“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

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 172/JPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) &

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158B

assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment can be made. The word ‘assess’ in Section 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e., those pending on the date of search) and the word ‘reassess’ to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction ... revival of any assessment or DCIT vs. M/s Royal Jewellers reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under section 153A of, the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding. 16. Section 153A bears the heading “Assessment in case of search

DCIT, CC-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Royal Jewellers, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 171/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) &

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 158B

Veena Devi, Muzaffarpur vs. Pr.CIT-1, Patna

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 41/PAT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 41/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Veena Devi Pr. Cit, Patna-1 Vs Krishnapuri, Nh 28 Bhagwanpur Chowk Muzaffarpur - 842001 [Pan: Aoyps8291P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Maskara, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per, Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patna-1, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Pr. Cit”) Dt. 23/03/2021, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of Eighteen (18) Days In Filing Of This Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons Of Delay. After Perusing The Same, We Find That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. Hence, The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Order Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act By The Ld Pcit, Patna Is Wrong, Illegal, Arbitrary & Against The Fact & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Maskara, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT, D/R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263

fact that after through examination of books and relevant documents by the AO no adverse finding recorded on the reasons of opening of reassessment proceeding U//s 147 of the IT Act and no addition was made by the AO as such AO has no jurisdiction to assess any other ... other than the issue of purchase of property of Rs. 35,90,812/-. Since the Assessing Officer has carried out the reassessment proceedings only for the purpose of examining the disclosure of purchase of assets at Rs.35,90,812/- and on being satisfied, he concluded the assessment

Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Gurgaon

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 672/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usi.T.A. No. 672/Del/2018 (A.Y 2008-09)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 234BSection 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 43B

Assessing Officer ("Ld. AO") I Ld. CIT(A) has erred in initiating and completing I upholding the validity of reassessment proceedings completed by the Ld. AO under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act without appreciating that the said reassessment is bad in law and void ... case and in law, the Ld. AO I Ld. CIT(A) has erred in initiating and completing I upholding the validity of reassessment proceedings completed by the Ld. AO under section 147 without obtaining requisite satisfaction under section 151 of the Act. 3. That on the facts

Late Sh. Shekhar Dhariwal Through L/H Smt. Nikita Dhariwal, Dhariwal Bhawan, Shastri Market, Kota vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Kota

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 51/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl.CIT

Section 147Section 148

following cases:- ITO Vs. Durlabhbhai Kanubhai Rajpara (2020) 270 Taxman 9 (SC) (Case laws compilation PB 1-4) :- Where High Court set aside reassessment proceedings on ground that no valid notice u/s 148 could be issued against a dead person, SLP filed against said order was to be dismissed. Urmilaben ... NIKITA DHARIWAL VS ITO, WARD-2(2), KOTA Aemala Venkateswara Rao Vs. ITO (2019) 176 ITD 431 (Vish.) (Trib.):- Subsequent to death of assessee, reassessment proceedings were initiated and notice u/s 148 was issued in name of dead person. In response to notice issued by AO, wife of deceased

Maxtech Realty Pvt. Ltd(Formerly Known As Nandivardhan Construction Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-2, Thane

ITA 690/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain & Shri Prateek JainFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Ld. DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153(3)Section 153ASection 250

claim of the assessee by submitting that though the assessee had objected to reopening of the case at a very first step of the reassessment proceedings, however this issue did not find mentioned in the objection filed before the AO. The assessee had raised the contention that during the course ... clear that non mentioning of the fact, regarding non disclosure of fully and truly material facts in the reasons /reopening, can not vitiate the reassessment proceedings and issue of the subsequent to receipt of hitherto unknown facts do form as basis of having reasons to believe 13 I.T.A. No. 690/Mum/2022

Ken Financial Services Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT - 4, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 894/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanvk-Vk-La- 894@Eaqcbz@2021 ¼Fu-Oa- 2010&11½ Ken Financial Services Ltd. 101, Shah Arcade, A Wing, Shah Archade Sra Chs Ltd Rani Sati Marg, Malad (E) Mumbai-400 097 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aaack4929K Cuke Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Room No. 629, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 020

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram & Shri Rahul Hakani izfroknh }kjk@For Respondent: Shri Byomakesh P. K. Panda, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

Voctory Sales P. Ltd. 21,00,000 00 The AO made a detailed enquiry with respect to the aforesaid bogus entries. The assessee during reassessment proceedings categorically denied that the assessee is not a beneficiary of any accommodation entry from any entity operated by Vipul Vidur Bhatt. Whatever transactions ... this account in reassessment order dated 29/12/2017. 2.1. Thereafter, for the same very alleged bogus transactions that were examined by the AO in reassessment proceedings, the PCIT issued show cause notice dated 24.03.2021 u/s 263 of the Act. However, the PCIT while issuing notice went a step ahead and questioned

Vijayakumar Kanaiyalal Matta, Mumbai vs. ITO 26 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 53/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhvk-Vk-La- 52@Eaqcbz@2020 ¼Fu-Oa- 2013&14½ Vk-Vk-La- 53@Eaqcbz@2020 ¼Fu-Oa- 2014&15½ Vijaykumar Kanaiyalal Matta 8/B/104, 10Th Floor, S. S. Nagar, Sion Koliwada, Sion Mumbai-400 037 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aropm6060D Cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer – 26(3) (4) Room No.507, 5Th Floor, Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, B. K. C. Bandra (E), ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 051

For Appellant: Shri Tejveer Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, Sr. AR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 69

said notice, the assesse filed return of income on 30.07.2017 declaring total income of Rs.41,760/- for AY 2013-14. During the course of reassessment proceedings, summons u/s 131 of the Act were issued to Vipul Mangal. He appeared before the AO and recorded his statement ... reopening furnished to the assessee by the AO vide communication dated 30.11.2017. From the perusal of same, we find that the roots of reassessment proceedings in the case of assessee are in the information received from Joint DIT (Investigation), Mumbai. As per the information received, the assessee has paid

Vijayakumar Kanaiyalal Matta, Mumbai vs. ITO 26 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 52/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tejveer Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, Sr. AR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 69

JCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai vs. Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1557/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. AyushiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 148Section 153C

investigation wing of Income-tax receipt of information from the investigation wing of receipt of information from the investigation wing of department Kolkata, the reassessment proceedings were initiated partment Kolkata, the reassessment proceedings were initiated partment Kolkata, the reassessment proceedings were initiated by way of issue of notice dated ... assessee. Thereafter, the the Assessing Officer of the assessee. Thereafter, the the Assessing Officer of the assessee. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer treated the reassessment proceedings as got treated the reassessment proceedings as got treated the reassessment proceedings as got abated and he issued notice u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A

Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1054/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. AyushiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 148Section 153C

Grasim Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1053/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/ Ms. AyushiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 148Section 153C

Kanti Lal Duggad, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Raipur

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

ITA 141/RPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.141/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kanti Lal Duggad 35/1008, Rms Colony, Tagore Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Agapd7948J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

since, the same has been passed without issuance of mandatory notice under the provisions of section 143(2) of the Act before completion of reassessment proceedings thereby vitiating the entire reassessment order. Hence, it is earnestly prayed that the Reassessment Order may please be quashed and cancelled on this ground

Rajesh Somnay, Mumbai vs. ITO, International Taxation, Ward 4(2)(1), Mumbai

The Appeal is allowed

ITA 533/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2015-16

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 54

none was present for the Appellant. 8. We have heard the Learned Departmental Representative and perused the material on record. We note that Reassessment proceedings are initiated against the 9. Appellant under Section 147 of the Act after recording reasons for reopening the assessment, the relevant extract of which ... Hardship Compensation was not in the nature of receipt liable to tax in the hands of recipient (as contended during the reassessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer and the DRP). On perusal of the Draft Assessment Order and the order passed by 14. the DRP, we find as under

Shilpa Gautam, Mumbai vs. ITO, (Int Tx), Ward-2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 409/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh AthwaleFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 144Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 56(2)(Vii)Section 56(2)(vii)

property for INR 4,10,63,800/- bearing address – Flat No. 701, 7th Floor, Wing A, Rustomji Paramount, Village – Bandra G, Khar West, Mumbai, reassessment proceedings was initiated under Section 147 of the Act and notice, dated 27/03/2021, was issued/served on the Appellant. In response to the aforesaid notice

ITO 17 (2)(4), Mumbai vs. Neumec Builders & Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6423/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri S.D. PathakFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 28Section 50C

issued under section 148 of the Act. The reasons recorded for reopening the assessment were also provided to the assessee. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to show cause as to why an amount of Rs.12 ... that no gain has arisen to the assessee on the transfer of the above properties during the financial year 2008-09. 6. During the reassessment proceedings, a reference under section 142A(1) and section 142A(7) read with section 131(1)(d) was made to the Departmental Valuation Officer

Emvee Shah Real Estates Private Limited (Formerly Known As Emvee Shah Holdings Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle- 8(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

ITA 805/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 250

pursuant to search proceedings. assessment ought to be made with recourse to procedure laid in section 153A of the Act. Accordingly, the impugned reassessment proceedings and the reassessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed: 2. The AO/CIT ... accordingly reopening the case of the assessee dehors "reason to believe" that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, renders the reassessment proceedings bad in law and liable to be quashed; 3. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO in reopening the case of the assessee