← 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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad vs. Marsh Fincom Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1342/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1342/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Aurangabad. Vs. Marsh Fincom Pvt. Ltd., 9Th Floor, Gold Crest, Ns Road No.10, Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai- 400049. Pan : Aabck0760B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.09.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)-12, Pune For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts By Quashing Proceedings U/S. 153A In Respect Of Assessee Where The Assessee’S Case Was Covered Under Section 132 Of The Act Dated 20.08.2014. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That The Ao Has Made

For Appellant: Shri Deepak ShahFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY

Andimuthu Raja, Perambalur vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Tiruchirapalli

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 262/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.261/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.262/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Andimuthu Raja Acit बनाम/ 3/127, Ambedkar Street, Velur Post Circle-1(1) Vs. Perambalur-621 104. Tiruchirapalli. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adtpr-2755-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Y.Sridhar (Fca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms.R.Anita (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri Y.Sridhar (FCA)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anita (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Further, there is no tangible material before Ld. AO to reopen the case of the assessee. Therefore, there is no valid ground to initiate reassessment proceedings. The issue of STCG has already been adjudicated favorably by Ld. CIT(A) in assessee’s favor and accordingly, there remain no ground

Andimuthu Raja, Perambalur vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Tiruchirapalli

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 261/CHNY/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.261/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2006-07) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.262/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Andimuthu Raja Acit बनाम/ 3/127, Ambedkar Street, Velur Post Circle-1(1) Vs. Perambalur-621 104. Tiruchirapalli. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adtpr-2755-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Y.Sridhar (Fca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms.R.Anita (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri Y.Sridhar (FCA)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anita (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Further, there is no tangible material before Ld. AO to reopen the case of the assessee. Therefore, there is no valid ground to initiate reassessment proceedings. The issue of STCG has already been adjudicated favorably by Ld. CIT(A) in assessee’s favor and accordingly, there remain no ground

M/S. R.K. Investments, Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1159/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1159/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. R.K. Investments Dcit Ground Floor, Block-Iv, Non-Corporate Circle-3(1) बनाम/ No.184-187,Temple Steps, Chennai. Vs. Anna Salai Little Mount, Chennai-600 015. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaafr-3413-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 2(14)(lii)Section 263Section 45

basis of submissions by the appellant of relevant documents at the time of original assessment as well as in the course of reassessment proceedings, particularly when the assessment was reopened only to see whether the impugned land would constitute a capital asset and on both occasions, the concerned assessing officers ... reopened specifically on the ground that the assessee claimed exemption u/s. 2(14)(iii) on sale of agricultural land. During the course of reassessment proceedings, various replies were furnished on the basis of which Ld.AO concluded that land sold was an agricultural land. Therefore, the issues were duly examined