← 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

Smt. Nandita Sau, Mayurbhanj vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Baripada

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

ITA 476/CTK/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.475 To 477/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2013-14,2014-15 & 2015 15 & 2015-16 Smt Nandita Andita Sau, Sau, Ward Ward Vs. National National Faceless Faceless No.18, No.18, Jamunadeipur, Jamunadeipur, Assessment Centre, Delhi Assessment Centre, Delhi Baripada, Dist: Mayurbhanj Baripada, Dist: Mayurbhanj Pan/Gir No. No.Azaps 3148 J (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Sahu, Adv , Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/01/20 025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Sahu, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 147Section 148Section 69B

fresh adjudication on merit in accordance with law after giving opportunities to both the parties. As the assessee has not cooperated either during the reassessment proceedings and first appellate proceedings, a cost of Rs.2000/- is levied per appeal and same is to be deposited in the ITAT Bar Association within

Smt. Nandita Sau, Mayurbhanj vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Baripada

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

ITA 475/CTK/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.475 To 477/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2013-14,2014-15 & 2015 15 & 2015-16 Smt Nandita Andita Sau, Sau, Ward Ward Vs. National National Faceless Faceless No.18, No.18, Jamunadeipur, Jamunadeipur, Assessment Centre, Delhi Assessment Centre, Delhi Baripada, Dist: Mayurbhanj Baripada, Dist: Mayurbhanj Pan/Gir No. No.Azaps 3148 J (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Sahu, Adv , Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/01/20 025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Sahu, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 147Section 148Section 69B

fresh adjudication on merit in accordance with law after giving opportunities to both the parties. As the assessee has not cooperated either during the reassessment proceedings and first appellate proceedings, a cost of Rs.2000/- is levied per appeal and same is to be deposited in the ITAT Bar Association within

Kundanben Yogeshkumar Shukla, Gujarat vs. ITO Ward 3, Junagadh

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

ITA 693/RJT/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Jan 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Swati Baid, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144Section 154

that on the facts and circumstances of the case, proper approval from the appropriate authority was not taken before initiating the reassessment proceedings 5. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 10,43,000/- treating

Gold Ancher Exim Private Limited, Khar West - Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 12(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5464/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Panjabi, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

assessment proceedings.The notice issued for re-opening of assessment under section 148, the re-opening of assessment under section 147, the reassessment proceedings and also the reassessment order are illegal, invalid and unjustified. 3. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the validity of re-assessment proceedings which was conducted without

Shri Rajesh Ramchandra Dake, Panvel vs. Dy CIT CC-1, Mumbai

ITA 3/MUM/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2008-09
For Appellant: \nShri Rajesh Ramchandra DakeFor Respondent: \nDy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Section 10Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

```json { "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,\nMUMBAI BENCH \"D\", MUMBAI\n\nBEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL

Partistha Commercial Centre Private Limited, Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

ITA 4264/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member

153A. But for such a non-obstante clause, the Revenue could possibly have faced hurdles in regard to unadopted/current assessment years as well as reassessment proceedings pending at the time of the search in respect of which proceedings were to be completed under Sections 153A/153C. Having regard to the above ... search no incriminating material is found, in case of completed/unabated assessment, the only remedy available to the Revenue would be to initiate the reassessment proceedings under Sections 147/48 of the Act, subject to situation, the Revenue cannot be left with no remedy. Therefore, even in case of block assessment under

Late Chhotalal Vallabhadas Doshi L/H. Heir Smt. Prabhavatiben Chhotalal Doshi, Jamnagar vs. The ITO Ward-1(3), Jamnagar

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

ITA 698/RJT/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.698/Rjt/ 2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Hybrid Hearing) Late Chhotalal Vallabhdas Doshi Vs. Ito Ward-1(3), Jamnagar. (Legal Heir Smt. Prabhavatiben Chhotalal Doshi). 505 Ajitnath Apartment, Near Indraprasth Tower, Jamnagar. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acdpd9371Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld. Cit(Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing :23/12/2024 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement :22/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [(In Short “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Vide Order Dated 24/07/204, Which In Turn Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer Vide Order Dated 22/03/2016 Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: 1. Hon. Cit(A) Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Dismissing The Appeal By Contending That No Response Has Been Received From Assessee Although The Response Has Been Submitted Through Samadhan.Faceless.Appeal@Incometax.Gov.In As There Was No Income Tax Registration Due To Death Of The Assessee I.E. Chhotalal Doshi On Ita-698/Rjt/2024 (Ay-2008-09) Late Chhotalal Doshi Vs. Ito Ward-1(3), Jamnagar.

For Appellant: Shri Dushyant Maharshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

obtaining sanction of JCIT as per section 151 of the IT Act in mechanical manner and therefore, notice issued u/s 148 is invalid and reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming reopening of assessment. 6. Learned A.O. erred in law as well

Pavan Prabhudyal Bhadada, Shahibaug, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Ahmedabad, Income Tax Office, Vejalpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 620/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 263

relation to a reassessment Pavan Prabhudyal Bhadada vs. ITO Asst.Year –2016-17 - 3– order passed under section 147 of the Act. In the reassessment proceeding after considering the submissions made by the assessee, the Assessing Officer accepted the return of income filed by the assessee. The Counsel for the assessee ... same issue more than once constitutes a multiplicity of proceedings, which is impermissible. Thirdly, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the reassessment proceedings, the A.O. issued a notice under section 142(1) to inquire about the relevant issue in response to which the assessee filed reply dated

Duraiswamy Chinnadurai, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-4(4), Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1782/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1782 /Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2013-14 Duraiswamy Chinnadurai, Income Tax Officer, No.146, N.G.N.Street, Non Corp, Ward-4(4), New Siddhapudur, Coimbatore Coimbatore. [Pan: Acppc1349B] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri S.Ramachandran, Ca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Sheila Parthasarthy, Addl.Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1064762387(1) Dated 09.05.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[Nfac], Delhi, For The Assessment Years 2013- 14. Through The Aforesaid Appeal The Assesse Has Challenged Order U/S 250 Dated 09.05.2024 Passed By Nfac, Delhi. 2.0 The Assessee Has Raised Altogether Seven Grounds Of Appeal, Of Which Grounds 1 To 4 Are Legal Grounds & Grounds 5 To 7 On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri S.Ramachandran, CAFor Respondent: Ms.Sheila Parthasarthy, Addl.CIT
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69ASection 69C

legal grounds and grounds 5 to 7 on merits. Page - 1 - of 7 :- 2 -: 3.0 The legal grounds are seminal to the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 148 and therefore considering the complexity of the matter we deem it appropriate to adjudicate the legal grounds first. Explaining the brief factual

ITO, Ncw - 3 (5), Chennai vs. Smt. Lakshmi Selvaraj, Chennai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1825/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1825/Chny/2019 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ito Late Smt. Lakshmi Selvaraj Rep. By Shri A.S. Ashwin Kumar Non-Corporate Ward-3(5) बनाम/ Chennai. New No.40, Old No.12, 2B, Vs. Jeyam Murray’S Gate Road, Teynampet, Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aaips-8030-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Krishna Kumar (Jcit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06-01-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-01-2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)

income from other sources u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) and the assessment was finalized. Appellate Proceedings 4. The assessee challenged the validity of reassessment proceedings which was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A). On merits, it was observed by Ld. CIT(A) that Ld. AO clearly stated that the properly

Meher Nosherwan Jehangir, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-19(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6211/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjeemeher Nosherwan Jehangir Vs Income-Tax Officer, 4, Darbhanga Mansion, 12/A Ward 19(2)(2), Mumbai Michael Road, Cumballa Hill S.O., Piramal Chambers, Lower Parel Mumbai-400 026 Mumbai Pan : Aanpj4670J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: ShriAsif Karmali (SR DR)
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250

heard during the proceedings before the Ld. AO. At the same time, the assessee is expected to act diligently and cooperate fully during the reassessment proceedings. 4 Meher Nosherwan Jehangir 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.6211/Mum/2024 is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced

Me N Moms Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1606/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2017-18 Me N Moms Private Limited, Pr. Commissioner Of 2 Amar Chs, 8Th Road, Income Tax-4, Khar (W), Vs. 6Th Floor, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Pan : Aaecm6253C M.K.Road, Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Heliwal, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

basis of information that the assessee has availed accommodation entries in the form of loans/share capital. Having come to such a conclusion in the reassessment proceedings, the AO did not make addition of loan/share capital amounts, since the very same addition had been made in the original assessment proceedings. Further

M/S. Vimoni India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6978/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarm/S. Vimoni India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle 17 (1), 3-D, Vandana Building, New Delhi. 11, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aaacv3859K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate Ms. Ragini Handa, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Anirudh Saran Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2024 Date Of Order : 22.01.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am:

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anirudh Saran Singh, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 154Section 154(7)Section 43(8)

fact that prior to issue of notice u/s. 148, the AO had issued notice u/s. 154 which was not disposed off and therefore the reassessment proceedings were bad in law and liable to be quashed. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the amount disallowed u/s. 43(8) in respect

Tej Singh Sinsinwar, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(2), Alwar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1100/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jan 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

case of Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali Vs ITO, ITA No. 3814/Del/2011, held that “in the case before us the only reason for reassessment proceedings was the fact of deposit of bank account which by itself does not lead to income being taxed in the hands of the assessee. Learned Departmental ... Representative has referred to several other judicial precedents in support of the proposition that at the stage of initiation of reassessment proceedings, all that is to be seen as existence, rather than adequacy, of the material to come to the conclusion that income has escaped assessment. To us, there cannot

Mack Star Marketing Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4994/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yash VarmaniFor Respondent: Mr. R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147

disallowed the building maintenance charges of Rs.3,42,97,676/-. On further appeal before the ld CIT(A) the assessee challenged validity of the reassessment proceedings as well as merit of the addition, however, could not succeed. Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ... have heard the rival submissions of both parties and perused the relevant material placed on record. The assessee has challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Act, specifically with reference to the proviso to Section 147 applicable during the relevant period. For ready reference

Nitin Goel, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2)(5), Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3142/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

Delhi) wherein the Hon’ble Court has held as under:- 48. “In terms of the Second Proviso to Section 153A, all assessment or reassessment proceedings relating to the six AYs' or the "relevant assessment year" pending on the date of search are statutorily envisaged to abate. Abatement is envisioned

Shikhar Chand Jain, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 555/RPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 555/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shikhar Chand Jain Gali No.3, Ashok Vihar Colony, Near Bansal School, Pandri, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan : Achpj2931Q .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 250(6)

decision for each of the Ground of Appeal separately, more particularly, when the assessee had inter alia assailed the legal validity of the reassessment proceedings on the ground that the copy of reasons recorded by the Learned A.O for initiating reassessment proceedings was not provided to the assessee in Form

Rahul Bajpai, Idgah Chowk vs. ACIT Circle 1(1), Shri Ram Plaza

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 348/RPR/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jan 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.348/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Rahul Bajpai Idgah Chowk, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh-495 001 Pan: Aexpb4410L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

notice under section 148 of the Act. The material available on record indicates that the A.O. provided the appellant with the reasons before the reassessment proceedings were completed. As a matter of fact, the appellant admitted the above facts in his submissions, as reproduced above in this order. The only ... chose not to object. It is not the case of the appellant that recorded reasons were not given to him before completion of reassessment proceedings. If the assessee does not file objections before the A.O., he cannot challenge the same in appellate proceedings. As the appellant failed to raise

Vaneet Gupta, S.O. Sh. Chattur Bhuj Gupta, #214, Sector-06, Panchkula vs. PCIT Panchkula Jurisdictional Assessing Officer ITO Ward 5, Panchkula

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 560/CHANDI/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 560/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vaneet Gupta, Vs. The Ito, बनाम S.O. Shri Chattur Bhuj Ward 5, Gupta, Panchkula # 214, Sector 6, Panchkula "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aphpg0692N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

PCIT in ITA No. 154/Asr/2015 order dated 25.02.2016 (Asr Bench), wherein it was held as under: Without prejudice the learned AR submitted that reassessment proceedings in this case were initiated on the basis of audit objection and which were later on dropped however, on the same date of dropping ... reassessment proceedings proposal for initiation action u/s 263 was initiated on the basis of same audit objection which was not warranted by law as held by Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of ‘CIT V Sohana Woollen Mills’, 296 ITR 238 and in this respect filed a copy

Raman Pillai Sivasankara Pillai, Baltana vs. DCIT, International Taxation, Circle, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 770/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 770/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Raman Pillai Sivasankara Vs. The Dcit, बनाम Pillai, #1590, Saini Vihar, International Taxation, Phase 3, Baltana, Chandigarh Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Cjcpp4391J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20 .01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148

Delhi, Jaipur and Raipur Tribunal and of the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court, for which, the brief synopsis were filed sought the quashing of reassessment proceedings u/s 148 as framed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 22.12.2016. The reliance is placed on the following judgements: - • The DCIT vs. Shri ... principle of law, we have no hesitation to quash the re-assessment it proceedings since there was no valid notice pursuant to which the reassessment proceeding was made in the present case. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed." 16. Thus, considering the above facts and in case