“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

Saurabh Jayant Bhaga, Raigad Panvel vs. ITO Ward-1, Panvel

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

ITA 2718/PUN/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2717 & 2718/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Saurabh Jayant Bhagat, The Income Tax Officer, A-806, Balaji Aangan, Nr. S T V Panvel. Depot, Panvel Raigad–410206. S. Maharashtra. Pan: Aklpb9996P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Gaurang Khakhkhar – Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Abhinay Kumbhar & Shri Vinod Pawar – Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commssioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, Date 31.05.2024 For The A.Y.2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) The Honorable Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Without Communicating The Reason For Reopening Of Assessment.

Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

following grounds of appeal : “1) The Honorable Commissioner of Income tax (A) has erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the reassessment proceedings without communicating the reason for reopening of assessment. ITA Nos.2717 & 2718/PUN/2024 [A] 2) The Honorable Commissioner of Income tax (A) has erred

Saurabh Jayant Bhagat, Panvel Raigad vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO Panvel

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

ITA 2717/PUN/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025AY 2013-2014

Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

Akshay Kumar Rungta, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), International Taxation

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per above terms

ITA 66/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.66/Bang/2024 Assessment Year :2015-16

For Appellant: Shri. Ravishankar S. V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 151Section 153Section 153CSection 250

report and which are extracted hereunder: "22. In the last paragraph quoted above, the Full Bench rejected the submission that reassessment proceedings would be justified if the assessment order is silent or does not record reasons or analysis of material on record. This, the Revenue had propounded, would show ... failure to draw proper inferences from the material facts already on record and examined, cannot be rectified or corrected by recourse to reassessment proceedings. The assessee is required to disclose full and true material facts and need not explain and interpret law. Legal inference has to be drawn

Smt Nirakumari Virendra Bajaj, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-17(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6177/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Reepal TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali

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

Assessee pressed into service Ground No.A (1)(a) to (d) raised in the present appeal challenging the validity of Assessment Year 2018-2019 the reassessment proceedings which reproduced as under: “A. Reopening of assessment is bad in law and liable to be quashed 1. The Ld. NFAC ... reopening of the assessment is bad in law and liable to be quashed.” 3. The Authorized representative for the Assessee submitted that the reassessment proceedings have been initiated in violation of provisions contained in Section 149(1)(a)/(b) of the Act. As per the provisions contained in Section

Late Kalpana Anant Joshi, Mumbai vs. I.T.O Ward-27(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5753/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: the CIT(A) which was dismissed by the CIT(A) vide order dated 25/09/2024. Now, the present appeal has been preferred before the Tribunal against the aforesaid order passed by the CIT(A) on the grounds reproduced in paragraph 2 above.

For Appellant: Shri Dharen GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69Section 69A

Assessment Year 2011-2012. On the basis of information received to the effect that the Assessee held deposits INR.66,87,751/- with a bank, reassessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the Assessee and noticed under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 26/03/2018. Since, the Assessee

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Karnani Solvex Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 850/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(4)

Delhi High Court in the case of SNG Developers Ltd. 404 ITR 312 held that when AO initiated the reassessment proceedings without application of mind, such proceedings would be invalid. AO in the present case has failed to verify the information received from Investigation Wing. Therefore, it is non-application ... case, the notice issued under section 148 cannot be sustained and the same is held to be bad in law. In the result, the reassessment proceedings are hereby quashed and set-aside. The grounds on merit have thus become infructous and are not adjudicated upon." We also find the issue

Gck Stock Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 1(4), Jaipur

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

ITA 1572/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2015-2016

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shaha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 234Section 250Section 271

assessee should be dismissed. Therefore, in light of above arguments, along with AOs report as enclosed, the honourable bench is requested to uphold the reassessment proceedings and confirm the addition of ₹4,96,87,796/- and uphold the interest charged under Section 234 and the penalty initiated under Section ... Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC) before any exercise of jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act." 7.3 Accordingly the assessee strongly contended that the objection raised at Paper Book Page

Mukeshbhai Hirabhai Prajapati, Kheda vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Nadiad

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

ITA 373/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-17 Mukeshbhai Hirabhai Prajapati Ito,Ward-1 A-1, Chandan Park Vs. Nadiad. B/H. Mai Mandir Opp: Alaknanda Society Nadiad 387 002, Dist: Kheda. Pan : Akxpp 3302 P (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri D.K. Parikh, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ravindra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Appeals) / NFAC further erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that as per record of the assessment order the reassessment proceedings were initiated without properly MA No.373/Ahd/2025 applying mind as regards year of cash deposited and also without following the mandatory requirements of section

Bhavesh Ramjeebhai Makvana, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer- Ward 1(2)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 2034/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt.Year :2012-13 Bhavesh Ramjeebhai Makvana The Ito, Ward-1(2)(1) At Pal, Tal-Lodhika Vs Vadodara. Dist. Rajkot. Pan : Bphpm 2808 B (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Bhuptani, Ar : Shri J.L. Bhatia, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/02/2045 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, AR

Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 251Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

assessee. 5 The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation before the AO and ensure timely compliance with the notices issued during the reassessment proceedings. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court

Narendra Khimji Savla, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6567/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui- Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69ASection 69C

facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Ld AO of initiating reassessment proceeding under section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming ... Aggrieved the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A) the assessee submitted that AO erred in initiating the reassessment proceeding under section 148 without issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act. The assessee also raised grounds on merit. The CIT(A) dismissed

Nissim Traders Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 10(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3090/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri P.V. Desai, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui- Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year: 8. From the perusal of the above provisions it is clear that if the reassessment proceedings beyond 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year cannot be initiated unless the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly

Savita Homemakers LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2849/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed & Shri AyushFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan- CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 69C

order we notice that the assessee has made a detailed submission in response to the show cause notice, explaining the inquiry conducted during the reassessment proceedings. We further notice from the order of the PCIT (as extracted in the earlier part of this order) that the PCIT has recorded that ... inquiry by the AO. The PCIT also did not take cognisance of the submissions made by the assessee regarding the inquiry carried out during reassessment proceedings and not recorded anything specifically on the error noticed. On the issue of Income from House property, the PCIT has held

Institute Management Committee Iti Jhalawar, Jhalawar vs. ITO Ward Jhalawar, Jhalawar

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 41/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee In This Appeal Has Raised The Following Grounds;

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 234

continue to possess jurisdiction, to put to tax, any other income, which subsequently came to his notice, in the course of reassessment proceedings, which were found by him, to have escaped assessment.—CIT vs. Atlas Cycle Industries (1989) 180 ITR 319 (P&H) concurred with. (b) In the case ... regarded as an interpretational error in the view which was taken by certain Courts that the AO has to restrict the assessment or reassessment proceedings only to the issues in respect of which reasons were recorded for reopening the assessment—However, Expln. 3 does not and cannot override the necessity

Institute Management Committee Iti Jhalawar, Jhalawar vs. ITO Ward Jhalawar, Jhalawar

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 39/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee In This Appeal Has Raised The Following Grounds;

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 10Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 234

Sushila Devi Jangid, Jaipur vs. ITO, WD 7(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 374/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 374/JP/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2010-11 Smt. Sushila Devi Jangid 65, Koshaliya Vihar Hajyawala,Muhana Mandi Ke Pass, Sanganer, Jaipur 302 029 बनाम Vs. The ITO Ward 7(2) Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFMPJ 2091 P निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Utkarsh Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by :Shri Gautam Sing

For Appellant: Shri Utkarsh Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT -DR a

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 250

case and in law, the Ld. Assessing officer has erred in not granting an opportunity of hearing to the assessee during the Reassessment proceedings u/s 147. The proceedings u/s 147 were concluded in a hasty manner without issuing single notice u/s 142(1) of the Act. The action ... file the return of income for relevant A.Y, due of lack of education and knowledge. 3. Later, as mentioned in the impugned order, reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act for relevant A.Y were initiated upon the assessee on 30.03.2017. However, the assessee was not aware of any notice/intimation

Dharmessh Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Patan

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 439/AHD/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 May 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2019-20 Dharmessh Shah The Ito, Ward-1 A-301, Vasantkunj Vs Patan. Garden Residency Sanjivan Road Paldi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aelps 5203 A (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Kunal T. Sanghavi, Ar Assessee By : Shri Prathvij Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Prathvij Raj Meena, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69C

notice u/s 148 was issued on 28.03.2023. The assessee refiled its return on 17.04.2023 declaring income of Rs.5,45,850/-. 3. During the reassessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee had allegedly made purchases of Rs.20,14,258/- from M/s. Vishnu Gold, flagged as a high-risk entity issuing ... documents placed on record, and the judicial precedents relied upon by both parties. The appeal challenges two substantive issues: (i) the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act, and (ii) the addition of Rs.20,14,258/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 69C, which

Dineshbhai Punjabhai Patel, Banaskantha vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2054/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prathvij Raj Meena, CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 270ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

RTGS credits received from M/s. Murlidhar Industries Pvt. Ltd., which were withdrawn in cash on the same day. 3. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had shown purchases amounting to Rs.14,24,58,326/- made in cash allegedly for procuring agricultural commodities such

Dhanshree Softech Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5742/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2018-19 Dhanshree Softech Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward 7(1), 59, Top Floor, Vijay Block, Delhi Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092 (Pan: Aaccd9596M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Mukul Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 144B

passed the exparte order u/s 144B of the Act by not providing any information or tangible material, till the end of the reassessment proceedings. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition without considering the fact that AO has passed the order without considering the reply

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Mrf Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 55/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.R. Clement Ramesh

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 35

assessing total income of Rs.861,75,63,920/-. Later, the case was re-opened u/s.147 of the Act and reassessment proceedings had been completed vide order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act on 03.12.2019 revising ITA Nos.54 & 55/Chny/2025 (AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s.MRF Ltd. :: 4 :: the income

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Mrf Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 54/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.R. Clement Ramesh

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 35