← 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

Royal Twinkle Star Club P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1425/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 147Section 194ASection 250Section 40

dated 21/08/2015 passed by the SEBI and the information received from the office of DCIT(TDS)- 2(1), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 in the case of the assessee and issued notice dated 30/03/2016 under section 148 of the Act. In the reasons recorded ... assessee submitted that the return original filed may be treated as filed in response to the aforesaid notice. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee explained its modus operandi and submitted that the deposits received from its members/customers are accounted as “sales” in its books of accounts and the NAC paid

Sh. Kesar Lal Bairwa, A-24, Varun Colony, Mandara Stand, New Sanganer Road, Mansarovar, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 381/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 28Section 3Section 56(2)(iii)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

Kesar Lal Bairwa, Jaipur. 10(37) of the Act, the interest received on such enhanced compensation is also exempt. The AO, in the reassessment proceedings rejected the claim of assessee that the amount so received being capital receipt is not liable for taxation by holding as under :- (i) Supreme court

Narayan Devarajan Iyengar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, International Tax, Ward 2(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 106/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram a/wFor Respondent: Shri Dilip K. Shah
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148

well as section 142(1) of the Act along with a questionnaire were issued and served on the assessee. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to provide the details of considerations received from M/s Keystone Realtors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Narayan Devarajan Iyengar ITA no.106/Mum./2023 S.A. no.29/Mum ... consideration. Since this amount was not considered as income by the assessee in his return of income by treating the same as capital receipts, reassessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the assessee and vide assessment order passed under section 147 r/w section 144C

Daryab Singh, Palwal vs. ITO Ward - 1(2), Faridabad

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

ITA 1664/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Sr.DR
Section 10(37)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 50C(2)

grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: “1. The learned ITO and CIT(A) erred in initiating and approving the reassessment proceedings in this case simply on the basis of input of information from DI(I&CI) on 26/03/2015 and the AO had recorded the reasons

Mrs. Divyesh Ambalal Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT-27(1), Navimumbai

ITA 629/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 68

section 143(3) r.w. section 147 of the 2 Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as against returned income of Rs. 44,56,260/-. Reassessment proceedings are bad in law 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in reopening the assessment under section ... issuing notice under section 148 of the Act inter alia in view of the following grounds and thus the said notice, consequent reassessment proceedings as well as the assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act are bad in law and liable

Girdhari Finlease Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-12(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 2770/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. B. R. R. Kumargirdhari Finlease Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv, Ward-12(4), F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, New Delhi Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacg4842M Assessee By : Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023

For Appellant: Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee was not provided complete copy of reasons recorded by the AO for initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act to the assessee. The ld counsel submitted that in view ... 2757/Del/2022 dated 22.06.2022, if the complete copy of reasons recorded by the AO are not provided to the assessee then the reassessment proceedings and consequent reassessment order is vitiated. 4. Replying to the above the ld Sr. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that

Rathi Cermics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 6136/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the learned A.O. are bad in the eye of law as the reasons recorded for the issue of notice under Section

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Kamal Kapoor, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1167/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. B. R. R. Kumaracit, Vs. Kamal Kapoor, Circle-45(1), A-47, Vishal Enclave, New New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aalpk7402K Assessee By : Sh. Amit Goel, Ca Sh. Nippun Mittal, Ca Revenue By: Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 151Section 151(1)

that the Addl. CIT had given approval in the case after being satisfied and after being satisfied and after recording reason for initiation of reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee. 3. The ld DR drew our attention towards copy of the reasons recorded by the AO available ... page No. 1 to 2 of the Assessee‟s paper book and submitted that the AO recorded detailed reasons before initiation of reassessment proceedings and also obtained approval of the competent authority as per requirement of provision of the Act. Therefore, the ld CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee

Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Maharashtra vs. ITO Wasrd-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 41/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -1(1)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.41/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -3(3)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) With Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 22/03/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 & A Penalty Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Investigation Wing and such specific information was not available during the original assessment proceedings. Therefore, it is a new information/tangible material and therefore the reassessment proceedings were rightly initiated by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. DR also pointed out that since the original assessment was completed under section 144 r.w.s ... details and that is why the assessment was framed under section 144 of the Act. Therefore, the assessee cannot take a plea that reassessment proceeding was initiated after a period of four years and there was a full disclosure on the part of the assessee for making the assessment

Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 40/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -1(1)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.41/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) Ganesh Ganpat Alim, Vs. The Ito, B-205, Mahashakti Appartment, Ward -3(3)(1), Jai Shree Jahannath, Nr. Manvel Panda Surat. Road, Nr. Mahak City Virar East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 401305. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ambpa5834F Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) With Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 22/03/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Are Directed Against The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”], Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 & A Penalty Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Investigation Wing and such specific information was not available during the original assessment proceedings. Therefore, it is a new information/tangible material and therefore the reassessment proceedings were rightly initiated by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. DR also pointed out that since the original assessment was completed under section 144 r.w.s ... details and that is why the assessment was framed under section 144 of the Act. Therefore, the assessee cannot take a plea that reassessment proceeding was initiated after a period of four years and there was a full disclosure on the part of the assessee for making the assessment

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Rps Infra Projects Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2781/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Dcit, Vs. M/S. Rps Infra Central Circle 5(1), Projects Pvt Ltd., Room No. 1928, C, 113 Shyam Kamal, 19Th Floor, Airindiabldg, 27, Tejpal Road, Nariman Point, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr3607E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule Cit-Dr & Smt. Neeraja Sharma.Dr Respondent By : Shri. Jp Bairagra, Shri Ashiskumar Bairagra & Shri Akhilesh Pevekar. Ar Date Of Hearing 06.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri.Dr. Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

appeal, submissions of the assessee, findings of the scrutiny assessment, remand report, provisions of law, judicial decisions and up held the validity of reassessment proceedings u/sec147 of the Act and granted relief in other grounds of appeal observing at page 8 Para 5 to 9 of the order read

Dhanshree Infratech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 12(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1243/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhdhanshree Infratech Vs. Ito-12(2)(1) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 303, Western Edge 1, 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, W.E. Highway, Borivali M.K. Road, (E), Mumbai – 66 Mumbai - 20 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aagca7306J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Girish Dave Respondent By : Shailja Rai Date Of Hearing 07.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-20, Mumbai Dated 29.12.2017 For A.Y. 2008-09. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us:

For Appellant: Girish DaveFor Respondent: Shailja Rai
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 68

Lower Authorities failed to appreciate that the Assessment Order is illegal and bad in law as the reassessment proceedings are without jurisdiction for the reason that re-opening of assessment is sought to be done for examination of alleged excess share-premium received and therefore the reasons for reopening ... sides and perused the material on record. The ld. Counsel submitted that the additional grounds are the legal ground challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings. The Ld. Counsel also submitted that being legal grounds the same may be decided on the basis of material already on record. Therefore, after considering

Deepak Garg, Haryana vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC, Krnal, Haryana

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

ITA 1046/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 69

there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for completion of the assessment, such reassessment proceedings initiated are void ab initio in view of the first proviso to Section 147. 9.2 Reliance in this regard is placed upon the decision ... Robert, 48 ITR 177 (SC). In the light of the above settled principle of law, we have no hesitation to quash the reassessment proceedings since there was no valid notice pursuant to which the reassessment proceeding was made in the present case. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Priti Construction, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2780/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Dcit,Central.C.5(1), Vs. M/Spriticonstructions, Room No. 1928, C, 113, Shyam Kamal, 19Th Floor,Air India 27, Tejpal Road, Bldg, Nariman Point, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. Pan/Gir No. : Aaafp0516A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Dr.Kishor Dhule Cit-Dr & Smt. Neeraja Sharma.Dr Respondent By : Shri. Jp Bairagra, Shri Ashiskumar Bairagra & Shri Akhilesh Pevekar. Ar Date Of Hearing 06.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 53 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri.Dr.Kishor Dhule CIT-DR &For Respondent: Shri. JP Bairagra
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

appeal, submissions of the assessee, findings of the scrutiny assessment, remand report, provisions of law, judicial decisions and up held the validity of reassessment proceedings u/sec147 of the Act and granted relief in other grounds of appeal observing at page 8 Para 5 to 7.1 of the order read

Globus Power Generation Ltd (Formely Known As Cumulative Investments & Trading Co. Pvt Ltd), New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-6(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6438/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshglobus Power Generation Ltd Vs. Acit, (Formerly Known As Cumulative Circle-6(2), Investments & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi A-60, Naraina Industrial Area, Phase-1, New Delhi-110028 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacg6734E

For Appellant: Sh. Ritesh Bajaj, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reassessment proceedings by the learned AO are bad in the eye of low as the reasons recorded for the issue of notice under Section ... said reasons recorded and the ld. AO disposed of those objections by way of a speaking order dated 23.11.2016 and thereafter proceeded with the reassessment proceedings. In the reassessment proceedings, the ld AO made disallowance of Rs. 46,07,275/- representing losses claimed by the assessee due to client code

Manish Paliwal, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

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

ITA 84/JPR/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 84/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2010-11 Shri Manish Paliwal C/o Shri Ghanshyam Paliwal 90, Bhatton Ki Gali, Purani Vidhan Sabha Jaipur cuke Vs. The ITO Ward -1(1) Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AQXPP2628N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Ashish Khandelwal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Ms. Chanchal Meena, Addl. CIT-DR l

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 69

jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Act. 2. That the AO has erred in law as well as in facts of the case in continuing reassessment proceedings initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act despite the fact that income alleged to be escaped in reasons recorded was never

Vivek Agnihotri, Mumbai vs. ITO 16 (1)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 4493/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalevivek Agnihotri Vs. Ito – 16(1)(5), 1505/1506, Amarnath Aayakar Bhavan, Tower, Yari Road, M.K.Road, Versova, Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400061. Pan/Gir No. : Adypa6052B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.Ar Respondent By : Mr. Ankush Kapoor.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Prcommissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit)-16, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 50C

that the Income from capital gains was disclosed and the reasons for reopening were provided and objections were filed in the reassessement proceedings. Further the assessment was reopened U/sec147 of the Act for invoking provisions of section 50C of the Act due difference in stamp duty valuation of property ... addition in respect of Long capital gains and was accepted by the Assessing Officer. 10. Further the Ld.AR emphasized that in the reassessment proceedings U/sec143(3) r.w.s147 of the Act, the AO found that the assessee in the F.Y 2011-12 has sold the property at Bhopal and whereas

Amrit Brakewell Products Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward -2(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4080/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargm/S. Amritbrakewell Products Vs. Ito, Pvt Ltd, Ward-2(3), A-202, Vikas Tower, Sonia New Delhi Pvr Complex, Vikaspuri, New Delhi-110018 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aacca3317P

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 68

case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 148 are bad in law as there is no live nexus between the reasons recorded and the belief formed ... been issued after four years from the end of the relevant assessment year. 7. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO and upheld by the learned CIT(A) are bad in the eyes of law, as the reasons recorded

Babulal Hajarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 274/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Shashank Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer in completing the reassessment proceedings without providing any opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses relied upon by the Assessing Officer and thus violating the law laid down ... circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of Ld. Assessing Officer in completing the reassessment proceedings without following the orders passed in the Appellant's own case in the preceding Assessment Years thereby violating the Principle of Consistency

Sai Prerna Co-Op. Credit Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 17(3) (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 216/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sai Prerana Co-Op Society Ltd., Ito-7(3)(2), 317, Puran Aasha Bldg. Gr. Fl. Room No. 126, 1St Floor, Narashi Natha Street, Katha Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- Bazar Musjid Bunder (W), 43 Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400 009. Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aadts 5638 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Ruby Srivastava & Mr. Bharat Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Mr. Milind S. Chavan, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 28/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: Ms. Ruby Srivastava &For Respondent: Mr. Milind S. Chavan, DR
Section 139(1)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80P

validity of the Before us, the assessee has challenged the validity of the Before us, the assessee has challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings on the ground that same amounts to reassessment proceedings on the ground that same amounts reassessment proceedings on the ground that same amounts change ofopinion ... relevant material on record. We find that Sai Prerana Co-op Society Ltd. Sai Prerana Co 5 the identical issue of validity of the reassessment proceedings in the the identical issue of validity of the reassessment proceedings in the the identical issue of validity of the reassessment proceedings