“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

Income Tax Officer-23(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Satguru Gems, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the R

ITA 4644/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. K A Viadyalingan

validity of the On further appeal, the assessee challenged the validity of the On further appeal, the assessee challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings as well as addition on merit. The Ld. ceedings as well as addition on merit. The Ld. ceedings as well as addition on merit

Income Tax Officer-23(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Satguru Gems, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the R

ITA 4613/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. K A Viadyalingan

Sachin Chirania, Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Navi Mumbai

ITA 4408/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 4. On the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in not taking cognizance of the stated legal position that Assessing Officer was bound to provide reasons within reasonable time for which he took six months and did not dispose of the objections filed by the assessee before completion of

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal KishoreFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

enquiries done to disprove the onus, so discharged by the appellant.” 3. The relevant facts in brief are that reassessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the Appellant for the Assessment Year 2012-13, and assessment was framed on the Appellant, vide order dated 04/12/2019, passed under Section ... Assessment Year: 2012-13 stock by the report of the investigation wing. In appeal before the CIT(A), the Appellant challenged the validity of reassessment proceedings as well as the additions of INR 10,77,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69A of the Act on merits. However

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2938/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

purposes of assessment or reassessment. F. INCRIMINATING MATERIAL- CASCADING EFFECT? 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

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2937/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2936/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2935/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR

Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

Nrupal Nareshchandra Raja, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 839/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 263

144B passed by learned Assessing Officer inspite of the fact that full inquiry was made by the learned Assessing Officer during the course of reassessment proceeding, and thereafter, the assessment order was passed. It is submitted that what the learned Assessing Officer had done in the reassessment order was taking ... examination of accommodation entries obtained by the assessee from Jignesh Shah and group, this issue was examined during the course of reassessment proceedings. Secondly, the counsel for the assessee submitted that during the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee had specifically submitted that during the impugned year under consideration

Shah Jitendrakumar Mafatlal HUF, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad vs. PCIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 645/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Padshah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 263

PCIT Asst.Year –2014-15 - 7– transactions as fictitious loan entry operator beneficiary amounting to ₹ 47,50,000/- of Jignesh Shah. In the reassessment proceedings, the assessee raised a specific objection that the assessee had not taken any loan from Jignesh Shah in any manner and accordingly, the reassessment proceedings which ... assessee. It is well settled law that recourse cannot be made to 263 proceedings, only with a view to enhance the scope of assessment / reassessment proceedings. It is evident from the facts placed on record that the issue regarding accommodation entry has been examined in detail both during the course

Deep Energy Resources Ltd. (Formerly Deep Industries Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the matter is restored to the file of Ld

ITA 461/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

receipt of reliable information. The AO followed due procedure in reopening of the assessment. Further the appellant was afforded opportunities of hearing during the reassessment proceedings. As such the action of the AO in making addition of the bogus unsecured loans entered with M/s. Rati Diamonds

Murari Mohan Moni, Purulia vs. ITO, Ward 3(3), Purulia

ITA 832/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Murari Mohan Moni Income Tax Officer, Ward No.13, Munsefdanga Ward 3(3), Purulia, Raghunathpur, Vs. West Bengal-713304 West Bengal-723133 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adqpm3685E Assessee By : Shri Sheikh Muhammad Asif Ali, Ar Revenue By : Shri Gautam Patra, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sheikh Muhammad Asif Ali, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Patra, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 50Section 50C

Officer called for Murari Mohan Moni, A.Y. 2012-13 certain information by issuing notice under Section 133(6) of the Act and concluded the reassessment proceedings making two additions firstly, for unexplained cash deposit of ₹19,64,500/- and secondly, addition for violation of section

Narendra Kumar Agrawal, Burhanpur vs. PCIT Indore-1, Indore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 345/IND/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaninarendra Kumar Agrawal Pcit (1) 203, Ck Campus Aaykar Bhawan Bahadarpur Road Vs. Indore Burhanpur (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adapa0131B Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2024

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

through M/s Xpro Securities was to be assessed tax by treating the same as fictitious entries of loss obtained by the assessee. During the reassessment proceedings the AO issued show cause notice u/s 142(1) dated 09.03.2022 which was replied by the assessee vide reply dated 15.03.2022. The assesse also ... transactions, ledger account of M/s Xpro Securities (broker) in the books of assessee, copy of contract note issued by M/s Xpro Securities during the reassessment proceedings. The AO after considering reply as well as documentary evidences was satisfied and again accepted the return income while passing order

ACIT Ltu 2, Chennai vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai

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

ITA 946/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.775/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011 ) Indian Overseas Bank, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 763, Anna Salai, Income Tax, Chennai 600 002. Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai 600 034. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.946/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011. ) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Income Tax, 763, Anna Salai, Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai 600 002. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaaci 1223J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. C. Naresh, C.A., Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, IRS, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 36(1)(viia)

belief has to be on the basis of some fresh tangible material or new information which is not the case here. This being so, reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed on legal grounds. 9. The aforesaid conclusion also find support from the decision of Hon’ble High Court ... Taxmann.com 280) as well as in CIT V/s RPG Transmissions Ltd. (48 Taxmann.com 57). 10. Considering the ratio of aforesaid binding judicial pronouncements, the reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. We order so. The legal grounds urged by the assessee stand allowed. The Ld. AR submitted that in such

Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu-2, Chennai

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

ITA 775/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, IRS, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 36(1)(viia)

Sarita Gupta, Alwar vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 662/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44A

notice under sec. 154 for rectification of the alleged mistakes. Rectification notice had been dropped by the same AO. He cannot again start reassessment proceedings on the basis of the same reasons. Condition precedent for initiation of reassessment proceedings is in any case, the formation of the belief, based ... proceedings u/s 154 were initiated in the year 2011, however, AO without dropping the proceedings or without passing any order u/s 154, initiated the reassessment proceedings on the same issue in the year 2013 and thereafter, completed the assessment by means of order u/s 143(3) read with section

Brij Bihari Agrawal, Jaipur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 737/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal (C.A)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

nexus between material and belief. (f) The reasons referred must show application of mind by the assessing officer. The validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings has to be judged with regard to the material available with the officer at the point of time of issue of notice ... reference to material that may have 13 ITA No. 737/JPR/2023 Sh. Brij Bihari Agrawal vs. ACIT come to light subsequently in the course of reassessment proceedings. In the light of what is stated above, we hold that there was no material with the AO for having reasons to believe that

Income-Tax Officer-20(3)(1), Piramal Chamber vs. Sameer Mahesh Sachde, Kutchi Lohana Niwas

In the result, appeal of the revenue and cross-objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2180/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Shri Vimal Punmiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Suhas Dabade, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 69C

present case, on the basis of the information received from the DGIT (Investigation), Mumbai that the assessee is the beneficiary of bogus purchases, reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee were initiated. Further, notice issued under section 133(6) by the AO to the entity was also returned unserved

Income Tax Officer - 19(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kuverben Kantilal Raval, Mumbai

In the result all the grounds of the appeal of the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 2066/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm A.Y.2013-14 The Income Tax Officer Kunverben Ratilal Raval 7, Taldhwaj Bhavan 19 (2) (2) Mumbai 3 Road 503, 5Th Floor, Pinjrapole Lane Vs. Piramal Chambers Mumbai 400004 Lal Baug, Parel Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan Aadpr8076L Assessee By Mr Mitesh Mehta Ca Revenue By Shri P D Chougule Adl Cit Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 14-08-2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2024

Section 131Section 143Section 144BSection 147Section 148

that 1. The statement of Mr Chethan P Bhakhada recorded under section 131 of the IT act was provided to the assessee during the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the act, which was not the case in the relied decision in the Ravi Gopal Trivedy 2. Reasons recorded ... assessment was carried out under section 143 (3) on 9/3/2016 wherein the assessed income was determined at Rs. 1,059,400/–. 4. Subsequently the reassessment proceedings were initiated by issuing a notice under section 148 on 24/4/2024. The reassessment was done wherein the reasons were recorded about client Modification code

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4) Mumbai, Pratishtha Bhavan Mumbai vs. Ghv Hotel (India) Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the learned Assessing Officer is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3296/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm A.Y.2018-19 Acit, Ghv Hotel (India) Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1(4), Kedy Compound , Near Mumbai, Pratishtha Bhavan, Bombay Mercantile Coop Vs. Mumbai Bank Limited Nagpada Junction Mumbai 400008

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148ASection 68

reassessment order dated 19.12.2022. 5. The assessee is aggrieved with that filed appeal before learned CIT(A), wherein reassessment proceedings were also challenged and it was stated that the assessee has proved the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. It was also contested that merely on the basis

P S Metal Store, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward- 63(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in the aforesaid manner

ITA 851/DEL/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Narinder Kumara.Yr. : 2007-08 P S Metal Store, Ito Ward 63(3), 5837, Basti Harphool Singh, Vs. New Delhi – 110 002 Sadar Bazar, Delhi – 110 006 (Pan: Adbpj5099C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: : Shri Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Yogeshwar Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the learned AO without obtaining approval of the prescribed authority under the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed