“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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Sh. Naval Kishore, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 456/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Section 139Section 143Section 153A

extert that these are proceedings for the benefit of Revenue and not that of the assessee. The assessee cannot be permitted, to convert these reassessment proceedings es his appeal or revision in disguise and seek relief in respect of items earlier not claimed in the original return of income. Reliance ... Court in CIT Vs Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. [1992] 107 CTR (SC) 209: [1992] 198 ITR 297 (SC) to the effect that in reassessment proceedings, an assessee can neither claim nor be allowed a deduction that was not claimed in the original return. As such the assessment proceedings initiated

Income Tax Office, Ward-6(2), Jaipur vs. Medical Designs India Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 236/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ratan Lal Goyal (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

assessee company was the seller and not the buyer, thus it is clear that while recording the reasons before the initiation of the reassessment proceedings, no effort was made to apply mind on the information supplied and in mechanical manner the reasons were recorded stating wrong facts. However, in Remand ... vain who tried to justify the addition by now considering it to be deemed sale value, which was never be the subject matter of reassessment proceedings. As submitted above, only issue on which satisfaction was recorded, is with respect to source of investment in purchase of immovable property, addition

Naval Kishore, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that

ITA 205/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Sh. Anil Dhaka (CIT)

Section 139Section 143Section 153ASection 234ASection 68

Comfort Intech Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(1) Mumbai, Aaykar Bhawan Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2926/MUM/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal&For Respondent: Shri Yogendra T. Wakare, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

issue any notice under Section 148 beyond 31st March 2021 and hence, even the relate back theory of the Revenue could not safeguard the reassessment proceedings initiated after 1st April 2021 for AY 2013-14 11 Comfort Intech Limited batch 36 Therefore, in the present case, as the foundation ... entire reassessment proceeding, viz., the notice issued in June 2021 itself was barred by limitation in view of non-applicability of Notification No.20/2021, the superstructure sitting thereon, viz., the reassessment proceedings initiated pursuant to judgment in Ashish Agarwal will also be regarded as beyond time limit. Therefore, on this ground

Comfort Intech Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(1) Mumbai, Aaykar Bhawan Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2573/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal&For Respondent: Shri Yogendra T. Wakare, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

Jayshree Ravi Sancheti, Mumbai vs. PCIT-20, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2269/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68Section 69C

purchase price as discussed above, after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.” 3. The ld. Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that during reassessment proceedings, the AO called on various details pertaining to the alleged bogus LTCG and after perusing all the details made the addition ... Accordingly, the ld. AR submitted that the AO has applied his mind while deciding to make an addition of the net capital gain during reassessment proceeding. The ld. AR took the bench through the show-cause notice issued by the PCIT (page 1 & 2 of PB) to submit that

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Comfort Intech Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2218/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal&For Respondent: Shri Yogendra T. Wakare, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Comfort Intech Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2216/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal&For Respondent: Shri Yogendra T. Wakare, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Comfort Intech Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2212/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal&For Respondent: Shri Yogendra T. Wakare, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

ACIT-24(1), Mumbai, Income Tax Department vs. Raj Clearing Agency, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

ITA 1489/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember Acit – 24(1), Raj Clearing Agency, Vs. Room.No.601, 6Th Floor, 303/D Wing, Piramal Chambers, Jayant Apartment, Lalbaug, Parel, Sahar Cargocomplex, Mumbai – 400012. Andheri(East), Mumbai-40099. Pan/Gir No. Aaifr0443E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 40A(2)(b)

Rs.2.46,07,278/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to furnish the basic details as called for by the AO during the reassessment proceedings as well as during the appeal proceedings to establish the genuineness of the expenses claimed on account of Agency charges of Rs.2.46 ... that basic facts for application of TDS provision, i.e. nature of the services rendered by M/s. Capricorn Logistics Pvt. Ltd remained unexplained in the reassessment proceedings as well as before the Ld. CIT(A). 6 (f) On the facts and circumstances of the case

A.C.I.T, Wardha Circle, Wardha vs. M/S Kapil Solvex Pvt .Ltd, Yavatmal

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 221/NAG/2017[2009-20010]Status: Trans-OutITAT Pune26 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

even according to the judgment of the Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (supra), is not considered to be fatal to the validity of the reassessment proceedings. In the present case, we have already found that the assessee was aware of the reasons for reopening the assessment. Therefore ... necessary for us to enter into the controversy as to whether the non-communication of the reasons is fatal to the validity of the reassessment proceedings or not. Even if it is to be held that the assessee cannot be said to be aware of the reasons for reopening

Syeda Humera Hai, K V Ranga Reddy vs. ITO (Int Taxn)-I, Hyderabad

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

ITA 461/HYD/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Dayaker, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR

Section 147

information the Assessing Officer reopened the case of the assessee u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). However during the course of reassessment proceedings no one appeared from the side of the assessee. Therefore on the basis of information revealing that the assessee has sold out a property

Rukhmani Traders, Mumbai vs. ACIT 18 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 822/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Rukhmani Traders, Asst. Cit -18(3), 6Th Floor, A Wing, Aurus Chambers, Earnest House, Nariman Point, Vs. S.S. Amrutwar Marg, Behind Mumbai-400021. Mahindra Towers, Worli, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aalfr 1619 R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shreyash ShahFor Respondent: Mrs. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 151

granted by quashing the entire reassessment be please be granted by quashing the entire reassessment be please be granted by quashing the entire reassessment proceedings initiated by the Id. AO and confirmed by the Id. proceedings initiated by the Id. AO and confirmed by the Id. proceedings initiated ... granted by quashing the entire reassessment be please be granted by quashing the entire reassessment be please be granted by quashing the entire reassessment proceedings initiated by the Id. AO and confirmed by the Id. proceedings initiated by the Id. AO and confirmed by the Id. proceedings initiated

Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1096/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/Sf 211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) V/S. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad Sp Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Atrpp 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jinesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Jinesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 251Section 68

challenging the orders of the AO. These legal grounds primarily pertain to procedural lapses alleged to have been committed by the AO during the reassessment proceedings. 7.1. The AR contended that the AO failed to issue a notice under section 143(2) after the filing of the return in response ... notice issued under section 148. The AR argued that this failure renders the entire reassessment proceedings invalid as per the settled law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer [2002] 125 Taxman 963 (SC). The assessee relied

Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1095/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Jinesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 251Section 68

Ramilaben Dineshbhai Moradiya, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1095/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Preyashi Tated, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

issued, asking the assessee to furnish details regarding the source of the cash deposits, but again, the assessee did not comply. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the savings bank statement showed total credit entries of Rs. 58,79,197/- which included the cash deposits. Since

Anju Chirania, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 4(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3158/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalanju Chirania, Vs. Ito, Ward –4(1)(3), 301, Sona Chambers, Room No. 637, 507/509, Jss Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Chira Bazar, Marine Lines, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 002. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. Afcpc9073Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

possible evidences as provided and placed on record of the Assessing Officer by the appellant before or after the commencement of reassessment proceedings to shift the onus back on to the appellant. 8. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income ... Since, the grounds of appeal on merits are decided in favour of the assesse, hence the grounds of appeal with respect to validity of reassessment proceedings raised by the assesse becomes academic and are left open. 20. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced

Polly Saha, Kolkata vs. ITO Ward 45(3), Kolkata

ITA 1097/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Taraknath Jaiswal, AdvFor Respondent: Madhumita Das, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50C

information suggesting escapement of income pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12, arising from the sale of immovable property, the Assessing Officer (the Ld. AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. Pursuant to the issuance

Ryatar Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamit, Bagalkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Vijaypura

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

ITA 1282/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri V. Mudrabettu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Parithivel, V., Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 68

there is no cross-examination provided to the assessee before making the addition, but the assessee could not prove that during the course of reassessment proceedings any Page 6 of 6 request was made with the AO for cross-examination, therefore the arguments made

Bindu Nambiar, Mumbai vs. Bipin Kumar Gupta, Piramal Chamber Ward

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1229/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: the AO wherein the AO has issues notice dated 09-01-2024 to Assessee to submit the relevant details and explanation on or before 19-01-2024.” 3. We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The relevant facts that emerged from the material on record are that the Assessee, an individual, did not file return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-2013. However, as per the information available with the Income Tax Department, the Appellant had undertaken transactions aggreg

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep NambiarFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Income Tax Department, the Appellant had undertaken transactions aggregating to INR.78,95,010/- in respect of which payments were made through credit card. Therefore, reassessment proceedings were initiated under Section 147 of the Act. The Assessee did not file any return of income in response to notice issued under Section