“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

Nitesh Kumar Jain, Bina vs. Income Tax Officer-1, Sagar

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

ITA 68/JAB/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Pavan Kumar Gadalenitesh Kumar Jain, Vs Ito, Link Road, Gali No.1, Bina (M.P) Achwat Ward, Bina, Distt.- Sagar-470113. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajzpj1655J Assessee By Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv. Revenue By Shri Shiv Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 18/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2023

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

cash deposit of Rs.17,81,050/- in the Saving Bank account of the assessee, the Assessing Officer (in short “AO”) recorded the reason to believe that income escaped assessment and re-opened the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) by way of issuing

M/S. Minestone, Mumbai vs. ACIT 18(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2546/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S. Minestone Acit-18(2) Room No. 32, 4Th Floor, Plot No. 98, Mumbai -400 020 Sagar Bhavan, Building No.2, Vs. Kantilal M Sharma Marg, Lohar Chawl, Kalbadevi, Mumbai-400 002

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148(1)Section 250

truly in respect of his income returned this case comes in the ambit of Sec. 147 of Income-tax Act. Therefore, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax to the extent of Rs.86 crores has escaped in the form of cessation of liability and also any other ... lesser amount than that which was due. The ld. A.O. then reopened the assessment u/s. 147 of the Act on the reason to believe that there was cessation of liability to the extent of Rs.86 crores which was income escaped to tax. The assessee had duly filed its objection

ACIT, Wardha Circle, Wardha vs. M/S Automark Technologies (India ) Limited, Yavatmal

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 403/NAG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Agrawal, DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

inspite of the fact that AO had received specific information that equity plus premium received by assessee is bogus and there was reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 2 ITA.No.403/Nag./2019 (ACIT vs. M/s. Automark Technologies (India) Limited 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur vs. M/S Jagannathdas Harichandmal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Raigarh

In the result appeal of revenue is partly allowed in terms of our observations herein above

ITA 106/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.106/Rpr/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Jagannathdas Harichandmal Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Sadar Bazar, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan: Aaccj2840G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal, Dated 16.03.2022 Which In Turn Arises From The Order By Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Dated 30.12.2018 For A.Y.2012-13. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: “ 1. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, While Holding Assessment Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of Act As Invalid & Void-Ab-Initio, The Ld. Cit(A) Completely Ignored The Fact That During The Course Of Survey, The Assessee Failed To Discharge Its Burden In Establishing 'The Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transactions As Required U/S 68 Of The Income Tac Act. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Reassessment Proceeding Are Based On Fresh Facts/Information Rather Than Change Of Opinion. 2. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Confirmation Of Concealment Of Income/Disclosure Made In Statement Recorded During Survey U/S 133A Of Act Is An Information, Though Not Conclusive, Which May Be Used In Regular Assessment Or Reassessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

basis of reopening of the assessments vitiated and as such, all these impugned assessments are ab-initio-void; the substratum to give a reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, is vitiated in this case; the impugned reassessment is not sustainable in law; once the statements ... hands of the assessee. 15. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the substratum to give a reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, is vitiated in these cases. Therefore, the impugned reassessments are not sustainable in law. They are accordingly

Narender Kumar, Sonipat vs. ITO, Ward-2, Sonipat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 320/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Raghunath, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

filed his return of income for the assessment year and source of the investment has not been submitted. Therefore, I have reasons to believe that amount to the tune of Rs.37,88,50,000/- is chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and also any other income chargeable ... bank account and cash in hand of Rs.4,75,000/-. The Revenue was posed a direct question as to whether there were any reason to believe that AIR information received pertaining to transaction worth Rs.37.88 crores were, in fact, reliable or not, whether any examination of the information received from

Deen Dayal Sharma, A-135, Govindpura, Kardhani, Kalwar Road, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(1), Jaipur

ITA 394/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

approval from the Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur-1, Jaipur and served to the assessee through speed post. As the ld.AO has reason to believe that the assessee sold an immovable property at P.No. A-15, Kardhani Residential Scheme, Govindpura, Kalwar Road Jaipur relevant to the year under consideration

Manasi Bhattacharya, Puna vs. ITO Ward 1(2) Jabalpur, Jabalpur

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

ITA 77/JAB/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalemanasi Bhattacharya, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(2), C-501, Phase-Ii, Nibm Aayakar Bhawan, Road, Raheja Vistas, Napier Town, Opp Cloud Ninesociety, Jabalpur-482001, Pune-411060, Madhyapradesh. Maharashtra. Pan/Gir No. : Ajdpb1117F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Sapan Usrethe, Advocate.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2023 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/Sec 271(1)(B) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri.Sapan Usrethe, Advocate.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

payments of more than Rs.1 lakh and made ManasiBhattacharya,Pune. term deposits of more than Rs. 2 lakhs in F.Y.2011-12. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In the course of assessment proceeding, the AO has issued

Shruti Vinimay Limited, Nagpur vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 223/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.223/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shruti Vinimay Private बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-4(3) Limited Room No.1921, 19Th Vs. 502, Mahalaxmi Apartment Floor, Air India Building, Shivaji Nagar, Nagpur Nariman Point, Mumbai- (Urban) Nagpur-440010, 400021. Maharashtra, India. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajcs4629R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue By: Shri Ganesh Shah (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2023 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-52 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)], Mumbai Dated 15.12.2022 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee, After A Preliminary Hearing Has Not Pressed Ground No. 1 & 2 Raised In The Revised/Additional Ground Of Appeal Filed Before Us Viz Action Of The Transfer Of The Case From Kolkata To Mumbai U/S 127 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act) As Well As The Action Of Ao First Of All, Dropping The Proceedings Initiated U/S 153C Of The Act & Instead Resorting To The Impugned Re-Opening Of Assessment, Which According To Assessee Is Bad In Law. Since The Aforesaid Two (2) Grounds Have Not Been Pressed By The Ld. Ar Both Grounds Stands Dismissed. 3. Coming To The Next Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee, Which Is Against The Action Of The Ao To Have Reopened The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Which According To The Assessee Is Bad In Law. Since It Is A Legal Issue The Same Is Dealt With.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Shah (Sr. AR)

Section 127Section 147Section 148Section 153C

open 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 an information and belief based on reason. After a foundation ... escaped assessment. In other words, before the AO issues notice u/s 148 of the Act, he must have recorded the “reason to believe, escapement of income”. It is no doubt true that this Tribunal cannot go into the sufficiency or adequacy of the material and substitute its own opinion

Sanjeev Agrawal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

ITA 1519/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

assessing officer starts as an investigator of the information furnished by the assessee, when he recorded the reason, he formed a prima facie reason to believe that there is an escapement of income. He should have converted his reason into the fact by making an investigation on the information provided

Sanjeev Agrawal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

ITA 1518/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Meerut vs. PCIT, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1148/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 263Section 40Section 40A(2)(b)

Later on, examining the records of the case along with detailed report received from DDIT (Investigation) Unit-1, Meerut, the ld. AO had reason to believe that there was a difference of Rs.12,98,24,582/- between turnover and credit in the bank account, which are not reconciled during ... 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 the matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income”, which is clear from the following

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax C 2(1), Jabalpur vs. Shri Rakesh Jaishwal, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 35/JAB/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit, Circle 2(1), Vs. Shrirakeshjaiswal, Annexe Building, Bunglow No. 6, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Napier Town, Jabalpur-482001, Jabalpur-482001, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Aefpj7779E Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri.Sanjay Seth Ca & Shri.Sachin Vajpayee, Adv.Ar Revenue By : Shri.Rajesh Kumar Gupta. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1,Jabalpur Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri.Sanjay Seth CA &For Respondent: Shri.Rajesh Kumar Gupta. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 69B

However in the balance sheet of assessee it was disclosed at Rs. 45,18,562/-. Therefore the AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. Subsequently notice U/sec142(1) of the Act was issued. In compliance, the Ld.AR

Henrietta Maria Pereira, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir-17(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1914/MUM/2023[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1914/मुं/2023 (िन.व. 2002-2003) Henrietta Maria Pereira, B/602, Vintage Chs Ltd, Ic Colony, Borivali (West),Mumbai – 400 103 Pan: Akupp5344E ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -17(1), Room No.117/135, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jitendra Singh "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Shri H.M.Bhatt सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/09/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri H.M.Bhatt

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 147

Assessee has not given any details by which vehicle insurance and vehicle expenses can be verified. For the above mentioned reason, 1 have reason to believe that the -income chargeable to tax has escaped .assessment, within the meaning of sec. 147 explanation.” A reading of the aforesaid reasons for reopening

Smt . Veena Chaturvedi, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent Cir -2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1702/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Section 10(38)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

entities involved in the transactions for generating such bogus claims of LTCG. After appraisal of these tangible material on record, there is enough reason to believe that not only the claim of exemption under section 10(38) by the assessee is prima facie bogus but by making such bogus claim ... assessee has clearly failed to disclose all material facts for determination of income. In view of the above facts, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax of Rs.7,28,88,736/- has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2013-14 by reason of the failure on the part

Jitendra Pratap Singh Bagri, Satna vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Satna

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

ITA 31/JAB/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur15 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv.ARFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar.Sr.-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)

engaged in the commodity trading transactions and there are cash deposits in the bank account maintained with Vijaya Bank. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In compliance, the assessee has filed the return of income

Narendra Agrawal, Jabalpur vs. ITO-Ward 1 (2), Jabalpur

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 25/JAB/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur15 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 25 & 26/Jab/2023 (A.Y: 2012-13 & 2016-17) Narendra Agrawal, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), 932, Wright Town, Annexe Building, Jabalpur 482001, Aayakar Bhavan, Madhyapradesh. Jabalpur, Madhyapradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Adopa3476D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Sapanusrethe, Adv.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Different Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / Cit(A) & Passed The Order U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri.SapanUsrethe, Adv.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 154Section 43B

that they are paid before due date of filling of the return of income u/sec139(1) of the Act. Hence 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 notices

Ranjeet Sharma, Rawatsar vs. ITO, Ward Nohar, Hanumangarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 580/JODH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur15 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Section 148Section 68

assessee had not filed return of income for the year under consideration. The important fact is that if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has been under assessed, it would be within his legitimate power to invoke sec. 147. It has been held ... Supreme Court that although for re assessment of income there must exists reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment, the question whether the reason was adequate or otherwise is not for the Court to decide (Phool Chand Bajrang Lal vs. ITO, reported in 203 ITR 456). Further

Income Tax Officer, Surat vs. Satyam Educational Trust, Silvasa

In the result, ground of appeal raised by the revenue in this appeal is dismissed

ITA 167/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)

allowable to the assessee as hit by Section 13 of the Act. The Assessing Officer on the basis of such view, has reason to believe that income of assessee has escaped assessment. Therefore, case of assessee was reopened under Section 147 of the Act. Notice under Section 148 dated 23/03/2019

Income Tax Officer, Surat vs. Satyam Educational Trust, Silvasa

In the result, ground of appeal raised by the revenue in this appeal is dismissed

ITA 166/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)

ACIT Circle-59(1), New Delhi vs. Neeraj Kumar Singhal, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 283/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

I.T.A. No.283/Del/2021 5 the end of relevant assessment year. II. The reasons recorded under section 148 of the Act cannot be construed as "reasons to believe" that any income of the assessee had escaped assessment, which is a condition precedent for initiating reassessment proceedings. III. The reassessment proceedings are liable ... barred by limitation. II. The reasons recorded under section 148 of the Act cannot be construed as "reasons to believe" that any income of the assessee had escaped assessment, which is a condition precedent for initiating reassessment proceedings. It is the respectful submission of the appellant that assessment initiated under