“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

Blueview Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-7(4).Kolkata., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 752/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 292B

validity of the assessment proceedings u/s 147/144 of the Act is concerned. It has further held that the failure of the AO, in reassessment proceedings, to issue notice u/s 143(2) of the Act prior to the finalizing the reassessment order cannot be condoned by referring the Section 292BB

Sheela Ramchand Uttamchandani, Mumbai vs. ITO-30(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3398/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54

Ramchand Uttamchandani “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO of initiating the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act in the case of appellant 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in passing ... appeal is partly allowed, while ground No. 4 is allowed. 16. Ground No. 1, raised in assessee’s appeal, challenging the initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act was not pressed during the hearing. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 17. Further, we find that

M/S. Saroj Embrods Pvt. Ltd., Hooghly vs. DCIT, C.C-3(4), Kolkata.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1352/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

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

assessment. Under these facts and circumstances, the order of Ld. CIT(A) is required to be set aside on the jurisdictional issue and the reassessment proceedings are held to be invalid and so is the assessment framed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. The legal

Saroj Embrods Private Limited., Hooghly vs. DCIT, C.C-3(4), Kolkata.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1351/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

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

Alma Assets Consultancy Private Limited., Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ward-4(3), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1092/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1092/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Alma Assets Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.………............…...……………....Appellant 341-K1, Post Office: Sahabana, Chandigarh Road, Mundian Khurd Ludhiana. [Pan: Aaica6234H] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata…….............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 10, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 20 , 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.08.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs.10,26,99,100/- Made By The Assessing Officer As Unexplained Cash Credits Into The Income Of The Assessee. 3. The Assessee Through Its Grounds Of Appeal Has Contested Not Only The Validity Of The Additions On Merits But Also Relating To The Validity Of The Reopening Of The Assessment U/S 147 R.W.S. 148 Of The Act & Also The Validity Of The Assessment For Want Of Issue Of Notice U/S 143(2) Of

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, has submitted that a letter was submitted by the assessee during the course of reassessment proceedings before the AO on 09.07.2014 stating that the return originally filed u/s 139 on 26.09.2011 may be treated as the I.T.A. No.1092/Kol/2023 Assessment Year ... case has been rightly dealt with by the learned Tribunal affirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and quashing the reassessment proceeding for want of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. In this regard usual reference may be made to the decision

Compagnie Ibm France, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 546/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos.490 & 491/Bang/2024

Section 271

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Compagnie Ibm France, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 545/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not_filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings — Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm Corporation, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 544/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings − Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm Canada Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 543/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos.490 & 491/Bang/2024

Section 271

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT") service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm United Kingdom Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 542/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Ibm Australia Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 541/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos.490 & 491/Bang/2024

Section 271

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT") service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm Osterreich Intionationale Buromaschinen Gesellschaft Mbh, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 504/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not_filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings — Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm Del Peru Sac, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 502/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology ("IT") service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm Deutschland Gmbh, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 501/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not_filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings — Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm China Hong Kong Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 500/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not_filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings — Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm Corporation, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 499/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings − Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm United Kingdom Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 498/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not_filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings — Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm United Kingdom Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 497/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings − Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm Israel Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 496/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology (“IT”) service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings − Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered

Ibm Israel Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, International Taxation-Circle-1(2), Bangalore

ITA 495/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A Nos.490 & 491/Bang/2024

Section 271

income which was filed in response to the initial 148 notice or by way of a revised computation at the stage of assessment/ reassessment proceedings. Furthermore, IBM Australia Limited also offered the Asia Pacific ("AP") Information Technology ("IT") service receipts and the miscellaneous support service receipts/ other receipts ... case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act was not filed and receipts were offered to tax during the reassessment proceedings Category C: 271(1)(c) case where original return under section 139(1) of the Act has been filed however, secondment related receipts were offered