“reason to believe”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 1474,202 judgments

The decision most relied on for reason to believe is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), cited in 1,673 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reason to believe

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.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More

82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court

1,579

citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

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.

CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.

331 ITR 236 · 2011 · High Court

694

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

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.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.

256 ITR 1 · 2002 · High Court

439

citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment under Section 147 based on a mere change of opinion regarding the same material available during the original assessment. Reopening requires fresh, tangible material or information that leads to a reason to believe income has escaped assessment.

Judgments citing reason to believe

Provestment Securities P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2136/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 68

from Musk Holding Limited whose beneficial owner is Sh. Sameer Thapar who is the director of the assessee company. Therefore, the AO had reason to believe that this clearly is a case of round tripping, wherein the funds were infused in the books of the company through an off-shore

Midway Exim P Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1773/DEL/2021[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Return Of Page 1 Of 15 Midway Exim Private Limited Vs. Ito

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Section 147 of the Act authorizes the A.O. to assess or reassess the income chargeable to tax if the A.O. has reason to believe the income for the relevant assessment year as escaped assessment. In the present case, the A.O. has cause or justification to know that the income ... Page 6 of 15 Midway Exim Private Limited vs. ITO proceedings is irrelevant. At the initiation stage, what is required is reason to believe but not the established facts of escapement of income. At the stage of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the only question is whether

Fatehpuria Transformers and Witchgears Pvt. Ltd, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

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

ITA 387/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar MathurFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 801ASection 801A(5)Section 80I

extent of Rs.6,86,000/-, contravening the legal provisions as contained u/s 801A(5) of the Act. Accordingly, the AO had reason to believe that income chargeable to tax to the extent of Rs.6,86,000/- had escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. In view

Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

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

ITA 64/JAB/2018[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147

circumstances of case, the assessment order passed by the Ld. AO u/s. 147/143(3) of the IT Act, is without jurisdiction as the "reasons to believe" to reopen the assessment were not supplied to the assessee, despite being requested by the assessee. This is gross violation of the principle laid ... observed: "the provisions contained in sub-Section (2) of Section 143 is mandatory and the legislature in their wisdom by using the word 'reason to believe' had cast a duty on the Assessing Officer to apply mind to the material on record and after being satisfied with regard to escaped

Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

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

ITA 63/JAB/2018[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147

Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

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

ITA 62/JAB/2018[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147

Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

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

ITA 61/JAB/2018[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147

Paramjit Singh, Delhi vs. AO Ward-1, Karnal, Haryana

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 446/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 151Section 263

provisions of section 151 of the Income tax Act, 1961. Keeping in view the facts narrated above, I am satisfied and have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax on account of cash deposited in bank account 'and interest income totaling Rs. 72,07,750/- as well ... year under consideration. Accordingly, in this case no assessment was made and the only requirement to initiate proceeding u/s 147 is reason to believe, which has been recorded in the above paragraphs. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case the assessee has chosen not to file return

Mumbai Shelter Housing Development Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2381/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Venugopal P. NairFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

observed as under: “16. Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word "reason" in the phrase "reason to believe" would mean cause or justification ... Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income had escaped assessment, it can be said to have reason to believe that an income had escaped assessment. The expression cannot be read to mean that the Assessing Officer should have finally ascertained the fact by legal evidence

Mumbai Shelter Housing Development Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-(1) 3, Mumbai

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

ITA 2380/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Venugopal P. NairFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

ACIT, Ernakulam vs. Appolo Tyres Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals as well as the Assessee’s COs, are allowed

ITA 140/COCH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit K. Das, CIT-DR and Smt

Section 147

matter, reproducing s.147in its relevant part to start with: Income escaping assessment 147. Income escaping assessment-If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess ... apply equally across all tax payers, so that subject to reasonable checks, the power of reassessment becomes a practical necessity. The condition of ‘reason to believe’ also guards against the exercise degenerating into an investigation exercise or a change of opinion or at the mere whim or fancy

ACIT, Ernakulam vs. Appolo Tyres Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals as well as the Assessee’s COs, are allowed

ITA 139/COCH/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Markose, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit K. Das, CIT-DR and Smt

Section 147

Nahta Trading Co., Jhalawar vs. ITO Ward Jhalawar, Jhalawar

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

ITA 449/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya (Adv. )For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 142Section 147Section 148Section 234A

reopening the case of earlier AY. A case can be re-opened under the provisions of section 147 if the AO has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In this case, AO had prima facie evidence in the form of information from ... basis of report of investigation wing only. A case can be re-opened under the provisions of section 147 if the AO has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. There are a plethora of decisions where it has been held that at the time

Jay Kishore Choubey, Rairangpur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Asansol

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2/CTK/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2010-2011 2011 Jay Jay Kishore Kishore Choubey, Choubey, Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-1, Asansol. Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Rairangpur Bazar, Rairangpur, Mayurbhanj. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Acmpc 1759 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Adv Revenue By : Shri Charan Das, Sr. Das, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11 11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/11 /11/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri P.R.MohantyFor Respondent: Shri Charan Das, Sr

Section 147Section 148

which the assessee was under statutory obligation to file In view of the above facts and circumstances, I have sufficient reason to believe that income of Rs.73,69,368/- has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2010-11 within the meaning of Section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. As such ... under section 32 Rs.1,89,824 The condition precedent to the exercise of the jurisdiction under section 147 is the formation of a reason to believe by the Assessing P a g e 3 | 15 Assessment Year : 2010-2011 Officer. Upon the formation of the reason to believe that income

Reliable Spaces Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Circle 15(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 939/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Chandekar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

notice for Reopening Assessment u/s 148 of the Act, bearing Ref no. ITBA/AST/S/148/2017-18/1009356896(1) was 31-03-2018 and Ld. AO had no reason to believe that income of the appellant had escaped assessment. Thus the reopening is bad in law and should be set aside. 3) The Learned

Balalji Lifestyle Realtors P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3172/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3172/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Balaji Lifestyle बिधम/ Acit, Central Circle-7(1) Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai. Vs. 118/120, Ashoka House Zaveri Baazar, Mumbai- 400002. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcb0234H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri N. M. Porwal (Adv) Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-49, Mumbai Dated 02.03.2017 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Ground No. 1 Is General In Nature So Does Not Require Any Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri N. M. Porwal (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 288ASection 69B

share Capital, Securities Premium & share application, which is otherwise chargeable to tax u/s.68 of the I. T. Act. 9. Hence, I have a reason to believe that in the case of the assessee, income of Rs.14,63,50,000/- chargeable to tax escaped assessment for A.Y.2009-10 within the meaning ... reopen the assessment, then AO has to record the reason to reopen the assessment, wherein he should record the “reason to believe, escapement of income”. It is settled position of law that “reason to believe” postulates a foundation based on information and belief based on reason. After a foundation based

Dhirubhai Nanjibhai Kachchadia, Vapi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Vapi

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 581/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Dhirubhai Nanjibhai Kachchadia, I.T.O. Ward-2, B-9/83, Near Ambaji Temple, Vapi. Vs. Haria Hospital Road, Gidc, Vapi (Gujarat)-396395. Pan No. Acppk 1953 R Appellant/ Respondent Respondent/ Assessee

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 254(1)Section 50C(2)

capital gain in the return of income. On the basis of such information, the Assessing Officer made his belief that he has a reason to believe that income of assessee has escaped assessment within meaning of Section 147 of the Act. The Assessing Officer after recording reasons, issued notice under ... situated within City limit and that assessee has not shown long term capital gain in his return of income. Thus, he has reason to believe about escapement of income of Rs. 95,60,600/- by invoking provisions of clause (b) of Explanation-2 of Section

Ghevarchand M. Surana, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Thane

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

ITA 2641/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Sshrighevarchand.M.Surana Vs Ito-Ward-2(4), 203, B-3, Sector-4, Ashar It Park, Mira Road (E), 6Th Floor, Road No. Thane-401107, 16Z, Wagle Maharashtra. Industrial Estate, Thane-400604. Maharashtra. Pan/Gir No. : Aajps6676B Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Shashank Mehta.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Joginder Singh.Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

Maharashtra that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills from three entities aggregating to Rs.1231,117/- and is a beneficiary. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee has filed a letter to treat the return

Pravinkumar Pratapchand Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 34(2)(7), Kautilya Bhavan

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

ITA 2576/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Spravinkumarpratapchand Vs Ito, Ward 34(2)(7), Shah,3Rd Floor, 13/15, 746, Kautilya Bhavan, Anantwadi, Atmaram C-41, To C-43, Merchant Road, G-Block Bkc, Chira Bazar, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400002. Mumbai-400051. Pan/Gir No. : Aapps9017G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Lawanya Rajpurohit.ARFor Respondent: Shri Joginder Singh,. Sr.DR

assessee has sold the shares in the F.Y 2011-12 and the aggregate value is Rs. 6,61,875/-. T he AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec 148 of the Act. In compliance to notice, the assessee has filed the return

M/S. Fortune Credit Capital Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle -(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2194/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Narender Kumar Choudhry () & Shri S Rifaur Rahman ()

For Appellant: Present for the Shri Ujjawal KumarFor Respondent: Chavhan SR. AR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

have not paid tax. The Assessee is one of the beneficiaries, who has traded in this scrip worth Rs.5,01,650/-“, formed the reason to believe that income chargeable to tax amounting to R.5,01,650/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act read with