← 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

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Mumbai vs. Kalpataru Projects International Limited, Gujarat

In the result, the appeals by the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 6112/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

upheld the 100% addition made by the AO under section 69C of the Act. 22. As noted above, in the present case, the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of the statement of key employees of the assessee recorded during the course of search and there is no allegation

Kalpataru Projects International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 5965/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

upheld the 100% addition made by the AO under section 69C of the Act. 22. As noted above, in the present case, the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of the statement of key employees of the assessee recorded during the course of search and there is no allegation

Kalpataru Projects International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 5964/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

upheld the 100% addition made by the AO under section 69C of the Act. 22. As noted above, in the present case, the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of the statement of key employees of the assessee recorded during the course of search and there is no allegation

Kalpataru Projects International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 5963/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

upheld the 100% addition made by the AO under section 69C of the Act. 22. As noted above, in the present case, the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of the statement of key employees of the assessee recorded during the course of search and there is no allegation

Kalpataru Projects International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee for the assessment years

ITA 5962/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

upheld the 100% addition made by the AO under section 69C of the Act. 22. As noted above, in the present case, the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of the statement of key employees of the assessee recorded during the course of search and there is no allegation

Ritesh Singh ACIT Circle 3 3 1, Mumbai vs. Trend Electronics Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed for

ITA 5461/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Shri Parth Parikh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 7

company which is being wound up by the Court. The orders made by the Income Tax Officer in the course of assessment reassessment proceedings are subject to appeal to the higher hierarchy under the Income Tax Act. There are also provisions for reference to the High Court and for appeals

Ritesh Singh ACIT Circle 3 3 1, Mumbai vs. Trend Electronics Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5460/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 7

company which is being wound up by the Court. The orders made by the Income Tax Officer in the course of assessment or reassessment proceedings are subject to appeal to the higher hierarchy under the Income Tax Act. There are also provisions for reference to the High Court

Ritesh Singh ACIT Circle 3 3 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Trend Electronics Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all result, all the three appeals are allowed for three appeals are allowed for statistical purpose statistical purpose

ITA 5459/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Parth Parikh, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 7

Income Tax the Court. The orders ma de by the Income Tax Officer Officer in in the the course of assessment or reassessment proceedings are subject to reassessment proceedings are subject to appeal to the higher hierarchy under the Income appeal to the higher hierarchy under the Income

Arpit Sehgal, Delhi vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 68(5), Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 8009/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 8009/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2019-20 Arpit Sehgal, Vs Income Tax Officer, House No. 174, First Floor, Sector- Ward-68(5), 8, Rohini, Delhi-110085 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Dmeps2068P Assessee By: Sh. Hardik Mehta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amit Shukla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.12.2025 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2019-20 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1081173922(1) Dated 25.09.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Hardik Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Shukla, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 29ASection 80G

144B dated 15.01.2025, and the written submissions along with documents filed by the appellant. 6.1 At the first instance, the appellant has challenged the reassessment proceedings on grounds of limitation and lack of approval by the competent authority. However, the facts on record clearly establish that notice u/s 148 dated ... framework of section 147– 151 of the Act. Reliance is placed on the settled principle that once the assessee has participated in the reassessment proceedings and filed return in response, procedural objections cannot invalidate the reassessment when tangible material exists. The challenge on this ground is rejected. 6.2 The assessee

Punya Sthali Tirth Trust, Uttar Pradesh vs. ITO Ward (Exemption) Ward 2(4), Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5713/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2017-18 Punya Sthali Tirth Trust, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Gang Nahar Road, Ward (Exemption) - 2(4), Muradnagar, Delhi Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aabtp8479P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 13ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 29A

Income Tax Officer Ward 25 3 Delhi & Ors.(supra), a Coordinate Bench of this court examined the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings, in cases where the income alleged to have escaped assessment was ₹50,00,000/- or less. In the aforesaid context, this court also considered the question ... amended 1961 Act, the issue concerning limitation is inextricably intertwined with two aspects: (a) First, the rank of the authority granting approval/sanction for triggering reassessment proceedings. (b) Second, the quantum of income which has escaped assessment." (Emphasis is ours) 12. Clearly, the Revenue advanced the argument of interlinkage between limitation

Sms Group Gmbh, Delhi vs. ACIT.Circle-3(1)(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 377/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-XXIV, New Delhi. Before ld. CIT (A), assessee has raised various grounds including jurisdictional issues for initiating reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee and also on merit, assessee has submitted before the ld. CIT (A) as under:- ITA No. 1591-1592/Del/2022 ... laid down that reassessment jurisdiction is available only to the AO and not to the assessee and the assessee in reassessment proceedings cannot claim that certain incomes originally declared as taxable are not taxable. Therefore, the AO has rightly considered the income returned in the revised return as starting point

Sunita Grovar, Panipat, Haryana vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Rohta, Rohtak Haryana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3608/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Smt. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2018-19 Sunita Grover, Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income T-7, Industrial Area, Panipat, Tax, Rohtak Pin: 132 103 (Haryana) Haryana Pan: Afmpg8500N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 147Section 263

Yarns from whom assessee has made purchases amounting to Rs.3,02,25,247/- are the fake firms who has issued fake bills. On information, reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act were initiated. The assessment in this case was completed under Section 147 r.w.s. 1448 of the Income ... Soni Textiles (Rs. 1,40,24,245) and M/s Maa Karni Yarns (Rs. 64,91,340) of the Rajesh Mittal Group. During the reassessment proceedings, the Ld. AO made detailed inquiries, issued notices u/s 133(6) and utilized the Verification Unit to verify the existence of the parties

Toyota Boshoku Corporation, Japan vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(1)(1) International Taxation New Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2463/DEL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kashish Gupta, CA
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 148Section 148ASection 151

Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT). The Learned AR before us submitted that since the approval has been obtained from the incorrect authority, the entire reassessment proceedings would become bad in law as the assumption of jurisdiction itself is flawed. We are in agreement with the contention of the Learned ... within three years or thereafter." 13. In Twylight Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (supra), a Coordinate Bench of this court examined the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings, in cases where the income alleged to have escaped assessment was Rs. 50,00,000/- or less. In the aforesaid context, this court also

Toyota Boshoku Corporation, Japan vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(1)(1) International Taxation New Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2462/DEL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kashish Gupta, CA
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 148Section 148ASection 151

Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT). The Learned AR before us submitted that since the approval has been obtained from the incorrect authority, the entire reassessment proceedings would become bad in law as the assumption of jurisdiction itself is flawed. We are in agreement with the contention of the Learned ... within three years or thereafter." 13. In Twylight Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (supra), a Coordinate Bench of this court examined the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings, in cases where the income alleged to have escaped assessment was Rs. 50,00,000/- or less. In the aforesaid context, this court also

Ram Prakash Bhatia, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-05, Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1481/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

course of survey, assessee admitted of indulged into the business of providing bogus bills and accommodation entries. Based on the admission by the assessee, reassessment proceedings were initiated by the AO by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act after recording the reasons. Thereafter, reassessment order was passed

Ram Prakash Bhatia, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-05, Delhi, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1480/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

course of survey, assessee admitted of indulged into the business of providing bogus bills and accommodation entries. Based on the admission by the assessee, reassessment proceedings were initiated by the AO by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act after recording the reasons. Thereafter, reassessment order was passed

Ram Prakash Bhatia, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-05, Delhi, Jhandewalan Extension

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1479/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

course of survey, assessee admitted of indulged into the business of providing bogus bills and accommodation entries. Based on the admission by the assessee, reassessment proceedings were initiated by the AO by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act after recording the reasons. Thereafter, reassessment order was passed

Ram Prakash Bhatia, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-05, Delhi, Jhandewalan Extension

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1478/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

course of survey, assessee admitted of indulged into the business of providing bogus bills and accommodation entries. Based on the admission by the assessee, reassessment proceedings were initiated by the AO by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act after recording the reasons. Thereafter, reassessment order was passed

Ram Prakash Bhatia, Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-05, Delhi, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1477/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

course of survey, assessee admitted of indulged into the business of providing bogus bills and accommodation entries. Based on the admission by the assessee, reassessment proceedings were initiated by the AO by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act after recording the reasons. Thereafter, reassessment order was passed

Sms Group Gmbh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1)(2), International Txation, New Delhi

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

ITA 993/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-XXIV, New Delhi. Before ld. CIT (A), assessee has raised various grounds including jurisdictional issues for initiating reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee and also on merit, assessee has submitted before the ld. CIT (A) as under:- ITA No. 1591-1592/Del/2022 ... laid down that reassessment jurisdiction is available only to the AO and not to the assessee and the assessee in reassessment proceedings cannot claim that certain incomes originally declared as taxable are not taxable. Therefore, the AO has rightly considered the income returned in the revised return as starting point