← 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

Edge Infrabuild Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-8(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 5136/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2023AY 2010-11
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 68

entry of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- as per details given above and information in the possession of this office, therefore, I have reason to believe that at least an income of Rs 1,00,00,000 has escaped assessment as defined by section 147 of the Act for Assessment

M/S Rajasthan State Road Development & Construction Corporation Ltd., Setu Bhawan, Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 150/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80Section 801ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

indirectly have to be considered for computation of profit and gains of an eligible business. In view of the above facts, I have reasons to believe that allowance of deduction under section 80IA without apportionment of head office expenses amounting to Rs.6,19,06,508/- has escaped assessment within ... quashed. 2. It may be noted that reassessment u/s 147 of the Act can be made when AO has reason to believe that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. First proviso to section 147 provides that where an assessment u/s 143(3) has been made

Palm Tracom LLP, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 38(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1944/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargpalm Tracom Llp, Vs. Ito, Shop 103, Ff, Deepali Ward-38(1), Chowk, Csc-Ii, Up Samaj, New Delhi Pitampura, New Delhi- 110034 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaqfp8495G Assessee By : Ms. Rano Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sumes Swani, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2023

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sumes Swani, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

basis of the reasons which are vague and against the facts of the case and the AO initiated proceedings without having valid reason to believe that income has escaped assessment for relevant assessment year. Further placing reliance on various orders and judgments including order of ITAT Delhi Benches ... absence of independent application of mind to the material received by the AO from the Investigation Wing. The AO could not have valid reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment only on the basis of report of Investigation Wing. Therefore, initiation of reassessment proceedings and reassessment order may kindly

Suresh Kumar Divakar, Sambalpur vs. ACIT, Circle 1(1), Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 129/CTK/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Jun 2023AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra and Himanshu Jena, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 44A

been taken care of in assessment order passed u/s 143(3) dated 29-03-2016. In view of the above discussion I have reason to believe that income amounting to Rs. 98,697/- has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the AY 2013-14 and therefore proceeding ... Delhi) to support his submission that action u/s.147 of the Act is permissible even if the AO has gathered his reasons to believe from very same record as had been subject matter of completed assessment proceedings and the issue of mere change of opinion would have no application where order

M/S Wf Asian Smaller Companies Fund Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle 4(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 459/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.459/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) M/S. Wf Asian Smaller बिधम/ Acit, Circle-4(3)(2) Companies Fund Ltd Room No. 1611, 16Th Vs. C/O Ankul Goyal, Azb & Floor, Air India Building, Partners A8, Sector-4, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Noida 201301. 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacw5648R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Deepak Chopra/Ankul Goyal Revenue By: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ao Dated 19.01.2023 U/S 147 R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Pursuant To The Direction Issued By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) For Ay. 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Legal Issue Challenging The Action Of The Ao To Have Reopened The Original-Scrutiny-Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act, After Four (4) Years [From The End Of The Relevant Assessment Year] Without Satisfying The Additional Condition Precedent As Prescribed In The Proviso To Section 147(1) Of The Act. Since The Assessee Has Raised The Legal Issue Assailing The Jurisdiction Of Ao To Have Issued Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, Proposing Re-Opening Of The Original Assessment [Framed Under Scrutiny Under Section 143(3) Of The Act], We Will Adjudicate It First. For Appreciating The Legal Issue, Let Us

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra/Ankul GoyalFor Respondent: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr
Section 133CSection 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147(1)Section 148Section 92E

look at section 147 of the Act and the relevant section reads as under: - “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 ... issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. And according to him, in order to usurp jurisdiction AO must first of all have “reason to believe that income of assessee has escaped assessment,’’ which he must record before issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. According

Shri Kiranjit Singh, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -4(3), Amritsar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 723/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.723/Asr/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250(6)

under section 147 have been initiated on the basis of suspicion and there was absolutely no material on record giving the AO any reason to believe that any income has escaped assessment. 2. That enquiry notices were issued without seeking approval from the CIT-2, Amritsar and as such

ACIT, Circle- 20(2), New Delhi vs. Rps Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, C.O No. 70/Del/2021 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6300/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

submitted that the reopening is in accordance with the provisions of the Act which cannot be found fault with. There was sufficient reason to believe that income had escapement assessment and proceedings were initiated after recording reasons and submitted that the reassessment is valid if there is a prima facie ... reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. Therefore submitted that, the initiation of proceedings u/s 147/143(3) of the Act is in accordance with law. 10. We have heard the parties perused a material on record. It is emerges from the record that on the basis of the report

Godavari Biorefineries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2 (1) (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5824/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Godavari Biorefineries Ltd. A C I T - 2(1)(2) 3Rd Floor, Somaiya Bhavan Room No. 561, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 45/47 M.G. Road, Fort M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400001 Pan – Aabcg2543C Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Vipul Doshi & Ms. Dinkle Haria Respondent By: Shri Ram K. Kedia, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.06.2023

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Doshi & Ms. Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Shri Ram K. Kedia, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 35

prescribed authority for AY 2009-10 which is clear from the information provided by the DSIR. Therefore, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2009-10. Notice u/s 148 of the Act is accordingly issued. 22.3.2016” 14. If the assessment

Hrish Chandra Pant, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-69(5), Delhi

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

ITA 1323/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Hrish Chandra Pant, Vs Ito, C/O-Anubhav Talwar, D-104, Ward-69(5), Ajay Enclave, New Delhi-110018 Delhi. Pan-Aecoo5229A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Anubhav Talwar, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

Section 147Section 234ASection 271(1)(b)

consideration paid for the purchase of the property was treated as equivalent to income escaping assessment, without any relevant material to form a reason to believe. 5. The Appellant requests that the addition made in the impugned Best Judgement Assessment on account of Property Purchase and tax thereon, the consequential

Babulal Khandelwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-63(3), Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2869/DEL/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2023AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

case. However, it is found that the AO reopened the case based on the information of bogus purchase . Therefore he has sufficient reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment. Hence this ground is not acceptable. The appellant tried to explain that this is not a bogus purchase based

Kanaram Labhuji Modi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 19(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 907/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmankanaram Labhuji Modi Ito – 19(2)(2), 59, Shatwar Mansion, Matru Mandir, बनाम/ Room No.1, 1St Floor, Tardeo Road, Vs. 3Rd Kumbhrwada, Mumbai-400007. Mumbai – 400004. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahipm9349P (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr. Navin Mishra.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Kavita Kaushik.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

accommodation entries of non-genuine purchases from a party M/s Prerna Steel of Rs.39,98,800/- and is a beneficiary. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice U/sec148 of the Act and the assessee has filed a letter dated 22.08.2015 to treat

Zubeda Khalil Nadkar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-33(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1040/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalezubeda Khalil Badkar Ito Ward 33(1)(1), Flatno.2205,Windsor, Kautilya Bhavan, बनाम/ Shastrinagar, Bkc, Vs. Andheri (W), Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400053 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adapn2290G (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr.Abhishek Jhunjhunwala.ARFor Respondent: Mr.Abhisek Kumar Singh.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 68Section 69

stamp duty valuation of the property is Rs.25.17 Lakhs and there is a difference in the value. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice U/sec148 of the Act. Subsequently, the AO has issued notice

Aditya Sharad Shah, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), NFAC., Delhi

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

ITA 1017/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleaditya Sharad Shah, Cit(A) / Nfac 6 Madhu Parag, Mumbai-400002. बनाम/ 69 Swastik Society, Vs. Vileparle (W), Mumbai-400056. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Amyps1987N (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Abhisek Kumar Singh.DR
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

escaping assessment, reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated. B. The reassessment proceedings initiated are merely on the ground of 'reason to suspect' and not 'reason to believe' C. The Assessing Officer grossly erred in not providing the opportunity to cross examine the analysis carried out by the ADIT(Inv.) Unit ... ADIT office based on which the addition was made in the hands of Appellant. The Assessing Officer ought to have appreciated that the reason to believe at the time of issue of notice of reassessment must be converted in to conviction based on corroborated evidences and proofs and it cannot

Rahul Agarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-46(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7955/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was made. Accordingly, in this case, the only requirement to initiate proceeding u/s 147 is reason to believe which has been recorded above.” 3. Since, it is an abated assessment, the assessment would also include seized material and also any other information

Milky Way Consultants LLP, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 37(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed on legal grounds

ITA 1946/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Verma, Sr. DR
Section 148

showing debit and credit payment to the assessee by six entities and in para 4 he jumped to a conclusion that he has reason to believe that the assessee’s income for AY 2011-12 has escaped assessment without assigning any character or mode of alleged transactions. The ld. Senior ... held as not satisfied in a case where there was clear non application of mind by the Assessing Officer while recording the reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment. Respectfully following the same we hold that in the present case the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening

Magpie Marketing LLP, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 38(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 1943/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Verma, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and in the subsequent para he directly jumped to a conclusion that he has reason to believe that undisclosed income has escaped assessment. We are unable to see any exercise on the part of the Assessing Officer to examine and ascertain ... PCIT vs. Meenakshi Overseas (supra) and PCIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl India Ltd.n(supra) the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court held that the reason to believe contain not the reason only but 2 the conclusion of the Assessing Officer and where there is no independent application mind by the Assessing Officer

Hgl Builder and Developer, Mumbai vs. ITO 42(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 992/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalehgl Builder & Ito – 42(1)(2), Developer, Kautilya Bhavan, बनाम/ 403, F-Wing, Shree Bkc, Bandra (E) Vs. Ganesh Aangan Bldg: Mumbai – 400051. Thakur Village, Near Thakur College, Kandivali (E), Mumbai. 400101. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaffh9709L (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr. Ajay Singh.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

lakhs, who are indulged in providing accommodation entries and bogus purchase bills and the assessee is a beneficiary. Therefore, the A.O has reason to believe that the income has escaped the assesseement and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act and the assessee has vide letter dated 25.04.2016 has submitted

Manish Bachubhai Dani, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 873/MUM/2023[20122-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2023

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanmanish Bachubai Dani Nfac, No-245-A, 702, Prakash Tower, North Block, बनाम/ Opp Raja Hotel, New Delhi, Vs. Shankarrao Chowk, Delhi-110001. Kalyan(W)- 421301, Maharashtra. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabhm0031L (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) Ito, Ward 3(2), Manish Bachubai 2Ndfloor,Ranimansion, Dani बनाम/ Murbad Road, 702, Prakash Tower, Vs. Kalyan(W)-421301, Opp Raja Hotel, Maharashtra. Shankarrao Chowk, Kalyan(W)- 421301, Maharashtra "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabhm0031L (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DRFor Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh.AR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

company M/s Diamant Infrastructure Ltd at BSE and the income was not offered in the return of income filed. Therefore the AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In response to notice, 3 ITA No. 873 & 1022/Mum/2023. Manish

Estate of Late Shri.Davendra Chtandas Ahuja(Through Mrs. Tania Deol, the Legal Representative of the Estat/Will), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-17(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2011/MUM/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2011/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2004-05) Estate Of Late Shri बिधम/ Ito, Ward-17(1)(3) Davendra Chetandas Ahuja Room No. 116, 1St Floor, Vs. (Through Mrs. Tania Deol, Aayakar Bhavan, The Legal Representative Of Mumbai-400020. The Estate/Will) 502, Raheja Chambers, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapa8072C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/06/2023 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. Cit(A)-28, Mumbai Dated 06.12.2017 For The Ay 2004-05. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Cit-Dr Brought To Our Notice That Despite This Appeal Being Fixed Several Times For Hearing, The Assessee/Ld. Ar Does Not Appear, Therefore, The Appeal May Be Heard & Disposed Off Ex-Parte Qua Assessee. 3. We Have Heard The Ld. Cit-Dr & Perused The Material On Records. We Note That The Appeal Has Been Fixed For Hearing Twenty (20) Times & Non-Appeared For The Assessee After 29.12.2022. We Note That The Assessee Has Raised Legal Issue Challenging The Reopening Of The Assessment. We Note That The Ao Has Given The Reason For Reopening Which Reads As Under: -

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra (DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 68

assessment can be reopened upto 16 years. As the foreign bank account of the assessee was operative from 29-06-2000, I have reason to believe that income in relation to Foreign Bank Account located outside India, chargeable to tax has escaped assessment and therefore it is a fit case

C.M. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr.CIT- 2, Delhi

ITA 6202/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263

ignoring the impounded material found during survey of third party in as much as the facts relating to the solitary issue forming the reason to believe while assuming jurisdiction by the Ld. AO u/s 147 had not only been raised and confronted to assessee right from the stage of initiation