← 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

DCIT Ltu 1, Chennai vs. M/S Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai

ITA 491/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Insurance Company Limited, Large Tax Payer Unit, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, Chennai. No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Large Tax Payer Unit, Insurance Company Limited, Chennai. Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 15.10.2024 08.01.2025 Per Bench: आदेश / Order The Following Appeals Have Been Raised By The Appellant Assessee & Appellant Revenue Contesting Assessment / Appellate Orders For Ays 2008-09 To Ay 2014-15. As The Grounds Of Appeal In Respective Appeals Of Assessee & Revenue Are Largely Common, All The Appeals Are Adjudicated Through This Common Orders. S. No. A Appeal Nos. B Ays C Appellate D Cit(A) Order Details E Revenue F 1

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.Sanjay for Ms V.Pushpa
Section 143(3)Section 148

reopening proceedings and re-determine taxable income through his order dated 22.03.2016. 2.2 The Ld. First Appellate Authority also dismissed the objections qua reassessment proceedings and confirmed the order of the Ld. AO. He held that material gathered by the assessing officer after due diligence will not amount to change ... same and applied his mind before arriving at his orders dated 24.12.2010 and 27.12.2011 supra. In the light of the same the initiation of reassessment proceedings on the same set of material evidences falls under the mischief of first proviso to section 147. 2.5 In support of its contentions

Gopal & Sons HUF, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 32(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1701/KOL/2024[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jan 2025AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 147Section 148Section 69A

bills were issued by some of the dealers and the assessee was one of the beneficiaries. The assessing officer on the said information-initiated reassessment proceedings on the said information. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee Balmukund Lease Fin Private Limited

Arun Bhardwaj, Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1190/JPR/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jan 2025AY 2010-2011

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

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

verifying the facts as submitted by the Ld. AO, perhaps he would not have granted his approval, which was mandatory condition to initiate the reassessment proceedings. In the instant case the Ld. PCIT has approved the reasons recorded after considering the AO’s contention which itself on the mechanical manner

Soyala Gram Sewa Sahakari Samiti Limited, Tonk vs. ITO, Tonk

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1116/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 80A(5)Section 80P

first limb is satisfied i.e. when an addition/ disallowance is being made on the issue which was formed the basis for initiation of reassessment proceedings. As in the instant case since no addition/ disallowance was made on the reasons framed for issue of notice u/s 148 the 8 Soyala Gram ... Courts including the jurisdictional High Court of Rajasthan have held that if the AO finds that the issue on which reassessment proceedings were initiated does not subsist then the ld. AO looses jurisdiction to assess other issues of concealment that comes to his knowledge. In this regard we quote

Gullipalli Ram Prasad, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Berhampur

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

ITA 440/CTK/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack08 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2018-19 Gullipalli Gullipalli Ram Ram Prasad, Prasad, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Income Tax Offi 1/218/34, 1/218/34, Sri Sri Simhadri S Berhampur Residency, Residency, Chandanpur Chandanp Colony, Colony, Flat Flat No.703, No.703, Gopalapatam, Gopalapatam, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Pan/Gir No. No.Aucoo 7479 A (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri N.Trinath Rao, Ca N.Trinath Rao, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 08/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/01/20 025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri N.Trinath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

appeared for the revenue. P a g e 1 | 4 Assessment Year : 2018-19 3. It was submitted that during the course of reassessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Act, the assessee could not furnish the return of income and furnish submission regarding the credit entries in the bank accounts. Therefore ... produce the same before the Assessing officer. As the assessment order has been passed u/s.144/147 of the Act and during the appellate proceedings also, reassessment proceedings has been challenged before the ld CIT(A) and proper opportunity was not given to the assessee to represent his case, in the interest

DCIT, Ghaziabad vs. M/S. Devidayal Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad

ITA 4297/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

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

Pallav, Jamnagar vs. DCIT, Circle 2, Jamnagar

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

ITA 473/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal & Shri Brijesh ParekhFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

assessing officer. The ld. CIT(A) noticed that reopening of assessment done by the assessing officer is valid and not only that commencement of reassessment proceedings was also valid, and in reassessment proceedings, it has only to be seen that whether there was prima facie some material on the basis ... which the department could reopen the case. Therefore, the ground raised by the assessee, under section 147 of the Act, challenging the reassessment proceedings, was dismissed by ld. CIT(A).On merit, ld. CIT(A) noticed that assessee has not furnished any documentary evidences such ledgers of the sundry debtors

Shri Rajeshkumar Maheshbhai Manek, Anjar Kutch vs. The ITO Ward-2, Gandhidham-Kutch

In the result, additional legal ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal & Shri Brijesh ParekhFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

both the parties on this preliminary issue. We note that assessee has raised the additional ground on the legal issue challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act. The facts relating to reopening the assessment under section 147/148 were there before the assessing officer.We note that ... into account, he would be required to issue a fresh notice under s. 148.” 12. Based on these facts and circumstances, we quash the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act, initiated by the assessing officer, therefore we allow the additional legal ground raised by the assessee

M/S Shah Traders, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals) NFAC, Mumbai

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

ITA 5564/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailm/S. Shah Traders, Dw-6251, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Bandra Kurla Complex, G-Block, Bandra East Mumbai – 400051 ............... Appellant Pan : Aabfs6536J V/S Dcit, Circle – 19(3), Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug Parel, ……………… Respondent Mumbai - 400012

For Appellant: Shri Amit JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Pushkaraj Bhangepatil, Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

assessee in its books of account. Accordingly, on the basis that the assessee has obtained accommodation entry of bogus purchases from M/s Swastik Corporation, reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. During the reassessment ... after thought and only a device to deviate from the core issue.” 5. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, upheld the initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Further, the learned CIT(A), also upheld the addition made by the AO under section 69C read with

ACIT-16(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan vs. Fakhruddin Taiyebali Padaria, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5500/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2017-18 Acit- 16(2), Mumbai Fakhruddin Taiyebali Padaria 5Th Floor, Shabbir Place, 80 Vs. Dr. A.L. Nair Road, Mumbai- 400008. Pan: Abdpp 7103 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Dinesh A Chourasia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.01.2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh A Chourasia, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 250Section 292BSection 69A

04/09/2022 as per the submission filed by representative. 6.2 As a dead individual is not a person in the eyes of law, assessment or reassessment proceedings or subsequent proceedings taken in his name will be invalid. The AO must bring all the legal representative(s) on record and continue proceedings ... against them as required under and in accordance with section 159 of the Act. No assessment or reassessment proceedings or subsequent proceedings can be undertaken against a dead person. Framing assessment or reassessment proceedings on a non-existent person is a jurisdictional defect and cannot cured under section 292B

DCIT It 3 3 2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Pramarica Aspf II Cyprus Holding Ltd, Ctprus

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3041/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai/ Shri YogeshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115A(1)(a)Section 143(1)Section 144CSection 148

income declared by the assessee and consequently the assessment order passed by the AO got vitiated. The AO subsequently initiated the 2nd round of reassessment proceedings, 4. by issuing notice under section 148 on 31.03.2021 in response to which the assessee filed the return of income on 26.04.2021. The assessee ... material which are already part of record and that the same has already been verified by the AO during the first round of reassessment proceeding. Therefore, the assessee objected that the 2nd round of reassessment is based on no new material and hence not maintainable. The assessee also contended that

DCIT It 332 Mumbai, Income Tax vs. Pramarica Aspf II Cyprus Holding Ltd, Cyprus

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3040/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Hirali Desai/ Shri YogeshFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115A(1)(a)Section 143(1)Section 144CSection 148

income declared by the assessee and consequently the assessment order passed by the AO got vitiated. The AO subsequently initiated the 2nd round of reassessment proceedings, 4. by issuing notice under section 148 on 31.03.2021 in response to which the assessee filed the return of income on 26.04.2021. The assessee ... material which are already part of record and that the same has already been verified by the AO during the first round of reassessment proceeding. Therefore, the assessee objected that the 2nd round of reassessment is based on no new material and hence not maintainable. The assessee also contended that

Nidhi Goyal, Haryana vs. DCIT, Hisar

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee in AY 2006-07 is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2006-07 is dismissed

ITA 886/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

order and observe ITA Nos.884 to 886/DEL/2022 CO No.18/Del/2017 CO Nos.186 to 188/Del/2022 that no proper opportunity was granted to the assessee and further reassessment proceedings were taken up only on 19.03.2014 and completed on 28.03.2014 within 9 days. It clearly shows that assessee was not extended proper time ... proper opportunity to produce various records as called for by the Assessing Officer. It is also fact on record that reassessment proceedings were initiated beyond four years and Assessing Officer has not brought on record any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material

Shree Chandi Maa Mahakali Prachin Mandir Sidh Peeth Samiti, Sonipat vs. CPC, Banglore

ITA 4791/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 92C

ITA Nos.4859/Del/2009; ITA Nos.157 to 159, 4791, 4856 & 5358/Del/2010 & ITA No.2539/Del/2017 Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi IN THE INCOME TAX

Madurai Tuticorin Expressways Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Circle - 5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all three appeals of the assesssee, i

ITA 1143/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

were set aside by the High Courts, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has only permitted the Union of India to proceed further with the reassessment proceedings under the amended provision of law, more particularly, as amended by the Finance Act, 2021. It never intended the authorities concerned to continue with

Viswanadh Kandula, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 1085/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1084 To 1088 & 1027/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20) M/S Ace Tyres (P) Ltd Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aadca2210N Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/09/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothese Six Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Six Separate Orders Dated 29/05/2025, 30/05/2025, 04/06/2025, 096/06/2025, 17/06/2025 & 14/07/2025 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Arising From The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act, Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations U/S 132 Of The Act, Dated 04/01/2023 In Case Of Exel Group Of Companies Including The Assessee For The A.Ys 2014-15 To 2019-20 Respectively. Since Common Issues Are Raised In These Group Of Six Appeals Arising From Same Facts & Search & Seizure Operation, Therefore, For The Sake Of Convenience, All Page 1 Of 78

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148BSection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

Mansa in ITA Nos. 306 & 307/ASR/2019, dated 30.06.2021, wherein it was held as under:- "12. As regards to the validity of the reassessment proceedings under section 147 r.w.s 148 of the Act, it is not in dispute that the A.O. is required to get the approval of the competent authority

Vijay Sadwal, Faridabad Haryana vs. ITO, Ward-2(5), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3554/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandrathe Income-Tax Officer Vs. Shri Paras Jain Ward – 58(7) 164-B, Gali No. - 5 Delhi Azad Nagar, East Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69Section 69C

from the final assessment order passed u/s 147 of the IT Act. If so, treating the opening stock as unexplained investment in the reassessment proceedings and adding the same by invoking section 69 of the IT Act is not maintainable. 6.9 In view of the above, the addition made

Iswar Chand Dubey, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-68 (1), Delhi

ITA 2985/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 147Section 151Section 2(22)(e)

declaring income of Rs.1,25,658/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) and subsequently taken up for reassessment proceedings. The reassessment proceedings were initiated subsequent to the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) in the case of M/s RAAS Ltd. for the year 2006-07. The relevant portion ... free to initiate proceeding under section 147 and failure to take steps under section 143(3) will not render the AO powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings even when intimation under section 143(1) had been issued.” 6.10. The Apex Courts in the judgments mentioned above have clearly held that formation

Punit Kumar Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-36(2), Delhi

ITA 2983/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 147Section 151Section 2(22)(e)

declaring income of Rs.1,25,658/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) and subsequently taken up for reassessment proceedings. The reassessment proceedings were initiated subsequent to the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) in the case of M/s RAAS Ltd. for the year 2006-07. The relevant portion ... free to initiate proceeding under section 147 and failure to take steps under section 143(3) will not render the AO powerless to initiate reassessment proceedings even when intimation under section 143(1) had been issued.” 6.10. The Apex Courts in the judgments mentioned above have clearly held that formation

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. Avinash Singla, Khanna

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

ITA 815/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yaday & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 814 & 815/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2013-14 & 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Avinash Singla, Central Circle-1, बनाम C-47, C.O Avinash Ludhiana Industries, Focal Point, Khanna "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Acypk9591N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 15/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Meenu Singla, बनाम Central Circle-1, C-47, C.O Avinash Ludhiana Industries, Focal Point, Khanna "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No.Afips6556G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Advocate and Shri Virsain AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

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 fulfilment of the conditions mentioned in sections 147/148, as in such a situation, the Revenue cannot