“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

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -3(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2617/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

under normal provisions of the Act and Book Profit under Section 115JB of the Act were determined at INR.1,70,14,98,778/-. Thereafter, reassessment proceedings were again initiated under Section 147 of the Act by issuance of notice, dated 31/03/2017, under Section 148 of the Act. In response ... Assessee filed objections against the reasons recorded for reopening assessment which was disposed off by the Assessing Officer vide order, dated 20/12/2017. The aforesaid reassessment proceedings culminated into passing of Assessment Order, dated 29/12/2017, under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved, Assessee preferred

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No.1 to 4 raised by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 2616/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Farooq IraniFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar&

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi vs. Logic Control Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3974/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 158B

section 148 of the Act. 13. In DIT v. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications [2010] 323 ITR 249 (Delhi), this court invalidated a reassessment proceeding after noting that the notice under section 143(2) of the Act was not issued to the assessee pursuant to the filing ... complied with or that on placing the objection the Assessee had waived the notice for further processing of the reassessment proceedings. The fact that on the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act, the assessee had placed its objection and reiterated its earlier return filed as one filed

Sga Infotech Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 5844/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Chawla, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Kulheri, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 292BSection 68

assessee company on 31.03.2021 through ITBA and registered email id. 4. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the reassessment proceedings in pursuance of issue of notice issued u/s 148 of the Act is bad in law. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that ... continued by saying that as per the amended section 148 of the Act, the Assessing Officer has to follow number of processes to initiate reassessment proceedings commencing with the issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer has followed the law prevailing in the statute before

DCIT, Circle- 19(1), Delhi vs. Rakshit Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 4727/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Circle 19 (1), Vs. Rakshit Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., C – 1/207, 2Nd Floor, Delhi. Sector 11, Rohini, New Delhi – 110 085. (Pan : Aaecr2414E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi-23 [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 14.08.2024 For Ay 2017-18. “(I) "Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A), Has Erred In Not Appreciating That Detailed Investigation Was Already Carried Out By The Investigation Wing On The Issue Of Bogus Short Term Capital Loss From Alankit Group & The Assessee Was Not Able To Substantiate Its Claim With Evidences."

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151

order of the ld. CIT (A) :- "Additional Ground No.1 : That on the facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that the instant reassessment proceedings so initiated are with non application of mind, based on change of opinion and also without satisfying the statutory preconditions of provisions of section ... limitation, and was to be quashed - Held, yes [Para 12] [In favour of assessee]” 12. Respectfully following the aforesaid decisions, we hold the impugned reassessment proceedings to be bad in law and quashed as such and accordingly, allow the additional grounds taken by the assessee. 13. With regard to other

Kross Limited, Adityapur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jamshedpur

Accordingly, ITA No. 98/RAN/2025 is allowed

ITA 98/RAN/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Nov 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: the CIT(A) where appeal was dismissed on wrong facts.4. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

Section 147Section 148Section 68

Brief facts of the Case are that the assessee is a company engaged primarily in the business of manufacturing auto components. In this case, reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were initiated based on information received by the Department regarding share application money pending allotment ... relevant to the assessment year 2012–13 and no part of this amount was received during the assessment year 2013–14. The reassessment proceedings were initiated on an incorrect assumption of facts without verifying the relevant accounting records. On examining the records, we find force in the submissions

Kross Limited, Adityapur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jamshedpur

Accordingly, ITA No. 98/RAN/2025 is allowed

ITA 97/RAN/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Nov 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: the CIT(A) where appeal was dismissed on wrong facts.4. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

Section 147Section 148Section 68

Hiralal Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Ranchi vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ranchi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 288/RAN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) where appeal of the assessee was dismissed sustaining the order of the AO.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

PCIT), Ranchi, under Section 151(1) of the Act, notice under Section 148 was issued on 11.08.2017 for reopening the completed assessment. During the reassessment proceedings, a certified copy of the reasons recorded for reopening was furnished to the assessee. The assessee was also issued notice under Section

Shambhu Dayal Soni, Ramganj Bazar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 921/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151(2)Section 69A

148A(d) and notice u/s 148 of the Act, both dated 25.07.2022 with the prior approval of Pr.CIT-1, Jaipur dated 19.07.2022. During the reassessment proceedings the appellant failed to explain the nature and source of the cash deposit in the form of SBN Notes. On verification of the bank

Shahbaz Mohammed Shafeeque, Malegaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Malegaon

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

ITA 2291/PUN/2025[2015 - 16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Nov 2025

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2291/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shahbaz Mohammed V The Income Tax Officer, Shafeeque, S. Ward-1, Malegaon. House No.904, Lane No.2, Malegaon City S.O., Malegaon, Nashik, Malegaon – 423203. Maharashtra. Pan: Cfppm6844A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Smt Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commisioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Dated 28.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

Court and 4 Hon. Allahabad High Court. Therefore, the impugned notice u/s 148 is ITA No.2291/PUN/2025 [A] invalid and hence the said notice and reassessment proceedings are void ab initio. 5) On the facts and in law the notice issued u/s 148 on 18/07/2022 by Jurisdictional AO is contrary

Manish Jashwantrai Bhuta, Nashik vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

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

ITA 1502/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 Manish Jashwantrai Bhuta Ito, Ward 1(1), Nashik Flat No.8, Pooja Apartment, Vs. Shivam Nagar, Hirawadi, Panchavati, Nashik – 422003 Pan: Aghpb1619F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket M Joshi (Through Virtual) Department By : Shri Manish M. Mehta Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-11-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M Joshi (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manish M. Mehta

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153CSection 68

instant case, in the light of the above judgement I notice that the notices u/s 148 of the Act for carrying out the reassessment proceedings for A.Y. 2017-18 has been issued on 20.07.2022. Also the first notice u/s 148A(b) has been issued on 26.05.2022. Therefore the notices ... without jurisdiction, bad in law and is in violation in provisions of section 151(ii) of the Act. Therefore the initiation of the reassessment proceedings in the instant case is without any jurisdiction and therefore such proceedings are quashed. The legal issue raised in ground No. 1 in assessee

Neha Jain, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1275/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1275/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Neha Jain Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 9(1) Pan:Asnpj2794B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Siddharth Toshnival राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Rajnaj Agarwala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 21/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Smt. Neha Jain (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 27.06.2025 For The A.Y 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Advocate Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: : Shri Rajnaj Agarwala, Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 45Section 69A

Rs.1,53,45,000/- sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). 8. The assessee had also raised a legal ground challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings. However, since we have allowed the appeal of the assessee on merits, we are not adjudicating the said legal issue, and the same

Sowmya Kannan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward-19(4), Chennai

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

ITA 2524/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2524/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ms. Sowmya Kannan, The Income Tax Officer, No.634-A, Ramasamy Salai, Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 19(4), K K Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 078. Pan: Aaopk 5170F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Abhishek Murali, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Murali, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Court of Madras in the case of TVS Credit Services Ltd. v. DCIT in W.P. No. 22402 of 2024, the Ld.AR argued that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer are void ab initio. 3. The Ld. DR relied on the order passed by the AO & First Appellate

Anand Arunraj, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp. Cirlce-5(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1348/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Gautam S. Mukundan, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)

decided on 21.08.2025, wherein, the proposition that non-disposal of the objections to reopening by way of valid and separate speaking order renders the reassessment proceedings a nullity. 6. The Ld.AR also took us through the findings of the ld.CIT(A), wherein it is held that the assessee ... reopening by way of a speaking order and if it is necessary, whether the non-adherence to the same would render the entire reassessment proceedings otiose or it is merely a procedural irregularity that does not make the reassessment invalid. In our view, it is mandatory for the Assessing Officer

ITO(It)-3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, Mumbai

ITA 3674/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar - CIT DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 3Section 3(1)

Court. 2.1 Grounds taken by the assessee in the cross objections are reproduced as under: CO. No. 152/MUM/2025 1. erred in issuing notices for reassessment proceedings under Section 148A, conducting the reassessment under Sections 148A and 148, and/or in passing the impugned orders dated 30 July 2022 and/or 28th July ... raised for the present appeal, which is wholly erroneous, arbitrary and contrary to law. 2. The learned Assessing Officer erred in issuing notices for reassessment proceedings under Section 148A, conducting the reassessment under Sections 148A and 148, and/or in passing the impugned orders dated 30th July 2022 and/or 28th July

Income Tax Officer (It)-3(2)(1), Kautilya Bhawan vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3523/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. Advocate and Shri Divesh Chawla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar - CIT DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 3Section 3(1)

Income Tax Officer (International Taxation) 3(2)(1), Kautilya Bhawan Mumbai vs. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry, Mumbai

ITA 3440/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar - CIT DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 3Section 3(1)

Magnolia Martinique Clothing Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle 17, New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4293/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Dushayant Chaudhary, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

raising following grounds of appeal :- “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)] erred in law and on facts in upholding the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 read with section 148/148A of the Income Tax Act. J 961, which were time-barred and therefore void ab initio ... erred in not quashing the reassessment proceeding, initiated under section 148A despite the fact that the notice under section 148 issued on 30.06.2021 was beyond the permissible limitation period as per amended section 149(1)(b), and no valid "asset” representing escaped income exceeding Rs.50 lakhs was identified

Magnolia Martinique Clothing Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle 17, New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4292/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Dushayant Chaudhary, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

Magnolia Martinique Clothing Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle 17, New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4291/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Dushayant Chaudhary, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148