follows: “1. That learned CIT(A) has arbitrarily upheld initiation of reassessment proceedings on the facts & circumstances of the case only on basis of report of DDIT (Inv.) Karnal mechanically without making any independent enquiry. 2. That ... delivery of goods, and the amount of Rs.51.57 lakhs , represents bogus purchase of the assessee, debited in profit and loss account to reduce profits. Reassessment proceedings commenced vide issue of notice u/s 148 dated 22nd 5. March, 2018 as per procedure (after necessary approval from higher authorities). Return filed

Anil Kumar Meena, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 834/JPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kanodia, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 250

order of AO and CIT (Appeal). However, after coming back to India on 02.07.2016 when the assessee came to know about the reassessment proceedings under going in his case, the assessee on 08.08.2016 submitted a letter to theld. AO through registered post, a copy of which along with receipt ... appeals. As held in Y. Narayan Chetty v. ITO (35 ITR 388 SC), valid service of notice is jurisdictional; absence thereof vitiates reassessment. Thus, reassessment proceedings are void ab initio land deserve annulment. Therefore it is evident that notice could not be served and entire proceedings becomes null and void

Siyaram City Cabs Ltd., Jaipur vs. Itd Ward 6(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 572/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 68

illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action ... illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Kanpur vs. Shri.Mohammad Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 144/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

Mohd. Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur vs. Deputi Commissioner of Income Tax CC-2, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 139/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Ambalia Hitesh Chhaganlal HUF, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1429/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr DR

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 68

basis of information received from the Investigation Wing pursuant to a search and seizure operation conducted on the Kushal Group on 05.02.2019. During reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer treated the LTCG of Rs. 2,92,64,512/- as bogus and added the same as unexplained cash credit under section ... Revenue is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. At the outset, a legal ground challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings was raised orally on the ground that the sanction obtained under section 151 of the Act prior to issuance of notice under section

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Ambalia Hitesh Chhaganlal HUF, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1428/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr DR

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 68

Dattaprasad Radhakisan Revgade, Hivargaon vs. ITO Ward 2, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 1897/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra, Judicialmember & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1897/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dattaprasad Radhakisan V The Income Tax Officer, Revgade, S Ward-2, Ahmednagar. At Hivargaon Post Dongargaon, Tal Aklole, Ahmednagar – 422609. Pan: Cddpr8213C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Piyush Bafna – Ar Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal(Nfac) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19 Dated 23.06.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 250Section 250(6)

Jurisdictional Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Hexaware Technologies Ltd. 464 ITR 430 (Bombay) as mandatory jurisdictional condition and therefore, the impugned reassessment proceedings and the consequential reassessment order may please be quashed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... unmodified template without application of mind renders the notice vague. nonspeaking, and invalid in law, as held in various judicial precedents and consequently, the reassessment proceedings initiated pursuant to such defective notice are liable to be quashed. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Mrs Neha Vitthal Dimble, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Pune

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

ITA 1223/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Abhay A AvchatFor Respondent: Shri Vidya Ratan Kishore

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69ASection 69C

return of income for AY 205-16. Further, the assessee filed only partial response to various notices issued by the Ld. AO during the reassessment proceedings which constrained the Ld. AO to complete the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s.144B of the Act on 19.02.2024 at an assessed income of Rs.83

Nashit Suhail Anshari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 30(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4416/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing)

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 254(1)

case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer of initiating the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act merely on the basis of suspicion without being in possession of any information which suggest escapement of income from assessment

Arham Star, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(2)(2), Piramal Chamber

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2427/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 Arham Star Income-Tax Officer, Cw-2090, Bharat Diamond Ward - 19(2)(2), Bourse, Bandra Kurla Mumbai Vs. Complex, Mumbai - 400051 (Pan: Aaafs5695M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Rahul Sarda, Advocate Revenue : Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1075308198(1), Dated 30/03/2025 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income-Tax Officer, 19(1)(1), Mumbai, U/S.144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 22.12.2017 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Nfac Failed To Appreciate That The Purchases Made By The Appellant Were Genuine & Supported By Documentary Material Including The Corroboration Of Sales Made From Such Purchases & There Was Not Material To Show That The Purchases Were Not Genuine & Hence, The Same Could Not Have Been Disallowed. 2. The Nfac Erred In Upholding The Addition On The Basis Of Generalized Statements In The Assessment Order Without The Assessing Officer Having Conducted Any Enquiry In The Matter.

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Sarda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 148

already on record - The conclusions arrived at in that case were on account of the failure of the assessee to appear in the reassessment proceedings and file proper evidence (para 32 to 35 of the judgement). - In fact, the grounds on which the judgement in the case of Mohd Hajı ... Assessing Officer for which there is no justification. Again, it noted in para 29 that the assessee chose not to attend the reassessment proceedings even though the notices were sent by post, email and affixture. Accordingly, in para 13, Hon’ble Court concluded that assessee having not joined the reassessment

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1682/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

income on 27.08.2022. the assessee filed its return of income on 27.08.2022. the assessee filed its return of income on 27.08.2022. 3.2 During reassessment proceedings, notices were issued from During reassessment proceedings, notices were issued from During reassessment proceedings, notices were issued from time to time (including ... Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules, the assessee further application under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules, the assessee further submitted as under: “2. Reassessment proceeding for AY 2015 2. Reassessment proceeding for AY 2015-16 are barred by 16 are barred by limitation 2.1 At the outset, the Company

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1681/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1680/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

DCIT Cen 5 3, Mumbai vs. Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are allowed partly

ITA 1679/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Anish Thackar

Section 10(15)Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 148Section 148ASection 44

Amrit Corporation, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC-1(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1658/MUM/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Amrit Corporation Dcit, Cc-1(1) K-225/226, Ansa Industrial Pratishtha Bhavan Estate, Saki Vihar Road Vs. M.K. Road Sakinaka, Andheri East Churchgate Mumbai-400 072. Mumbai-400 020. Pan : Aaffa1022R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya M. RaiFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Bhatt

Section 148Section 250

principles of natural justice for affording an opportunity to the appellant to cross examine the alleged evidences collated and relied upon in the reassessment proceedings. 5. The Appellant craves right to alter, amend, withdraw or substitute any ground or grounds or to add any new ground or grounds of appeal

ACIT(It)-4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Wells Fargo Bank National Association, Mumbai

ITA 3795/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

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

r.w.s.144C(3) which is already tabulated above. Two further additions were made to the total income assessed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144C(3) in the reassessment proceedings resulting into total income reassessed at Rs.36,59,84,420/-. The details are tabulated below: Particulars Amount (Rs.) Gross Total Income as per assessment order ... appeal against the original assessment, we find that Revenue has not contested the relief so granted against the original assessment and now through the reassessment proceedings, Revenue has raised up the issue on the relief so granted by ld. CIT(A). 5. 1. In our considered view