← 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

Lalmuni Devi, Patna vs. ITO, Patna

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

ITA 18/PAT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 48Section 50CSection 55

case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (“the Ld. AO”) noted that the assessee received an amount of ₹29,40,000/- as part of the Joint Development Agreement

Income Tax Officer 331, Majura Gate Surat vs. Shardaben Gordhanbhai Asodaria, Surat

ITA 793/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 69A

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH

Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(3)(1), Surat vs. Hitesh B Ponkia HUF, Surat

ITA 1295/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 69A

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH

M/S the Regional Agro Industrial Development Cooperative of Kerala Ltd, Kannur vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kannur Range

ITA 563/COCH/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: The Tribunal Within The Time Prescribed. Accordingly, The Delay Of 69 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Is Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh KumarFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 40A(3)

business of sale of motor pumps, agriculture equipment and food products, did not file return of income for the Assessment Year 2010-2011. Reassessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the Assessee by issuance of notice dated 25/10/2012 under Section 148 of the Act. In response to the aforesaid

Prabu Karuppaiah, Pudukkottai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Pudukkottai

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

ITA 2494/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2492, 2493 & 2494/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Prabu Karuppaiah, The Income Tax Officer, 8/115, Avudaiyarkoil Poovalur Vs. Ward 1, Bo, Pudukkottai Avadaiyar Kovil, Pudukkottai – 614 618. Pan: Clepp 3346R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor 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

Prabu Karuppaiah, Pudukkottai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Pudukkottai

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

ITA 2493/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2492, 2493 & 2494/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Prabu Karuppaiah, The Income Tax Officer, 8/115, Avudaiyarkoil Poovalur Vs. Ward 1, Bo, Pudukkottai Avadaiyar Kovil, Pudukkottai – 614 618. Pan: Clepp 3346R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor 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

Prabhu Karuppaiah, Pudukkottai vs. ITO, Ward-1, Pudukkottai

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

ITA 2492/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2492, 2493 & 2494/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Prabu Karuppaiah, The Income Tax Officer, 8/115, Avudaiyarkoil Poovalur Vs. Ward 1, Bo, Pudukkottai Avadaiyar Kovil, Pudukkottai – 614 618. Pan: Clepp 3346R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.11.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor 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

Assps6238G, Noida vs. AO, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3270/DEL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nring Chamwibo Zellang, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 271(1)(b)

without any proper basis and appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case. Ground 2: The Ld. CIT(A)/AO erred in undertaking reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Ground 3: Without prejudice, The Ld. CIT(A)/AO failed to 3 undertake the analysis with Form ... assessee. Keeping in view the huge financial transactions undertaken by the assessee and having not filed ROI for the relevant period, the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short] was initiated by forming a belief that income has escaped assessment. 4. Accordingly

M/S Munna Construction, Jamshedpur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jamshedpur

In the result, boththe appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 41/RAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: the Id. CIT(A), though the Id.CIT(A) has issued notices on various dates as mentioned in page 4 of the order, however, the assessee could not furnish the detail to substantiate its claim. Also before the Tribunal, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of Id.AO for readjudication. Liberty is granted to the assessee to challenge all legal issues that it so desires to raise before the Assessing O

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Dasgupta, Sr. DR
Section 147

Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Should the assessee not cooperate or provide details in the reassessment proceedings, liberty is granted to Assessing Officer to draw adverse inference. 4. In the result, boththe appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

M/S Munna Construction, Jamshedpur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jamshedpur

In the result, boththe appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 40/RAN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: the Id. CIT(A), though the Id.CIT(A) has issued notices on various dates as mentioned in page 4 of the order, however, the assessee could not furnish the detail to substantiate its claim. Also before the Tribunal, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of Id.AO for readjudication. Liberty is granted to the assessee to challenge all legal issues that it so desires to raise before the Assessing O

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Dasgupta, Sr. DR
Section 147

Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Should the assessee not cooperate or provide details in the reassessment proceedings, liberty is granted to Assessing Officer to draw adverse inference. 4. In the result, boththe appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Rajendrasinh Ranjitsinh Jadeja, Khakhadabela, Paddhari vs. ITO WD 2(1)(4), RKT, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed, to the extent indicated above

ITA 459/RJT/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.459/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Rajendrasinh Ranjitsinh Jadeja Vs. Ito Ward 2 (1) (4), Khakhadabela, Paddhari, Aayakar Bhawan, Race Course Rajkot - 360110 Ring Road, Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agvpj2529E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Gaurang Khakhar, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am ; Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13, Is Directed Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Dated 26/07/2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Dated 25/11/2009 U/S 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. That The Reasons Recorded U/S 147 Of The I.T. Act, 1961 By The Ld. A.O. Were Merely Based On The Suspicion & Without Any Tangible Material So As To Suggest Any Escapement Of Income. Hence The Reassessment Proceedings Are Liable To Be Quashed Rajendrasinh Ranjitsinh Jadeja

For Appellant: Shri Gaurang Khakhar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

were merely based on the suspicion and without any tangible material so as to suggest any escapement of income. Hence the reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed Rajendrasinh Ranjitsinh Jadeja, 2. The ld. AO erred in reopening the assessment itself by issue of Notice ... notice of the income-tax authorities after the assessment has been completed." 15. The purpose behind the relevant provisions imposing condition precedent for initiating reassessment proceedings is to ensure finality of proceedings. The Act also provides that such reason must be recorded in writing before issue of notice of reassessment

Vijit Singh, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 3(2) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1246/JPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Nov 2025AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT
Section 147Section 234ASection 250

deserved to be quashed-Approval granted by Addl. CIT was a mechanical and without application of mind, which was not valid for initiating reassessment proceedings issue of notice u/s 148 and was not in accordance with s.151 thus, notice issued u/s 148 was invalid and accordingly, reopening in this ... relevant assessment year, notice u/s 148 should not be issued unless Commissioner was satisfied that it was fit case for issue of such notice–Reassessment proceedings and notice being bad in law were quashed-Assessee's appeal allowed. Also refer a recent judgment of this Honble ITAT in the case

Prem Singh, Chamba vs. ITO Ward Palampur, Palampur

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 945/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 943/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 944/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 945/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Prem Singh Dcit Circle Palampur बनाम/ The Palace, Chamba Palampur (Hp) - 176061 Vs. Chamba (Hp) -176310 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aampr-8876-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain (Ca) - Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 10-07-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

Rs.57.65 Lacs only which ultimately stood accepted by Ld. AO. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, we would hold that since the reassessment proceedings proceeded on misconception of facts, the same stood vitiated in law. We order so. The Ld. AO is directed to accept the regular return ... income as filed by the assessee. The appeal stand allowed on this very legal ground. Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 6. The reassessment proceedings for AY 2013-14 have been initiated considering the view taken in reassessment proceedings for AY 2012-13. For this year, the assessee filed regular

Prem Singh, Chamba vs. ITO Ward Palampur, Palampur

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 944/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 943/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 944/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 945/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Prem Singh Dcit Circle Palampur बनाम/ The Palace, Chamba Palampur (Hp) - 176061 Vs. Chamba (Hp) -176310 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aampr-8876-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain (Ca) - Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 10-07-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

Rs.57.65 Lacs only which ultimately stood accepted by Ld. AO. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, we would hold that since the reassessment proceedings proceeded on misconception of facts, the same stood vitiated in law. We order so. The Ld. AO is directed to accept the regular return ... income as filed by the assessee. The appeal stand allowed on this very legal ground. Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 6. The reassessment proceedings for AY 2013-14 have been initiated considering the view taken in reassessment proceedings for AY 2012-13. For this year, the assessee filed regular

Prem Singh, Chamba vs. DCIT Circle Palampur, Palampur

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 943/CHANDI/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 943/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 944/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 945/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Prem Singh Dcit Circle Palampur बनाम/ The Palace, Chamba Palampur (Hp) - 176061 Vs. Chamba (Hp) -176310 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aampr-8876-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain (Ca) - Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-11-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up Appeal For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 10-07-2025 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain (CA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

Rs.57.65 Lacs only which ultimately stood accepted by Ld. AO. Therefore, considering the facts of the case, we would hold that since the reassessment proceedings proceeded on misconception of facts, the same stood vitiated in law. We order so. The Ld. AO is directed to accept the regular return ... income as filed by the assessee. The appeal stand allowed on this very legal ground. Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 6. The reassessment proceedings for AY 2013-14 have been initiated considering the view taken in reassessment proceedings for AY 2012-13. For this year, the assessee filed regular

Geeta Sharma, Sunam vs. ITO, Sunam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 491/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Saldi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Prem Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 149

applying the principle of 'coram non judice' and following aforesaid judgments of the supreme court, held that if an assessee seeks to challenge the reassessment proceedings as being without jurisdiction, when action for rectification is sought to be taken on the assumption of the validity of the reassessment order, then ... assessee has to step in and protect its interests and the liberty to question even the validity of the reassessment proceedings ought to be given to it......." (emphasis supplied) 8. 8. Similar view was taken in another decision of the Tribunal in the case of Dhiraj Suri vs ACIT

Jamyang Khyentse Yeshi, Kangra, Himachal Pradesh vs. ACIT, DCIT, C.R. Building, Chandigarh

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 604/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A). The Ld. Cit(A), After Calling For A Remand Report Under Rule 46A, Recorded The Following Findings (Para 5.1 To 5.5 Of The Appellate Order):

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Kanwar, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Prem Singh, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee, a non-resident individual, was subjected to reassessment proceedings on the basis of information received by the Assessing Officer that cash deposits and credit-card payments aggregating to Rs. 42,57,319 were

Navdeep Medical Store, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 6(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1322/AHD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Gaurang Khakhhar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

reopened on the basis of information that the assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.1,87,92,700/- during the relevant year. During reassessment proceedings, it was found that the actual cash deposits amounted to Rs.29,78,000, and not Rs.1,87,92,700/-. The Assessing Officer, however, treated these

Ratan N Motwani (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 23(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 5532/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt.Renu Jauhri7 (A.Y.2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri. Bhadresh Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Uma Shankar Prasad- CIT
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151Section 151ASection 250Section 68

deemed notices and the date of judgment in Ashish Agarwal (supra), the assessing officers were deemed to have been prohibited from proceeding with the reassessment proceedings." 3.15 Subsequently Hon'ble Court further elaborated on period of exclusion and in para 105 Hon'ble Court referred to the 3rd proviso

Preity G Zinta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Ward 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4199/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Preity G Zinta Income Tax Officer, Int Tax, 403 Parishram, Ward 4(3)(1), Smt. Nergish Dutt Road, Mumbai Bandra West Vs. Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Aaapz2650B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri. Dharan Gandhi & Ms. Vinita Nara, Advocates Revenue : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.11.2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Dharan Gandhi and Ms. Vinita Nara, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 68

aside the order and directed that the matter be decided by the Assessing Officer and the DRP on the issue of validity of initiating reassessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer. It was directed tothe Assessing Officer to reiterate the findings and adjudication on merits of the case made ... Tribunal, matter was taken up by the ld. Assessing Officer and fresh directions were given by ld. DRP in respect of validity of initiating reassessment proceedings. Merits of the case were reiterated as originally directed in the initial order by ld. DRP dated 31.12.2022. Fact of the matter is that