“reason to believe”

Income Tax Office-20(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Crystal Corporation, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Sito-20(1)(1), M/S. Crystal 110,1St Floor, Piramal Corporation, 4A/4B, बनाम/ Chamber, Ground Floor, Opp. Vs. Lalbaug,Parel, Annex Building, Old Mumbai-400012. Anjirwadi, Mazgaon, Mumbai-400010. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacfc7226Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri.Anil Gupta.Dr ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : None. सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 22/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale - Jm: The Revenue Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2011-12. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. "Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Correct In Restricting The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase To 6% Of Total Bogus Purchases Ignoring The Fact That The Sales

Maharashtra. The assessee has obtained bogus purchases entries which are in the nature of non-genuine purchases from the dealers. The A.O has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In compliance, Ld.AR of the assesse appeared from time

Arun Moreshwar Patil, Mumbai vs. ITO, 32(1)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Sarun Moreshwar Patil, Ito-32(1)(2), G-2, Bhayandarkar Pratyakshkar Bhavan, बनाम/ Sadan, Ghratan Pada C-11, Room No.204, Vs. No.2, Sant Mirabai 2Nd Floor, Bandra Road, Dahisar (East), Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400068. Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aodpp8017R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Roshan Patil.Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Anil Gupta.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 22/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale - Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. "On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Proceedings Initiated U/S 147 By Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Is Invalid & Bad In Law.

owners has sold plot of land and the capital gains on sale of property was not offered to tax. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped the assessment and therefore, issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In compliance to notice, the assessee has filed return

Bhagyashree Manohar Sawant, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward - 26(1)(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms. Padmavathy Sbhagyashree Manohar Ito, Ward-26(1)(2), Sawant, 702, 7Th Floor, Room.No.303, बनाम/ Ptabuddha Samata Co- Kautilya Bhavan, Vs. Op Hsg. Society, Bkc, Bandra(E), Sant Rohidas Marg, Mumbai-400051. Sion, Mumbai-400022. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Cohps2513D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Malav Sheth.Ar ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Anil Gupta.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 22/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2023 आदेश / Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale - Jm: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. “Additions Of Rs.25,48,198/- Confirmed Without Giving Opportunity Of Being Heard Is Bad-In-Law & Must Be Deleted.

saving bank account maintained with State Bank of India and the contract receipts of Rs.3,00,000/-. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped the assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In compliance to notice, the assessee has filed the return of income

DCIT Central Circle-2(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Asian Star Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S Asian Star Company Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3) Room No.803, 8Th Floor, 114-C, Mitta Court, Pratishtha Bhavan, Vs. M.K. Road, Churchgate, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca4856B Assessee By : Shri Suchek Anchaliya, Ms. Vaishali More, Ars Revenue By : Smt. Shailja Rai, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.05.2023

return of income or during the assessment proceedings completed under section 143 (3) of the act and therefore the learned assessing officer has reason to believe that income of ₹ 119,830,422 chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for assessment year 2012 – 13 on account of the failure ... alleged beneficial owner which is examined separately. 8.6. The defendants further argue that the Initiating Officer has failed to record the 'Reasons to Believe', which is a pre- requisite and sine qua non for issuance of SCN u/s 24(1). According to Section 24(1) of PBPT

Shri Rajesh Ravjibhai Patel, Mumbai vs. Asstt.CIT-Circle.26(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Money” is paid 1 Crescenda Associates Rs.1,11,89,600/- Total Rs.1,11,89,600/- In view of the above, I have reasons to believe that the income of the assessee of Rs 1,11,89,600/- has been escaped assessment within the meaning of the provisions of Section ... purchase of certain flats from Crescendo Associates. Once there is tangible material like this, then prima facie any prudent mind will entertain reasons to believe that this amount of On-money which is shown by the assessee for the purchase of flats in the return of income amounts to escapement

Amarshi Avchar Gala, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office Ward 24(1)(1), Mumbai

value transactions remains undisclosed and the same is required to be considered in computing total income of the assessee. 5. Basis of forming reason to believe. In this case, the assessee has sold the property for aggregate consideration of Rs.30,98,500/- however, the assessee has field return of Income ... failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully & truly all material facts necessary thereto in his return of Income. I have reasons to believe that the income to the extent of Rs 30,98,500/- chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee has escaped assessment within

Govindbhai L. Kakadia, Mumbai vs. JCIT-19(2), Mumbai

bank account in HSBC, Geneva (BUP_SIFIC_PER_ID: 5090175594, balance shown for Assessment Year 2006-07: USD 1081). The Assessing Officer had reasons to believe that the Appellant had an asset located outside in India in relation to which income for the Assessment Year 2006-07 had escaped assessment ... assessment proceedings. It is settled legal position that while examining the validity of initiation of re-assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer must have ‘reason to believe’. At this stage, whether the materials available can prove decisively that there was escapement of income, is not a relevant as the belief formed

Ravi Gopal Trivedy, Mumbai vs. National-Eassessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

income and that the assessee has not disclosed fully and truly all material facts in the return of income and, therefore, had a reason to believe that an income to the extent of Rs.17,40,120/- has escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer concluded the assessment stating that the share transaction ... failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully & truly all material fact necessary thereto in his return of income, I have reason to believe that the income to the extent of Rs.17,0,120/- due to trade of client code modified transaction is chargeable

Bharati Hemant Chheda, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 29(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, grounds pertaining to re-opening of the case and consequent additions made are set-aside

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalbharti Hemant Chheda B-30, Konark Indraprastha Chs Ltd Sarvodaya Nagar, Jain Mandir Road Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080 Pan: Aadpc1013E ...... Appellant Vs. Ito 29(1)(2), Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra(E), Mumbai-400 051 ..... Respondent

linked by any reason to come to the conclusion that the Respondent-Assessee has indulged in any activity which could give rise to reason to believe on the part of the Assessing Officer that income chargeable to tax has escaped Assessment. It is for this reason that the recorded reasons ... escape assessment of a part of its income. Prima facie, this appears to be a case of reason to suspect and not reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 9. In the result, grounds pertaining to re-opening of the case and consequent additions made