← 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

Space Chem Engineers Private Limited, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Ghaziabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1791/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 68

total income of the assessee. 9. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee, apart from challenging the addition on merit challenged the validity of reassessment proceedings. The assessee also filed certain documents in shape of additional evidences since the AO had not given adequate opportunity of being heard to the assesee ... ground that no specific submissions have been made by the assessee during the appeal proceedings. 10. So far as the validity of the reassessment proceedings are concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) decided the same against the assessee by observing as under :- “ Ground

Narender Jindal, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 63(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2385/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Girish K. Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Renu Mukherjee, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

made addition of Rs.5,89,961/-. 5. Before the CIT(A), the assessee, apart from challenging the addition on merit, challenged the validity of reassessment proceedings. However, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed both the issues. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before

Karan Khurana, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 48(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1783/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 151

following grounds : 1. The Ld CIT(A) has erred both in law and in facts of the case in upholding the reassessment proceedings and consequential reassessment order on the ground 2 ITA.No.1783/Del./2019 Shri Karan Khurana, Delhi. that impugned reassessment order has been passed without providing copy of reasons ... initio and liable to be quashed. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and circumstances of the case in upholding the reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 147 of the IT Act without application, of mind on the material, if any, provided by the Inv. Wing of the department

M/S. Marble Art, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2480/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

amend or alter any of the foregoing grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. All these three appeals are outcome of the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act on the basis of notices issued u/s 148. In these appeals filed, the assessee has challenged ... validity and legality of the initiation of the reassessment proceedings as well as it 7 ITA.Nos.2478 to 2480/Del./2013 M/s Marble Art, New Delhi. has challenged the additions made and sustained by the CIT (A). In respect of initiation of the reassessment proceedings

M/S. Marble Art, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2479/DEL/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

amend or alter any of the foregoing grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. All these three appeals are outcome of the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act on the basis of notices issued u/s 148. In these appeals filed, the assessee has challenged ... validity and legality of the initiation of the reassessment proceedings as well as it 7 ITA.Nos.2478 to 2480/Del./2013 M/s Marble Art, New Delhi. has challenged the additions made and sustained by the CIT (A). In respect of initiation of the reassessment proceedings

M/S. Marble Art, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2478/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

amend or alter any of the foregoing grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. All these three appeals are outcome of the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act on the basis of notices issued u/s 148. In these appeals filed, the assessee has challenged ... validity and legality of the initiation of the reassessment proceedings as well as it 7 ITA.Nos.2478 to 2480/Del./2013 M/s Marble Art, New Delhi. has challenged the additions made and sustained by the CIT (A). In respect of initiation of the reassessment proceedings

Parveen Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(4), New Delhi

In the result, this issue is decided against the assessee

ITA 1266/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

conduct of the A.O. as well as assessee clearly revealed that assessee accepted the reopening of assessment and never raised the illegality in reassessment proceedings at any point. Therefore, assessee never asked for copy of reasons recorded under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT(A) also ... Therefore, assessee himself defaulted in not asking for copy of the reasons from the A.O. It is well settled Law that validity of the reassessment proceedings is to be judged with reference to the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. The assessee even now failed to produce copy

Parveen Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(4), New Delhi

In the result, this issue is decided against the assessee

ITA 1265/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

conduct of the A.O. as well as assessee clearly revealed that assessee accepted the reopening of assessment and never raised the illegality in reassessment proceedings at any point. Therefore, assessee never asked for copy of reasons recorded under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT(A) also ... Therefore, assessee himself defaulted in not asking for copy of the reasons from the A.O. It is well settled Law that validity of the reassessment proceedings is to be judged with reference to the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. The assessee even now failed to produce copy

Late Shri Ganpat Singh, L/H Bikram Singh, Rewari vs. ITO, Ward-1, Rewari

ITA 2880/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Frat Khan,Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

peak balance of Rs. 8,90,000/- on 17.04.2008. 4. Before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee apart from challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings challenged the addition on merit. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed both the grounds. So far as the validity of reassessment proceedings are concerned ... upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings by observing as under :- I have carefully considered the facts of the case, assessee’s ''submissions, assessment order and find that: Reopening of assessment : In the assessment order, the A.O. has made addition of Rs.8,90,000/- on account of 4.1 unexplained cash

ITO, Ward- 3(2), Noida vs. Renu Jain, Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3516/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Barun Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Dudeja, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(2)(ii)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

revision was passed on 10/03/2016. The provision of sub- section (1] of section 150 shall not in this case as action for assessment/ 3 reassessment proceedings would have been barred by time when the assessment order, which was subject matter of appeal, was passed in the light of provisions ... supra], it has been explained on this issue as under: "We find that the provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply where the reassessment proceedings would have been barred by time even at the time when the order, which was the subject- matter of appeal, revision, etc., was passed

Vijay Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 31(3), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7022/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 as well as the resultant order of reassessment flowing there from dated 11.12.2018 passed

Bishan Sharup Gupta, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 45(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 8083/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. D.R
Section 131Section 147Section 148

with his "belief" that the amount had escaped assessment not only at the stage of rejecting the assessee’s objections but also in the reassessment proceedings, where he proceeded to add the entire amount to the income of the assessee. Therefore there was non-application of mind on the part

Ram Kandoi, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 35(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 496/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ram Kandoi Vs. Ito, 27, 1St Floor, Ward – 35(2), Bunglow Road, Kamla New Delhi Nagar, New Delhi-110007 Pan : Agfpk 5089 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By --None-- Revenue By Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 16/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/02/2021 Order Per Amit Shukla, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

Kandoi vs. ITO A.Y. 2009-10 4 5. The grounds of the appeal filed by the assessee reveals that apart from challenging the reassessment proceedings, in ground no.4 assessee is challenging the disallowance of Rs.3,35,921/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. With respect to the aforesaid disallowance ... assessee is allowed. Ram Kandoi vs. ITO A.Y. 2009-10 6 8. As far as the other grounds raised by the assessee challenging the reassessment proceedings are concerned, we are of the view that in the absence of any material placed by the assessee to controvert the findings

Anita Chaudhary, Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Ward-2(5), Khatuli

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1095/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Bansal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 69A

result, appeal of the Assessee allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court. 8. It is well settled law that validity of reassessment proceedings is to be judged in the light of the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. In the case of Dheeraj Yadav (supra) it is held that ... before recording the reasons for reopening of the assessment, it would be clearly non application on the part of the AO to initiate the reassessment proceedings. In the present case, assessee explained to AO before recording the reasons of reopening of the assessment that total cash

R.S. Shares & Securities Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 8031/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Learned DR has also filed written submission electronically. 4. The ground No. 1 to 1.4 of the appeal relates to validity of the reassessment proceeding. In the ground No. 1.1, the assessee has challenged “reason to believe” on the ground that same are not specific and lacking reliable and tangible ... above reasons recorded in absence of any tangible material to infer that income escaped in the case of the assessee. We, accordingly, quash the reassessment proceedings and set aside the order of the Learned CIT(A) on the issue in dispute. The ground No. 1.1 of the appeal is accordingly

Madhu Apartment Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 16(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 3870/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey , Sr. DR
Section 147Section 151Section 68

approval given in a mechanical manner make the re-assessment proceedings invalid being not in accordance with law. Accordingly we hold that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO is not valid in the eyes of law. Accordingly the same is directed to be quashed. Since 20 ITA.Nos.3869 & 3870/Del ... have heard argument of both the sides on these legal grounds of the assessee, wherein the assessee has challenged to the initiation of reassessment proceedings and reopening of assessment u/s. 147/148 of the Act. The ld. AR submitted that the impugned order of assessment is invalid and unsustainable

Madhu Apartment Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 16(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 3869/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey , Sr. DR
Section 147Section 151Section 68

approval given in a mechanical manner make the re-assessment proceedings invalid being not in accordance with law. Accordingly we hold that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO is not valid in the eyes of law. Accordingly the same is directed to be quashed. Since 20 ITA.Nos.3869 & 3870/Del ... have heard argument of both the sides on these legal grounds of the assessee, wherein the assessee has challenged to the initiation of reassessment proceedings and reopening of assessment u/s. 147/148 of the Act. The ld. AR submitted that the impugned order of assessment is invalid and unsustainable

Vikas Chowdhary, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 36(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 9742/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

Commodity Exchange amounting to Rs. 107,89,34,900/- during assessment year under appeal and no return has been filed. The AO, therefore, initiated reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the IT Act and issued notice u/s 148 to the assessee on 31.03.2018. The AO noted that there is no compliance ... assessment. 8. I have considered the rival submission and perused the material on record. It is well settled law that validity of the reassessment proceedings is to be determined on the basis of the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment. The reasons are reproduced above

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Spl Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Department stand

ITA 5302/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2021AY 2005-06
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

already part of the profit shown by the assessee in its income tax return and was again added back in the order passed in reassessment proceedings. The Ld. Sr. DR could not point out any perversity in the finding of the Ld. CIT (A) that this amount had come

Mr. Abhisar Sharma, Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3285/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2005-06 Mr. Abhisar Sharma, Vs Dcit, B-602, Plot No.F-2, Circle-64(1), The Crescent, B-Block, Room No.314, Sector-50, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Noida. Civic Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aigps3840N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri J.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr. Date Of Hearing : 12.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th March, 2015 Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act By The Pcit-22, Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 22Nd July, 2005 Declaring Income Of Rs.9,00,355/-. The Assessee In The Return Of Income Had Declared Income From Salary At Rs.9,81,964/- & Loss From House Property At Rs.81,609/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 4Th July, 2006 At The Same Income. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 27Th March, 2012 After Obtaining Prior Approval Of The Addl. Cit, Range-7, New Delhi, Vide His Letter No.526 Dated 27Th March, 2012. The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 147/143(3) On 28Th March, 2013, Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.11,03,270/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs.9,00,355/- Wherein He Made The Following Additions:-

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 17Section 17(2)Section 263Section 68Section 69C

case of the assessee was reopened u/s 148 of the Act for Assessment Years 2005-06 to 2008-09.The reasons recorded for initiating the reassessment proceedings for all the four Assessment Years read as under: “2 "This office received a copy of DO. letter from Sh. S. L Srivastava ... kept in view only the material before t)avAO on basis of which he recorded reasons and issued notice u/s 148" 18. Subsequently, the reassessment proceedings were started. In the questionnaire, the assessee was required to submit the following information: "A) AS Per Tax Evasion Petition filed in your case