“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

Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Jain, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 799/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 799 & 800/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Ito Jain Ward - 1(2)(3), Vs. 22 Jakorbal Chamber, Opp. Ahmedabad Madhubaug Panchkuwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abbpj6013E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. Dr 19/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 03/10/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 29.12.2023 & 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 249(4)Section 69A

facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO has erred in law and facts in initiating reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act beyond the prescribed time limit of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, i.e AY 2014-15 and hence, reassessment proceedings

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Mahaveer Kumar Jain, Jaipur

ITA 469/JPR/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024

For Appellant: Shri Tanju Agarwal AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR

Section 69

project. It is true that in the present case, copy of the DVO's report was furnished to the assessee during the reassessment proceedings. However, it is required to be noted that except the DVO's report, there was no further tangible material before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, solely

Vimla Devi Meena, Dausa vs. ITO Ward- Dausa, Dausa

ITA 1034/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sarwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 234ASection 250

reassessment, a proper and valid service of notice u/s 148 on assessee is mandatory requirement violation thereof will result in quashing of the reassessment proceedings. Assessee has demonstrated that the notice was issued/sent at an address different than the one mentioned in his return of income. Department also admits that ... served on the assessee for A.Y. 2001-02. In the absence of a valid service of notice u/s 148 on the assessee the reassessment proceedings for AY2001-02 are bad in law, consequently they are quashed. CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd 296 ITR 333 (Del); Hotel Blue Moon

Prabhati Devi, Dausa vs. ITO Ward Dausa, Dausa

ITA 1031/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sarwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

ACIT Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Jmp Securities Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the cross objection by the assessee is allowed, while the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3722/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri. Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri. K Gopal/ Om KandalkarFor Respondent: Shri. Surendra Meena Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151ASection 154Section 250Section 68

Bombay) [25-08-2023] and therefore, unsustainable and bad in law. 3) The NFAC is not justified in upholding the validity of the reassessment proceedings without appreciating the fact that the notice dated 30.07.2022 issued under section 148 of the Act has been issued by the Jurisdictional ... relief granted by the learned CIT(A) on merits. On the other hand, the assessee has filed the cross objection challenging the initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act.As the issues raised by the assessee vide its cross objection are jurisdictional issues, which go to the root

Arihant Engineers, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 28(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3660/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Prashant Maharishi & Shri. Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri. Akhatar Hussain AnsariSr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 234ASection 250Section 274

grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing” 3. Grounds no. 1-3, raised in assessee’s appeal pertain to the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act. 4. As far as the issue relating to the validity of reopening under section ... Mumbai, we are of the considered view that the Revenue has not followed the mandatory provisions of the Act while initiating the reassessment proceedings and sanction of the Specified Authority is not in conformity with the law prevalent at the time of grant of sanction. 13. Thus, in the present

M/S Swastik Construction, Thane vs. I.T.O., Ward-4(4), Thane

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4818/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Shreyash Shah a/w Shri Kunal ShahFor Respondent: Shri. R. R. MakwanaSr. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

based on aforesaid information notice under section 148 was issued on 30/03/2017 and proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to explain the unaccounted cash payment of = 21,65,000 to M/s Vrushi Enterprises during the year as per repayment

Tirupati Jewels, Kailash Colonny New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 30(6), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1853/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Tirupati Jewels Vs Ito Tirupati Jewels K-12, Kailash Ward- 30 (6) Colony New Delhi-110048, Delhi New Delhi Pan No.Aajft4161A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

under Section 124(3)(a). This condition has been obviously overlooked by the ITAT which proceeded to set aside the assessment and completed the reassessment proceedings. The impugned order is consequently set aside; the question of law urged by the Revenue is answered in its favour. The matter is remitted ... consideration on the merits of the appeal concerning the additions made in the reassessment proceedings.” 9. The assessee has not challenged the jurisdiction before the AO within time so this argument is not tenable. Ground decided accordingly. 10. We find that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading

Kalpana Saurabh Patwa, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT-3, Ahmedabad

ITA 512/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah &For Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

purchased jointly in the name of Saurabh Sumant Patwa, Kalpana Saurabh Patwa, Gopi Saurabh Patwa and Shimoli Vishal Shah from NODPL. 2.2. During the reassessment proceedings for the AY 2015-16, the assessees raised significant objections regarding the validity of the re-opening of the assessment. Despite repeated requests ... stated that the Ld.PCIT has not given any details of information received, its analysis and independent inquiry. The assessee also stated that during the reassessment proceedings the AO has already conducted the inquiry about the impugned issue and completed the reassessment. The assessee also argued that where two views

Kalpana Saurabh Patwa, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT-3, Ahmedabad

ITA 511/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah &For Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

Saurabh Sumant Patwa, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT-3, Ahmedabad

ITA 510/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah &For Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

Saurabh Sumant Patwa, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT-3, Ahmedabad

ITA 509/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah &For Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

M/S. Stone Metals Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1499/KOL/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: hearing of the appeal.”

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

raised the following grounds of appeal: I.T.A. No. 1499/Kol/2024 M/s Stone Metals Private Limited “1. For that the Ld. AO erred in initiating reassessment proceedings merely based upon information received without independent application of mind and without establishing any live link or intelligible nexus between the information received and belief ... received during the year under appeal but the Financial Year 2011-12 (Assessment Year 2012-13). As such the very reason for which reassessment proceedings has been initiated is factually incorrect. Consequently, the entire reassessment proceeding is bad in law and ab initio void. 3. For that even otherwise, since

M/S Multitech Solutions, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. -31, Kolkata

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

ITA 1443/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, Additional CIT

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

year in which the loan was received or the very next financial year 2013-14, which is much before the start of the instant reassessment proceedings. The relationship of the creditors with the partners has also been mentioned and a transaction summary in case of the loan creditors from whom

Brijendra Garg, Bhiwadi vs. ITO Ward Bhiwadi, Bhiwadi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed with no order is to cost

ITA 103/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147

ld.CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified and arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted quashing the entire reassessment proceedings being illegal and void ab initio. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2892/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Small Industries Income Tax Circle- Development Bank Of 3(3)(1) India Room No. 609, Sme Development Centre, Aaykar Bhavan, C-11, G- Block, Vs. M. K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Churchgate, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400020. Pan: Aabcs3480N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule- CIT D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

Rs.1536,44,28,460/- Thereafter notice u/s 143(2) and u/s142(1) were issued to assessee from time to time. Assessee filed objections against reassessment proceedings on 02.08.2021 as under: - “The objections raised by the assessee are being summarized as under: i. The documents filed during the assessment proceedings were ... Acrylic Manufacturing Co, vs. CIT and Anr (2009) 308 ITR 38 (Del) Thus, the assessee contended that in view of above judicial pronouncements, the reassessment proceedings maybe dropped.” 5. The objections raised as above were disposed of by the AO on 31.01.2022 by holding as under: - “The reasons giving rise

Amish Manubhai Brahmbhatt, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 932/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

reopening of assessment itself fails, therefore the reassessment made by the Assessing Officer has no legs to stand. In our considered view, the entire reassessment proceedings is liable to be quashed. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed. Order pronounced in the open court

M/S. Panchmahal Steel Ltd., Baroda vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for both the assessment years in question

ITA 128/AHD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Manish J Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 263

Department that 5,636 bags of nuts were received in the relevant period at the factory and godown belonging to the assessee. Hence, reassessment proceedings were started and penalty proceedings were also initiated. These were upheld by the Tribunal. On a reference the High Court held that in the sales ... sales tax proceedings resulting in the final order in regard thereto on May 25, 1990, by the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) Sales Tax, rendered the reassessment proceedings invalid. While passing the order the High Court made the following observations:- “Be that as it may, when the very initiation and origin

M/S. Panchmahal Steel Ltd., Baroda vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for both the assessment years in question

ITA 127/AHD/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Manish J Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 263

Agamani Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 365/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.365/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Agamani Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant Vandana Auto Rmakund, G.E. Road, Chhattisgarh-492001. (Pan: Aagca6022P) Vs. Assessing Officer ………… Respondent National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. Appearances By: Shri Abhisek Bansal, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Addl. Cit Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 28.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 27.09.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2013-14 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 29.12.2023 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68

that the assessment order passed. by the Ld. AO is bad in law as well as on facts. 2. For that the reassessment proceedings initiated merely on the basis of information received without me AO himself carrying out any Inquiry and without independent application of mind ... order In haste without providing the appellant sufficient opportunity of being heard. 6. For that under the facts and circumstances of the case, the reassessment proceeding is bad in law and the addition made by the Ld. AO and affirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is liable to be deleted