← 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

Suresh Kumar Divakar, Sambalpur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Sambalpur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 43/CTK/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.43/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014) Suresh Kumar Divakar, Vs Acit,Circle-1(1), Sambalpur 3Rd Floor, Paradise Chamber, Budharaja, Sambalpur Pan No. :Agupd 1872 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Himanshu Jena & Narahari Swain, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Nishanth Rao, B, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 11.12.2024 For Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld Ar That The Appeal Is Against Penalty Levied By The Ao & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A). It Was The Submission That Against The Quantum Assessment, The Assessee Had Filed An Appeal Before The Tribunal & The Tribunal Vide Its Order Dated 26.06.2023, Passed In Ita No.129/Ctk/2022 In Assessee’S Own Case Has Quashed The Reassessment Proceedings. It Was The Submission That Consequently The Penalty Proceedings Should Also Be Quashed. 3. In Reply Ld. Sr. Dr Vehemently Supported The Orders Of The Ld. Ao & Ld.Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, Himanshu Jena &For Respondent: Shri Nishanth Rao, B, Sr.DR

appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its order dated 26.06.2023, passed in ITA No.129/CTK/2022 in assessee’s own case has quashed the reassessment proceedings. It was the submission that consequently the penalty proceedings should also be quashed. 3. In reply Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders ... noticed that the quantum assessment in the case of the assessee has already been quashed by the Tribunal on account of reassessment proceedings being quashed, therefore, the consequential penalty proceedings would also fail, insofar as the assessment order itself has been quashed. Thus, the penalty levied

Nellikkote Kunhipari Mohammedali, Kozhikode vs. ACIT Circle-1(1), Kozhikode

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 888/COCH/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Jul 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 263

case of firm - N.K. Mohhammed Ali and Brothers. 7. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) contending that the reassessment proceedings are invalid in law as there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the material facts truly and fully necessary

Nellikkote Kunhipari Mohammedali, Kozhikode vs. ACIT Circle-1(1), Kozhikode

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 881/COCH/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Jul 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 263

case of firm - N.K. Mohhammed Ali and Brothers. 7. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) contending that the reassessment proceedings are invalid in law as there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the material facts truly and fully necessary

Nellikkote Kunhipari Mohammedali, Kozhikode vs. ACIT Circle-1(1), Kozhikode

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 880/COCH/2024[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Jul 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)Section 263

case of firm - N.K. Mohhammed Ali and Brothers. 7. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) contending that the reassessment proceedings are invalid in law as there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose the material facts truly and fully necessary

Vikas Dugar L/H of Late Shri Keshari Singh Dugar, Jaipur vs. PCIT (Central) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 388/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: or in the course of hearing of the appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 263

assessee that as on the date on which the Search & seizure proceedings under Sec. 132 were conducted on it, viz.14.03.2013, no assessment or reassessment proceedings for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2007-08were pending, therefore, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course

Vikas Dugar L/H of Late Shri Keshari Singh Dugar, Jaipur vs. PCIT (Central), Jaipur

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 387/JPR/2025[A.Y.2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 263

assessee that as on the date on which the Search & seizure proceedings under Sec. 132 were conducted on it, viz.14.03.2013, no assessment or reassessment proceedings for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2007-08were pending, therefore, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course

Vikas Dugar Legal Heir of Late Shri Keshari Singh Dugar, Jaipur vs. PCIT (Central), Jaipur

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 386/JPR/2025[A.Y. 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 263

assessee that as on the date on which the Search & seizure proceedings under Sec. 132 were conducted on it, viz.14.03.2013, no assessment or reassessment proceedings for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2007-08were pending, therefore, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course

Jaiprakash Yadav, Alwar vs. Income Tax Officer, WD, Behror

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, Adv. (Thr.VC)For Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69Section 69A

quashed and CIT(A) erred in not holding so 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the reassessment proceedings initiated is bad in law, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of law including the specific provisions of section 147 to section ... therefore, the reassessment proceeding initiated along with assessment order passed are liable to be quashed and CIT(A) erred in not holding so.. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed by the assessing officer is bad-in-law, without jurisdiction

Manish Ranjan, DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. Rashmin Kantilal Vakta, Ahmedabad

ITA 866/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, AR and Shri Samir Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

Accordingly, notices under section 148 were issued on 30.03.2021 for both A.Y. 2013–14 and A.Y. 2014–15. In response, the assessee complied and reassessment proceedings were initiated. Meanwhile, search and seizure operations were conducted in the case of Shri Dilip C. Patel and Sankalp Group on 30.10.2018, during which ... section 147 and treated the same as valid assessments for both years, thereby no separate orders under section 153C were passed. 3. During the reassessment proceedings for A.Y. 2013–14, the AO examined the bank account of the assessee maintained with Shri Renukamata Multi-State Urban Co-operative Credit Society

Manish Ranjan, DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad, Aaykar Bhawan Ashram Road vs. Rashmin Kantilal Vakta, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad Gujarat

ITA 865/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, AR and Shri Samir Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

Accordingly, notices under section 148 were issued on 30.03.2021 for both A.Y. 2013–14 and A.Y. 2014–15. In response, the assessee complied and reassessment proceedings were initiated. Meanwhile, search and seizure operations were conducted in the case of Shri Dilip C. Patel and Sankalp Group on 30.10.2018, during which ... section 147 and treated the same as valid assessments for both years, thereby no separate orders under section 153C were passed. 3. During the reassessment proceedings for A.Y. 2013–14, the AO examined the bank account of the assessee maintained with Shri Renukamata Multi-State Urban Co-operative Credit Society

Rashmin Kantilal Vakta, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 830/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, AR and Shri Samir Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

Accordingly, notices under section 148 were issued on 30.03.2021 for both A.Y. 2013–14 and A.Y. 2014–15. In response, the assessee complied and reassessment proceedings were initiated. Meanwhile, search and seizure operations were conducted in the case of Shri Dilip C. Patel and Sankalp Group on 30.10.2018, during which ... section 147 and treated the same as valid assessments for both years, thereby no separate orders under section 153C were passed. 3. During the reassessment proceedings for A.Y. 2013–14, the AO examined the bank account of the assessee maintained with Shri Renukamata Multi-State Urban Co-operative Credit Society

Rashmin Kantilal Vakta, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 829/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, AR and Shri Samir Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

Accordingly, notices under section 148 were issued on 30.03.2021 for both A.Y. 2013–14 and A.Y. 2014–15. In response, the assessee complied and reassessment proceedings were initiated. Meanwhile, search and seizure operations were conducted in the case of Shri Dilip C. Patel and Sankalp Group on 30.10.2018, during which ... section 147 and treated the same as valid assessments for both years, thereby no separate orders under section 153C were passed. 3. During the reassessment proceedings for A.Y. 2013–14, the AO examined the bank account of the assessee maintained with Shri Renukamata Multi-State Urban Co-operative Credit Society

Mahasakthi Bio Enercon Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 467/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:467/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mahasakthi Bio Enercon Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Vs. Income Tax, No.64, Dr. Nanjappa Road, Central Circle -1, Coimbatore – 641 018. Coimbatore. [Pan:Aabci-0022-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. T. Banusekar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T.

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

reliance on the following decisions of the jurisdictional High Court where it is held that the purported income discovered subsequently during the course of reassessment proceedings, can be brought to tax, only, if the escaped income, which caused, in the first instance, the issuance of notice u/s.148 ... ld.PCIT inferring u/s.263 direct an Assessing officer to do a thing which could not have been done by the Assessing officer in the reassessment proceedings. 13. Further the ld.AR placed a reliance in this connection on the following decision of the Jurisdictional Tribunal wherein it is held that Assessing Officer

Shri Pachamuthu Ravi, Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle-1(3), Chennai

ITA 2346/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 2(22)(e)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'बी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक

C.G. Buildcon Private Limited, Raipur vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee company is dismissed

ITA 300/RPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.300/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 C.G Buildcon Private Limited B-1, 3Rd Floor, C.G. Elite, Opp. Mandi Gate, Vidhan Sabha Road, Pandri (C.G.)-492 004 Pan: Aaccc5355P

For Appellant: Shri S.N Agrawal, CA (Joined virtually)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 801Section 80I

clarity, the “reasons to believe” based on which the case of the assessee company was reopened are culled out as follows: 4. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee company on being called upon to produce a copy of the “completion certificate” issued by the Municipal Corporation, Raipur, dated 24.08.2016, submitted ... predecessor, which was not permissible as per the mandate of law; and (iii). that the ITO-Ward 3(1) has erred in initiating reassessment proceedings as the original assessment u/s 143(3), dated 09.12.2011 was framed by the ACIT-Circle1(2), Raipur; and (iv). that the lower authorities had, based

Damjibhai Lekhrajbhai Thavrani, Junagadh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Junagadh

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 58/RJT/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Jul 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.58/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Hybrid Hearing) Damjibhai Lekharjibhai Thavrani Vs. Income-Tax Officer, C/O. Sarda & Sarda (Ca), Sakar 1St Ito Ward – 1 Floor, Dr. Radha-Krishnan Road, Income Tax Office, Bhootnath Opp. Rajkumar College, Chamber, Rajkot - 360001 Junagadh - 362001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aeypt7701B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/ 05 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 14/ 07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT. DR
Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(3)

Thus, it may please be appreciated that my new address of Junagadh was available on the records of the Department before initiation of reassessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 30.03.2015. However, the Id. A.O. issued all the notices in connection with the re-assessment ... course of argument that the assessee has shifted from Rajkot to Junagadh and the new address were submitted to the department before initiation of reassessment proceedings. No notice served on the new address and assessee prayed for an opportunity to present this case. The Ld. AR prayed that delay

Vaka Ghanta Nageswararao, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Tenali

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 251/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.251/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward – 1 Vaka Ghanta Nageswararao 4-82-A, Gullapalli Tenali -522201 Goudapalem, Cherukapalli Mandal Andhra Pradesh Guntur – 522309 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afjpn4315H] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Malladi Muralidhar, Ca करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250(6)Section 69ASection 80C

more for that year. He therefore pleaded that the notice under section 148 dated 07.04.2022 is barred by limitation and hence the consequent reassessment proceedings are bad in law. Page. No 7 I.T.A.No.251/VIZ/2025 Vaka Ghanta Nageswararao 7. Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] submitted that ... invalid and barred by limitation. In view of the above findings and in light of binding judicial precedents, we hold that the reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2015-16 are without jurisdiction, and hence the notice issued under section 148 and subsequent proceedings are quashed. Accordingly, the assessment completed under

The Garoh Co-Operative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Dharamshala, Kangra vs. Income Tax Officer, Dharamshala

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 67/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

filed its return of income under Section 139(1). 4.1 A notice under Section 148 dated 31.03.2022 was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. Reassessment proceedings culminated in an order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) on 15.03.2023, wherein deduction under Section 80P was disallowed and income was assessed ... Where the issuance of 6 notice is in violation of the procedure prescribed by CBDT under Section 144B, such a defect is jurisdictional. The reassessment proceedings are invalid.” 18. In view of the abovesaid discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the notice issued under Section 148 dated

The Garoh Co-Operative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Dharamshala, Kangra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dharamshala, Dharamshala

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed

ITA 66/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

filed its return of income under Section 139(1). 4.1 A notice under Section 148 dated 31.03.2022 was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. Reassessment proceedings culminated in an order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) on 15.03.2023, wherein deduction under Section 80P was disallowed and income was assessed ... Where the issuance of 6 notice is in violation of the procedure prescribed by CBDT under Section 144B, such a defect is jurisdictional. The reassessment proceedings are invalid.” 18. In view of the abovesaid discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the notice issued under Section 148 dated

Span Construction, Pune vs. I.T.O Wrd-3(3), Pune

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

ITA 1346/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1346/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Span Construction, V The Income Tax Officer, H1, Flat No.203, S. Ward-3(3), Pune. S.No.123/A/1/1, Vanraji Heights, Rambaug Colony, Near Mit College, Kothrud, Pune – 411038. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaefs2589J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte – Ar Revenue By Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 27.03.2025 For A.Y.2017-18, Emanating From The Order U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Read With

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250

Shri. Sachin Nagar and the correct action ought to have been initiated under section 153C of the IT Act, 1961 therefore the entire reassessment proceedings are Void-ab-initio and any consequential order passed deserves to be quashed. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... Shri. Sachin Nagar and the correct action ought to have been initiated under section 153C of the IT Act, 1961 therefore the entire reassessment proceedings are Void-ab-initio and any consequential order passed deserves to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case