← 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

Late Lodaya Navalbai Raichand by Legal Heir Shri. Sharad R Lodaya, Gadag vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gadag

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on Ground nos

ITA 39/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Smt. Preethi Patel, Advocate
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

provisions of section 292BB and submitted that the notice u/s. 148 to be read as originally issued. He thus submitted that the reassessment proceedings are valid. 12. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Late Navalbai R. Lodaya expired on 09.06.2011. From the record ... extent to which the estate is capable of meeting the liability.” Section 159 (2) of the Act makes a specific reference to a reassessment proceeding under Section 147 of the Act. While Section 159 (2) (a) of the Act talks of a proceeding already taken against an Assessee 'before

Aadesh Commodities Pvt Ltd, Mumbai Suburban vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 4035/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy.Saadesh Commodities Pvt Ltd Vs National Faceless Assessment 401, Satyam Tower, 90 Feet Centre, Delhi Road, Asha Nagar, Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400 101 Pan : Aahca3726H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, JCIT
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 250Section 68

incumbent to first dispose off the objections to reopening and wait for a period of 4 weeks thereafter before proceedings to begin reassessment proceedings. The CIT(A) / AO failed to appreciate that: a. the notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Sir Dorabji Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2116/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Bleand**

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

### **IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH "D", MUMBAI** # **BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

Sir Dorabji Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Appeals) NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2085/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Bleand**

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

### **IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH "D", MUMBAI** # **BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

Sumit Maheshwari, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(5), Meerut

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 779/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.779/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

SURESH KUMAR SHEETLANI VS. ITO - ITA NO. 413 OF 2011 DATED 14.08.2018 ,wherein it was held "Notice served at the wrong address renders reassessment proceedings invalid". Full text of the judgment is enclosed. Our issue is squarely covered under this judgement.” 2. On perusal of the penalty order passed

Gulshan Grover, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 59(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 1127/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganeshgulshan Grover, Vs. Ito, H. No. 64, Block-18, Ward-59(4), Geeta Colony, East New Delhi Delhi, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Agbpg4348N Assessee By : Shri Manpreet Singh, Ca Shri R. S. Rathore, Adv Revenue By: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/04/2024

For Appellant: Shri Manpreet Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148

ICICI Bank Account, which compelled the ld AO to make the addition of ₹84,84,075/- as unexplained cash deposit while completing the reassessment proceedings u/s 144 read with section 147 of the Act on 21.12.2017. The ld CIT(A) gave relief of ₹2,04,750/- being the income declared

Arvind Dada Kolekar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 16(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4137/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHARI (Accountant Member)

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 151Section 151ASection 56(2)(vii)

reopening time barred. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in initiating reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 since the notice dated 27.07.2022 u/s. 148 was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer which is in clear violation of section 151A

Rachit Aggarwal (Prop.) Ashok Kumar Gupta & Co., Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ward II(2), Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 858/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.Krishnan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 234BSection 271ASection 68

have furnished all the requisite documents and details, firstly before the AO in the ITA -858/CHD/2023 & SA-2/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 28 reassessment proceedings, and then before the CIT(A). Further, the AO has wrongly observed that the assessee failed to supply the source of the cash deposits

Loksewa Shikshan Bahuuddeshiya Mandal, Buldhana vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 62/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.62/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2015-16 Lokeswa Shikshan The Commissioner Of Bahuuddeshiya Mandal, V Income Tax-I, Nagpur. C/O. Dr.Arvindw.Kolte, S Janta College, Buldhana Road, Malkapur – 443101. Pan: Aaatl5306N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanjay Thakar – Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Nagpur Dated 11.11.2014 Passed Under Section 12Aa(1) Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : 1] On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Material Already On Record The Learned Cit Should Have Granted Registration U/S. 12A As Per Assessee’S Application Filed On Lokeswa Shikshan Bahuuddeshiya Mandal [A]

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 148Section 253(3)

remained to be filed and hence the (case of the Assessee was reopened for A.Y.2015-16 by notice u/s.148 dt.30.03.2022. It was in this reassessment proceedings one of the issue o registration of Trust u/s.l2-A for the year arose. Said reassessment proceedings are going on. It then came to light that

Manju Devi Shah, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-50(4), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1280/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.1280/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Manju Devi Shah……………..…..…......................…...……………....Appellant P-281 Scheme Vim Cit Road, Kankurgachi, Kolkata-700054. [Pan: Amkps3650G] Vs. Ito, Ward-50(4), Kolkata.......…..........................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Bibekananda Madhu, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 29, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 22, 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 12.10.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Apart From Challenging The Additions On Merits Made/Confirmed By The Lower Authorities Of Rs.42,12,703/- U/S 68 Of The Act By Treating The Long-Term Capital Gains Earned By The Assessee As Bogus, Has Also Challenged The Very Validity Of The Reopening Of The Assessment. 3. Since, The Legal Grounds Relating To The Validity Of The Reopening Of The Assessment Hit At The Very Jurisdiction Of The Assessing Officer To

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

legal issue raised by the assessee in the additional ground is that notice u/s 148 of the Act is time barred and, therefore, the reassessment proceedings carried out are without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. We notice that the assessee, who is an individual, filed his return of income ... April 1 2021 at 3 a.m. thereby treating the 1st April 2021 as issuance of impugned notice u/s 148 of the Act, quashed the reassessment proceedings holding that the provisions of Finance Act 2021 would be applicable from 01.04.2021 and therefore, before issuance any notice

Shah Construction Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 859/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(iii)

against the order, dated 31/03/2016, passed under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Act challenging the initiation of reassessment proceedings as well as the addition made on merits. However, the CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer of initiating reassessment proceedings under Section ... Being aggrieved, the Appellant has now carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal. Ground No. 1 is challenge the validity of the reassessment proceedings. Ground Nos. 2 & 3 are directed against the disallowances made on merits. Ground No. 4 pertains to interest charged under Section 234B

Neera Dhupar, Delhi vs. I T O, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3051/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad:Assessment Year: 2011-12 Neera Dhupar, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), 1E/15, Jhandewalan Noida (Up) Extension, Delhi-1100 55

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

both in law and on facts in upholding the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 of the Act, in as much as, the instant reassessment proceedings were without satisfying the statutory pre-condition as envisaged under the Act. 2.1 That the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) has failed ... appreciate the fact that the reassessment proceedings so initiated by Assessing Officer based in Noida are without jurisdiction, as the assessee’s jurisdiction lies in Delhi and that is why, the notices so issued by A.O in Noida were never served on the assessee on the address mentioned

Chodisetty Hemashankar, Tuni vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tuni

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 74/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.74/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Chodisetty Hemashankar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Tuni. Ward-1, Pan: Akupc 0617 K Tuni. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of : 19/04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

ought to have held that the notice issued U/s. 148 of the Act is invalid and ought to have quashed the consequent reassessment proceedings as void ab initio. 4. Without prejudice to Ground No.2 and Ground No.3, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have directed the AO to estimate reasonable

Dori Winery Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 6(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result ITA number 1145/M/2024 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1145/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Dori Winery Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer 6(2)(1) 366 Dhuru Lodge, Aayakar Bhavan, Veer Savarkar Marg, Vs. Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400028 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccd1400A Assessee By : Shri Haridas Bhatt Revenue By : Smt. Smitha V. Nair (Sr. Ar.) Date Of Hearing: 10.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.04.2024

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Smt. Smitha V. Nair (Sr. Ar.)
Section 139Section 148Section 196ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 37

have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. We find that during the course of the reassessment proceedings where the notice under section 148 of the income tax act was issued the assessee filed its return of income. The assessee did not file ... original return of income. When the reassessment proceedings culminated into an assessment order, the addition was made with respect to the reasons for which reassessment proceedings were initiated and further the learned assessing officer asked about the details of the expenses incurred by the assessee and claimed as deduction under

Mr Manish Rajnarain Goswami, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3960/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Blemanish Rajnarain Goswami V. Income Tax Officer – 16(1)(3) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Metropolitan Chsl Mumbai - 400020 B-6 / B-8, Nargisdas Road Pali Hill, Bandra (W) Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Addpg7655D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vijay Mehta Department Represented By : Smt Mahita Nair

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

beyond the limitation period of four years I have disclosed all the facts while filing income tax return. 3. I object to the said reassessment proceedings and request you to kindly provide us with copy of all the evidences that is to used against me. Treat these as my objections ... /survey and also provide us an opportunity to cross examine concerned persons. In view of the above I request Your Honor to drop the reassessment proceedings and oblige.” Page No. 10 Manish Rajnarain Goswami 16. Order disposing the objections raised by the assessee read as under: - “ORDER DISPOSING

Jignesh Chimanlal Jobanputra, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Ward 33(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4008/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, JCIT
Section 148Section 69

treat the original return as the return filed in response to the notice under section 148 of the Act. During the course of reassessment proceedings the AO noticed that the assessee has made investments in immovable property for an amount of Rs.52,23,570 and called on the assessee ... proving the genuineness of the loan transaction. 6. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. The AO during the course of reassessment proceedings, called on the assessee to furnish the details of source for purchase of immovable property. Since the assessee did not furnish

Kaushik Pravinchandra Gohel, Bhavnagar vs. The Assessing Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with respect to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act for A

ITA 694/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B. R. Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

approvals / legal steps for initiating proceedings under Sections 147 / 148 of the Act were duly taken by the Assessing Officer prior to initiation of reassessment proceedings. Secondly, on facts which are on record before us, the assessee had not filed it’s return of income for the impugned assessment year ... During the course of arguments, we had requested the Department to furnish a copy of the Investigation Report, on the basis of which the reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee so as to facilitate the Bench in adjudicating the issue, which is before the Bench for it’s consideration

Kaushik Pravinchandra Gohel, Bhavnagar vs. The Assessing Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with respect to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act for A

ITA 693/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B. R. Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

approvals / legal steps for initiating proceedings under Sections 147 / 148 of the Act were duly taken by the Assessing Officer prior to initiation of reassessment proceedings. Secondly, on facts which are on record before us, the assessee had not filed it’s return of income for the impugned assessment year ... During the course of arguments, we had requested the Department to furnish a copy of the Investigation Report, on the basis of which the reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee so as to facilitate the Bench in adjudicating the issue, which is before the Bench for it’s consideration

Kaushik Pravinchandra Gohel, Bhavnagar vs. The Assessing Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with respect to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act for A

ITA 692/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B. R. Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

approvals / legal steps for initiating proceedings under Sections 147 / 148 of the Act were duly taken by the Assessing Officer prior to initiation of reassessment proceedings. Secondly, on facts which are on record before us, the assessee had not filed it’s return of income for the impugned assessment year ... During the course of arguments, we had requested the Department to furnish a copy of the Investigation Report, on the basis of which the reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee so as to facilitate the Bench in adjudicating the issue, which is before the Bench for it’s consideration

Kaushik Pravinchandra Gohel, Bhavnagar vs. The Assessing Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with respect to levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act for A

ITA 691/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B. R. Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

approvals / legal steps for initiating proceedings under Sections 147 / 148 of the Act were duly taken by the Assessing Officer prior to initiation of reassessment proceedings. Secondly, on facts which are on record before us, the assessee had not filed it’s return of income for the impugned assessment year ... During the course of arguments, we had requested the Department to furnish a copy of the Investigation Report, on the basis of which the reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee so as to facilitate the Bench in adjudicating the issue, which is before the Bench for it’s consideration