← All Phrases

“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

Shekhar Gajanan Govekar (Representative of Late Gajanan Mahabaleshwar Govekar), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 42(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2758/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshekhar Gajanan Vs. Ito, Ward 42(2)(2), Govekar (Representative Kautilya Bhawan, Of Late Gajanan Bkc, Bandra, Mahabaleshwar Govekar) Mumbai-400051. 308, C-Wing, Viman Darshan Society, Jiva Mahale Marg, Opp Bahar Cinema, Andheri(East), Mumbai-400069. Pan/Gir No. : Aaapg4252C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Sumit Mantri.ARFor Respondent: Shri G.J. Ninawe.Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

assessee has not disclosed long term capital gains and claim of exemption U/sec54 of the Act. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act, further the AO has issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act and there

Maa Chandi Rice Industries, Kurud vs. Income Tax Officer, Dhamatri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 295/RPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 295/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Maa Chandi Rice Industries, Shop No.7, Bhothali Road, Kurud, Dhamtari-493 663 (C.G.) Pan : Aaofm6916H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dhamtari (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69C

escaped income of Rs.28,47,000.; reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated only to examine the facts of the case unless there is reason to believe rather than suspect; in the absence of a valid reasons recorded as mandated by law u/s.148/147, reassessment proceedings u/s.147/148 would be invalid and is liable ... assumed by the A.O for initiating proceedings u/s.147 of the Act. The Ld. AR had drawn my attention to the copy of the “reasons to believe”, based on which proceedings u/s.147 of the Act were initiated in the case of the assessee, which reads as under: 8 M/s. Maa Chandi

Himanshu Goyal, Dhamtari vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur

In the result legal grounds raised by the assessee under present appeal is allowed

ITA 144/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.144/Rpr/2022 (Assessment Years: 2012-2013) Himanshu Goyal, Vs Pr.Cit, Raipur-1, Raipur Nawagaon Road, Dhamtari, 793773, (C.G.) Pan No. :Agtpg1746Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Praveen Goyal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Praveen KhandelwalFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 263

position, the revisionary proceedings u/s.263 of the Act cannot be invoked on a different issue which was never a part of the initial reasons to believe. Ld. AR place reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jet Airways (I) Ltd., reported ... notice under section 148, he accepted the contention of the assessee and holds that the income which he has initially formed a reason to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income

Barcelona Mercantile Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Ward 12(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2346/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay N. KapadiaaFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 143(3)Section 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

Rubeena Shahin Khan, Jabalpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Jabalpur

ITA 116/JAB/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur19 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalerubeena Shahin Khan Vs. Ito, Ward1(3), 655, Chotu Miyan Ki Annexure Bldg, Talaiya, Khatek Mohlla, Aayakar Bhawan, Lokman Tilak Ward, Napier Town, Jabalpur-482001, Near Russel Chock, Madhyapradesh. Jabalpur-482001, Madhyapradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Awspk5404A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Poonam Chand Jain.Adv.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) /Cit (A) Passed U/Sec144 R.W.S 147 & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri.Poonam Chand Jain.Adv.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 208Section 234ASection 234BSection 69

assessee has not filed the return of income. Therefore the AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. Subsequently the notice u/sec 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act are issued through ITBA E filing portal and there

ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Brijwasi Jewellers, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1950/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

report received by it whereby it was clearly stated that purchases made by the assessee are actual purchases and hence there was no reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 15. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... various persons. Therefore, these bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- should have been disallowed. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee

Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1027/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

report received by it whereby it was clearly stated that purchases made by the assessee are actual purchases and hence there was no reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 15. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... various persons. Therefore, these bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- should have been disallowed. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 882/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

report received by it whereby it was clearly stated that purchases made by the assessee are actual purchases and hence there was no reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 15. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... various persons. Therefore, these bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- should have been disallowed. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 881/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

report received by it whereby it was clearly stated that purchases made by the assessee are actual purchases and hence there was no reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 15. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... various persons. Therefore, these bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- should have been disallowed. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 880/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

report received by it whereby it was clearly stated that purchases made by the assessee are actual purchases and hence there was no reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 15. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... various persons. Therefore, these bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- should have been disallowed. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee

Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-06, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 9356/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

report received by it whereby it was clearly stated that purchases made by the assessee are actual purchases and hence there was no reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 15. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... various persons. Therefore, these bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- should have been disallowed. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee

Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-06, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 9355/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

report received by it whereby it was clearly stated that purchases made by the assessee are actual purchases and hence there was no reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 15. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... various persons. Therefore, these bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- should have been disallowed. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee

Brijwasi Jewellers, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-06, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 9284/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 9284/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 9355/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 9356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1027/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Brijwasi Jewellers, Vs Acit, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni Central Circle-14, Chowk, Delhi-110006 New Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Ita No. 880/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 881/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 882/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 1950/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Acit, Vs Brijwasi Jewellers, Central Circle-14, 1170, Kucha Mahajani, Chandni New Delhi-110006 Chowk, Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafb2917R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.10.2023 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

report received by it whereby it was clearly stated that purchases made by the assessee are actual purchases and hence there was no reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 15. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts ... various persons. Therefore, these bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- should have been disallowed. In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that income amounting to Rs.1,36,94,314/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of failure on the part of the assessee

Jumman Lal Yadav, Durg vs. ACIT-1(1), Bhilai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee being devoid and bereft of any merit is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 290/RPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 290/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Jumman Lal Yadav Deep Chowk, Kusumkasa, Balod, Durg (C.G.)-491 228 Pan : Acmpy0168R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 119aSection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

necessarily be income of the assessee; reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated only to examine the facts of the case unless there is a reason to believe 3 Jumman Lal Yadav Vs. ACIT-1(1), Bhilai rather than suspect; the impugned reassessment proceedings u/s.147/148 is liable to be quashed ... No.2 raised by the assessee is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid observations. 11. Also, the assessee has assailed the validity of the “reasons to believe,” on the basis of which proceedings u/s.147 of the Act had been initiated in his case. Although it is the claim of the assessee

Bhasin Motors India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-4(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 3695/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M.Balaganesh[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Bhasin Motors India Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, 28, Raja Garden, Ward-4(4), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacb8884C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vikas Jain, Adv. Respondent By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.10.2023 Order

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

natural justice. 3. That the notice issued and reassessment order passed U/s 148 is bad in law and without jurisdiction. 4. That the reason to believe was never framed by the AO and notice issued without any tangible material is illegal bad in law and without jurisdiction and is also

Hartron Sase Communications Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 1064/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 68Section 69C

submitted that with these vague observations the Assessing Officer directly proceeded 2 to record his satisfaction that he has reason to believe that income to the extend to the said amount has escaped assessment in the hands of beneficiary assessee company. 4. The ld. AR vehemently pointed out that from ... review of the above it will be observed that these reasons are not in fact the reasons to believe but only conclusions one after the other. The expression accommodation entry has been used without explaining the basis for such a conclusion. He vehemently pointed out that the crucial live link

Suraj Exports, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)

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

ITA 1327/MUM/2023[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri Om Praksh Kant & Pavan Kumar Gadalesuraj Exports, Vs. Acit.Circle-19(3), De 8011/12/13 Bharat Mumbai. Diamond Bourse, Bkc ,Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. Pan/Gir No. : Aaafs3513J Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri.Akshay.J.Shah.Ar Revenue By : Shri.Nayanjyoti Nath.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 07.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 10.10.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi /Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 254 & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri.Akshay.J.Shah.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Nayanjyoti Nath.Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

Little Diam, M/s Daksh Diamonds and M/s. A2 Jewels all aggregating to Rs.3,79,50,581/- and is a beneficiary. The A.O has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec 148 of the Act. The assessee has filed the objections and the objections were

Mrs Nisha Jignesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circl-27(2), Mumbai

In the result, Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1012/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalmrs. Nisha Jignesh Mehta 402, Shreeji Tower, Rajawadi, Ghatkopar – East, Mumbai-400 077 Pan: Agmpm9537E ...... Appellant Vs. Acit 27(2) Ito, Tower No. 6, 4Th Floor, Vashi Railway Station Commercial Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400007 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Satya Prakash Singh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha. Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 250Section 37

thereby reducing taxable Income to that 3 Mrs. Nisha Jignesh Mehta extent. In view of the above, the AO had reason to believe that Income to the extent of Rs. 3, 01,518/- had escaped assessment and notices u/s. 148 was issued on 28/3/2016 to reopen the case

Shark Packaging (India) Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed only on ground no

ITA 2163/DEL/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 46ASection 68Section 69C

authorities, based on which an enquiry can be triggered to find out whether there is any material leading to formation of reason to believe. The mandate of law is for the Assessing Officer to undertake independent inquiry and through due diligence and application of mind to convert the information ... reason to believe. The inquiry necessitates analysis of information as well as collection of additional material that would make him believe that the information in his possession can lead to reason to believe judicially. Also, the phrase "Reason to believe" and its due compliance has been considered

Shark Packaging (India) Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 23(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2012-13 is partly allowed only on ground no

ITA 8310/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 46ASection 68Section 69C

authorities, based on which an enquiry can be triggered to find out whether there is any material leading to formation of reason to believe. The mandate of law is for the Assessing Officer to undertake independent inquiry and through due diligence and application of mind to convert the information ... reason to believe. The inquiry necessitates analysis of information as well as collection of additional material that would make him believe that the information in his possession can lead to reason to believe judicially. Also, the phrase "Reason to believe" and its due compliance has been considered