← 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

E2E Supply Chain Solutions Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal for AY 2008-09 is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in terms of above order

ITA 3101/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 3100 & 3101/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2013-14 M/S. E2E Supply Chain V. Assistant Commissioner Solutions Limited, Of Income Tax, 4Th Floor, East Coast Centre, Corporate Circle -1(1), 534, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aabce 7932 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. S. Dwarakesh, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2026 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of : 09.03.2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm:

For Appellant: Mr. S. Dwarakesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT

mind, thereby vitiating the assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act. 5. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have quashed the underlying reassessment proceedings, as the Appellant had made a true and full disclosure of all material facts during the course of the first reassessment proceedings, rendering ... disallowance primarily on the basis of an alleged statement recorded from one Mr. Abhishek Chokhani. The ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the reassessment proceedings were initiated and concluded on the basis of the alleged statement of Mr. Abhishek Chokhani. However, neither during the assessment proceedings nor during

E2E Supply Chain Solutions Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal for AY 2008-09 is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in terms of above order

ITA 3100/CHNY/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 3100 & 3101/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2013-14 M/S. E2E Supply Chain V. Assistant Commissioner Solutions Limited, Of Income Tax, 4Th Floor, East Coast Centre, Corporate Circle -1(1), 534, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aabce 7932 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. S. Dwarakesh, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2026 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of : 09.03.2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm:

For Appellant: Mr. S. Dwarakesh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT

mind, thereby vitiating the assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act. 5. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have quashed the underlying reassessment proceedings, as the Appellant had made a true and full disclosure of all material facts during the course of the first reassessment proceedings, rendering ... disallowance primarily on the basis of an alleged statement recorded from one Mr. Abhishek Chokhani. The ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the reassessment proceedings were initiated and concluded on the basis of the alleged statement of Mr. Abhishek Chokhani. However, neither during the assessment proceedings nor during

Income Tax Officer 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Astra Exim Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 230/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kantι.Τ.Α. Nos. 198 & 230/Mum/2025 A.Ys: 2014-15 & 2016-17 Ito Officer 9 (1)(1) Room No. 205, Aayakar Bhavan Room No. 205, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) Vs Astra Exim Pvt Ltd Unit No. 4101, 4Th Floor, Oberoi Garden Estate, С- Wing, Off Saki Vihar Road, Chandivili, Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aadca9987A (Respondent) Co. No. 108/Mum/2025 A.Y: 2014-15 Astra Exim Pvt Ltd Unit No. 4101, 4Th Floor, Oberoi Garden Estate, С- Wing, Off Saki Vihar Road, Chandivili, Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aadca9987A (Appellant) Vs Ito Officer 9 (1)(1) Room No. 205, Aayakar Bhavan Room No. 205, М.К. Road Mumbai - 400020 (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Gaurav Bansal Respondent By Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav Cit –Dr & Shri Surendra Mohan (Sr.Dr) Date Of Hearing 16.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09.03.2026 Order Astra Exim Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai Per Sandeep Gosain (Jm): The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objections By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dt. 24.11.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act'), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) / Cit(A) For The Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2016-17. 2. Since All The Issues Involved In These Appeals & Cross Objection Are Common & Identical & Belongs To One Assessee Therefore, They Have Been Clubbed, Heard Together & Consolidated Order Is Being Passed. Firstly, We Shall Take Ita No. 198/Mum/2025, A.Y 2014-15 As Lead Case & Facts Narrated Therein.

Section 144BSection 148Section 148ASection 250

grounds of appeal: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in quashing reassessment proceedings merely relying upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hexaware Technologies Ltd, and holding that