← 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

Black Box Ltd (Formerly Known As Agc Networks Ltd), Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT-14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1184/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Aby T Vakery & Shri Amarjit Singhblack Box Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of 5Th Floor, Building No.9, Income Tax- 14(1)(1) Airoli Knowledge Park, 460, Aayakar Bhavan, Midc Industrial Area, M.K. Road, Airoli West, Navi Mumbai- 400020 Mumbai- 400708

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Ved, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 3Section 35D

appeal :- 1. Re-opening of the assessment proceedings is invalid and bad in law a. The learned CIT (A) erred in not quashing the reassessment proceedings being invalid and bad in law; b. The learned CIT (A) erred in not appreciating that the reassessment proceedings initiated are invalid ... brought on record is not valid as held by Courts on various occasions; d. The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the reassessment proceedings initiated based on Audit objection are invalid and bad in law; e. The learned CIT (A) erred in not appreciating that the queries raised

Santosh Kaushik, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 41(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 685/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 685/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ms. Santosh Kaushik, Vs Income Tax Officer, 1/27A, Near Hanuman Mandir, East Ward-41(5), Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi-110026 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Amtpk4230D Assessee By : Sh. Manish Malik, Adv. & Sh. Vinod Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.09.2023 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Malik, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

placed on the decision of Hon'ble Court in the case of Amit Polyprints (P.) Ltd. Vs DCIT (Gujarat) wherein it was field that reassessment proceedings initiated on basis of information received from Investigation wing that assessee had received certain amount from shell companies working as an accommodation entry provider ... received by DRI from CCE which was passed on to revenue authorities and court considered it as 'tangible material outside record' to initiate valid reassessment proceedings. In the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. ITO And Others (236 ITR 34) Hon'ble SC has held that in determining whether

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. Shri Jignesh Mahesh Amin, Surat

ITA 223/SRT/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) A.C.I.T., Shri Jignesh Mahesh Amin, Central Circle-3, 418, Royal Trading Tower, Nr. Vs. Surat. Ratan Cinema, Salabatpura, Surat-395003. Pan No. Aajpa 2349 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)

noting’s on the diary, the income to the tune of Rs. 19.97 crores chargeable to tax as escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer during reassessment proceedings, on the basis of reasons recorded and the post survey statement, recorded by survey team, issued show cause notice as to why a difference

Meenaxi Diamonds Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 310/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Meenaxi Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., V. Acit - Central Circle – 1(3) 228-229 Pratishtha Bhavan Majestic Shopping Centre Mumbai - 400020 Opera House, Mumbai - 400004 Pan: Aafcm0371A (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Milan& Co. V. Acit - Central Circle – 1(3) 3-M, Ambika Darshan Pratishtha Bhavan Moti Dadiya Sheri Mumbai - 400020 Surat, Gujarat – 395003 Pan: Aarfm9959R (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Meridian Jewellery Pvt. Ltd., V. Acit - Central Circle – 1(3) 316, Panchratna Pratishtha Bhavan Opera House, Mumbai - 400004 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacd9904F

Since we have already allowed the appeal of the assessee on merit, the ground raised by the assessee challenging the legality / validity of reassessment proceedings has been rendered academic and therefore we are not adjudicating the same and the same is left open.” 11. Since the issue is exactly similar

Bhawna Computers LLP (Converted From Bhawna Computers Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC-7(3), Mumbai

ITA 6402/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi& Shri Rahul Choudhary

For Appellant: CA Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Samuel Pitta, Sr. AR
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

opening of the case." Vide Para no. 6.6, Ld. CIT (A) has also held that "the assessee company had duly participated in the reassessment proceedings through its authorised representative before the AO. Hence, the said contention raised by the Id. AR of the appellant is hereby rejected." Further, on perusal ... through by the Hon’ble Judicial Member who had categorically pointed out that the said assessment records reveal that during the fag end of reassessment proceedings, the concerned assessing officer of the appellant had requested the predecessor assessing officer at Page 7 of 36 Kolkata (who had issued the notice

Bhawana Computers LLP (Converted From Bhawna Computers Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbau vs. DCIT - CC 7 (3), Mumbai

ITA 6401/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi& Shri Rahul Choudhary

For Appellant: CA Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Samuel Pitta, Sr. AR
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

opening of the case." Vide Para no. 6.6, Ld. CIT (A) has also held that "the assessee company had duly participated in the reassessment proceedings through its authorised representative before the AO. Hence, the said contention raised by the Id. AR of the appellant is hereby rejected." Further, on perusal ... through by the Hon’ble Judicial Member who had categorically pointed out that the said assessment records reveal that during the fag end of reassessment proceedings, the concerned assessing officer of the appellant had requested the predecessor assessing officer at Page 7 of 36 Kolkata (who had issued the notice

DCIT -CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Bhawna Computers LLP, Mumbai

ITA 6127/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi& Shri Rahul Choudhary

For Appellant: CA Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Samuel Pitta, Sr. AR
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

opening of the case." Vide Para no. 6.6, Ld. CIT (A) has also held that "the assessee company had duly participated in the reassessment proceedings through its authorised representative before the AO. Hence, the said contention raised by the Id. AR of the appellant is hereby rejected." Further, on perusal ... through by the Hon’ble Judicial Member who had categorically pointed out that the said assessment records reveal that during the fag end of reassessment proceedings, the concerned assessing officer of the appellant had requested the predecessor assessing officer at Page 7 of 36 Kolkata (who had issued the notice

DCIT -CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. Bhawna Computer Private Limted, Mumbai

ITA 6126/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi& Shri Rahul Choudhary

For Appellant: CA Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Samuel Pitta, Sr. AR
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

opening of the case." Vide Para no. 6.6, Ld. CIT (A) has also held that "the assessee company had duly participated in the reassessment proceedings through its authorised representative before the AO. Hence, the said contention raised by the Id. AR of the appellant is hereby rejected." Further, on perusal ... through by the Hon’ble Judicial Member who had categorically pointed out that the said assessment records reveal that during the fag end of reassessment proceedings, the concerned assessing officer of the appellant had requested the predecessor assessing officer at Page 7 of 36 Kolkata (who had issued the notice

Bihari Charitable Trust, Delhi vs. ITO(E), Ward Ghaziabad, Ghaziabad

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3032/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 34

exhibited at page 234 of the Paper Book shows the address as 65, AGCR Enclave, Delhi – 110092. The Gift Deed, which triggered the reassessment proceedings is at pages 22 to 221 of the Paper Book wherein the name of the assessee- trust has been mentioned at address 65, AGCR Enclave ... context of Section 34 of the 1922 Act,: "The notice prescribed by section 34 of the Income tax Act for the purpose of initiating reassessment proceedings is not a mere procedural requirement; the service of the prescribed notice on the assessee is a condition precedent to the validity

M/S Citi Plaza, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Jalandhar

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

ITA 356/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 250

order has been made by the Civil Court in land acquisition proceeding, it would operate to remove the bar of limitation in reassessment proceeding in view of Clause (ii) of sub-section (3) of section 153 of the Act. However, this Court in the case of Foramer (supra) has drawn ... prescribes a maximum period of four or seven years depending upon the quantum of tax as mentioned in the said section for initiating reassessment proceedings. Section 150(1) states that the period of limitation prescribed in section 149 is not applicable, if the reassessment is proposed on the basis

ACIT Circle-59(1), New Delhi vs. Neeraj Kumar Singhal, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 283/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of case, the Ld. CIT(A)-37 has erred in facts & law in holding that the reassessment proceedings were barred by limitation and therefore, void-ab-initio. This in spite the facts that the sanction by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi ... that the assessee has not fully disclosed all the material facts during the assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of IT. Act, hence, the reassessment proceedings us 147 was clearly justified.” Briefly stated, the assessee in the instant case is inter alia 3. engaged in the transactions in derivative segment

Senior India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3747/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: or during the hearing.”

For Appellant: 3.1. That Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law in disregarding the method of
Section 271(1)(c)

file of the AO for fresh examination of books of account. In pursuance to the directions of the Tribunal, the AO initiated the reassessment proceedings and examined the books of account and thereafter made additions of Rs. 10,00,000/- on account of excess claim of expenses on power & fuel

Jaishri Kesharwani, Raigarh vs. Income Tax Officer-1, Raigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 225/RPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur13 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 225/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jaishri Kesharwani House No.682/1, Thavait Gali, Baikuntpur, Raigarh-496 001 (C.G.) Pan : Akfpj6433R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1, Raigarh (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

appeal ex-parte overlooking the adjournment application filed. 2) The ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the income-tax Act. 1961 without fulfilling all the necessary conditions. Hence, the said re-assessment proceeding as well as the assessment

M/S. Blue Square Corporate Services Pvt Lte, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-12(1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 2052/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2023AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Ms. Vinita ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 68

clarified that the Appellant would be at liberty to raise contention relating to grounds raise before CIT(A) relating to the validity of reassessment proceedings as well as merits of the addition. It terms of aforesaid, Ground No. 1, 2 & 3 raised by the Appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

Suman Tripathi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(2)(4), Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 1436/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: The Ld.Cit(A) Due To Lack Of Advice Of The Tax Consultant & As A Matter Of Inadvertent Omission. The Ld. Counsel Submitted

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 292B

follows: - “5(i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 in total disregard to the fact that assessment order was passed without issuing mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. (ii) That ... illegal and bad in law.” I.T.A.No.1436/Del/2023 5. The ld. Counsel submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) disregarding the fact that the reassessment order was passed without issuing mandatory

Raj Kumar Karanwal, Muzaffarnagar vs. Pr.CIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 644/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sankalp Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263

from three parties, the assessee submitted before the Ld. PCIT (pages 113-117 of Paper Book) that detailed list of expenses was filed during reassessment proceedings which were verified by the Ld. AO from the ledger account and thereafter he allowed them. From certain other expenses, the Ld. AO disallowed

Kailash Chand Yadav, 100, Kalu Baba Ki Dhani, Sheoshinghpur, Akoda, Phulera-303338 vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 82/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar(Adv.)&For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Addl.CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

others [236 ITR 34] [SC] and Yuvraj vs UOI [315 ITR84][SC]where the Supreme Court held that "That while determining whether commencement of reassessment proceedings was valid it was only to be seen whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen ... discharge that onus. (v) The mere fact that an Assessee or some other person on his behalf not duly authorized participated in the reassessment proceedings after coming to know of it will not constitute a waiver o f the requirement of effecting proper service of notice on the Assessee under

M/S Atul Projects India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-9(1)(2) (Now Juridiction With Dc CC (2) (4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as dismissed

ITA 1878/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153C

scheme of the Act, the Assessing Officer can issue notice of demand only in respect of incremental liability, if any, raised in the reassessment proceedings, meaning thereby, the Assessing Officer is not entitled to raise the very same demand second time. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to reduce

DCIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. Anand Persad Jaiswal, New Dehi

In the result the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2742/DEL/2022[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2003-04 The Dcit, Central Circle-04, New Delhi Anand Persad Jaiswal, 54, Ring Road, Lajpat Nagar-Iii, New Delhi 110024 Vs. Pan Adrpj 2549 M (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr For Assessee: Shri Deepchand Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing : 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.09.2023 Order Per Chandra Mohan Garg, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-23, New Delhi Dated 25.08.2022 For Ay 2003-04. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: 1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Quashing The Assessment Order Relying On The Decision Of Hon'Ble Delhi High Court In The Case Of Brahm. Dutt (100 Taxmann.Com 324) Without Appreciating That The Amendment To Sec 149(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 By Finance Act, 2021 Was Retrospective In Nature In View Of Explanation To Sec 149 As Held By Itat (D Bench Mumbai) In The Case Of Dilip J. Thakkar (135 Taxmann.Com 208) After Considering The Decision Of Hon'Ble Delhi High Court In Brahm Dutt (Supra).

For Appellant: Shri Deepchand Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)

wherein it was held that on 22.03.2021 the Assessing Officer has no power to assume jurisdiction u/s. 147 of the Act for initiation of reassessment proceedings and thus impugned reassessment order was rightly quashed by the ld. CIT(A). 5. On careful consideration of above submissions, first ... High Court was as to whether subsequent amendment to section 149, by Finance Act, 2012, which extended limitation for initiation of reassessment proceedings to sixteen years, could not be resorted to for reopening concluded proceedings in respect of which limitation had already expired/lapsed before amendment became effective. Hon’ble High

Gajraj Giri, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Bilaspur

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed in terms of my observations above

ITA 222/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 222/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Gajraj Giri S/O. Raghuraj Giri, Sai Mandir Road, Jaharbhata, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495 001 Pan : Afgpg0112E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)

these compliances from the point of view " clearly indicate that he had said to go on with the AO to complete the reassessment proceedings". In fact, the AO had recorded these following findings in the assessment order: The AO had stated that :".notice U/s. 143(2) of the Income ... these facts do prove the appellant's intention seems clear and he had a mind to go on with the AO to complete the reassessment proceedings, On the other hand, the appellant had not filed any concrete proof and evidence in support of his statement that he had requested