“reason to believe”

Rakesh Rathi, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-58(5), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2011-12 Rakesh Rathi, Ito Ward 58(5), New C/O M K Bhatt & Co., Delhi Chartered Accountants, Vs. G-7(Basement), Preet Vihar, New Delhi 110092 Pan Agrpr8529C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri M.K Bhatt, Fca Shri Malav Goswami, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Om Prakash, Sr Dr

initiating proceedings under section 147 of act in holding that there existed relevant material which could lead to formation of requisite "Reason to Believe" 4. That the CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on fact, in confirming the order of assessment under section 147/143

DCIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi vs. National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

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

Rs.2,22,06,299/-. On the basis of examination of the facts and circumstances for A.Y. 2006-07 as above, I have reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment on account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary ... disclosed in Form 3CD. 8. On going through the reasons recorded, we also find that the Assessing Officer has mentioned that they have reasons to believe that the income has escaped assessment on “account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully” all material facts

National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

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

Rs.2,22,06,299/-. On the basis of examination of the facts and circumstances for A.Y. 2006-07 as above, I have reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment on account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary ... disclosed in Form 3CD. 8. On going through the reasons recorded, we also find that the Assessing Officer has mentioned that they have reasons to believe that the income has escaped assessment on “account of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully” all material facts

Narayan Securities Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-17(2), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal is treated as partly allowed

Resources Ltd. (‘SVC Ltd. ) were purchased by the appellant, without any independent verification / satisfaction of the assessing officer, did not constitute valid “reason to believe” to assume jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act. 1.2 That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in holding that the appellant

Subhash Gujar, Jhajjar vs. ITO, Ward-4, Rohtak

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Tribunal. 4. Ground nos. 2 & 3 are against validity and legality of reopening of the assessment on the basis that there was no reason to believe that income of the assessee escaped assessment and the Assessing officer failed to issue notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. Apropos to these ... Officer has the basic jurisdiction to assess the income in terms of section 147 and section 148 of the Act where he has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment. On the submissions of non-issuance of notice under section

Sumangal Techpark (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 24(3), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 Sumangal Techpark (P) Ltd., Vs. Ito, 117, Hans Bhawan, Ward-24(3), 1 Bsz Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aalcs4760R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Ms Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2023 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.02.2019 Of The Cit(A)-8, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. First Of All, We Have Heard The Arguments Of Both The Representatives On Legal Ground No.1 Of The Assessee Which Reads As Under:- “3. The Initiation Of The Proceedings U/S 148 & The Consequent Order Us 147 Are Bad In Law As A) The Initiation Of Proceedings U/S 148 Are Contrary To Provisions Of Law B) The Mandatory Procedure Laid Down In The Act Has Not Been Followed. C) The Notice Issued U/S 148 Is Time Barred As Issued After 4 Years From The End Of The Relevant Assessment Year Where The Case Has Already Been Assessed U/S 143(3). D) The Approval Of Addl. Cit & Pcit Is Bad In Law & Mechanical Without Application Of Mind & Has Been Taken Without Bringing To Their Notice Material Facts Of The Case. E) The Information Has Been Collected Behind The Back Of The Assessee & The Assessee Was Never Confronted With The Same Nor An Opportunity Provided For Cross-Examination Of Jain Brothers, Alleged Intermediary & The Relevant Seized Material Relied Upon Has Not Been Provided To The Assessee.”

actually assessee's own money (cash) which was rotated through such channel. This cash was out ofhis unaccounted income. I have reasons to believe that an amount of Rs.1.93 crores has escaped from the Assessment for the A.Y. 2009-10 which was chargeable to tax. I am also satisfied that ... entry operators as mentioned in the chart above and same was not offered for taxation. Having perused and considered the information, I have reason to believe that income of the assessment company to the extent of Rs.193 Lakh has escaped assessment for the A.Y. 2009-10. Therefore, proceedings

Rajesh Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 3(4), Gurgaon

In the result, ITA No.1108/Del/2016 is partly allowed and ITA

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

section 143(2) of the I. T.Act as service by affixture in the first instance was not valid particularly when there was no reason to believe that the assessee was avoiding service of notice and consequently this being not merely an irregularity but an illegality, the assessment could

Aerens Jai Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 9, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Garg

Commissioner or Commissioner or Additional Director or Additional Commissioner or Joint Director or Joint Commissioner in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to believe that-- (a) any person to whom a summons under sub-section (1) of section 37 of the Indian Income

Aerens Jai Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 9, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Garg

Commissioner or Commissioner or Additional Director or Additional Commissioner or Joint Director or Joint Commissioner in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to believe that-- (a) any person to whom a summons under sub-section (1) of section 37 of the Indian Income

Aerens Jai Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 9, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Garg

Commissioner or Commissioner or Additional Director or Additional Commissioner or Joint Director or Joint Commissioner in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to believe that-- (a) any person to whom a summons under sub-section (1) of section 37 of the Indian Income

Shri Rajesh Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, ITA No.1108/Del/2016 is partly allowed and ITA

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

section 143(2) of the I. T.Act as service by affixture in the first instance was not valid particularly when there was no reason to believe that the assessee was avoiding service of notice and consequently this being not merely an irregularity but an illegality, the assessment could