“reason to believe”

M/S Sunmoon Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19 (3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S Sunmoonenterprises Vs. Acit – 19(3) Fc-8160A, Fc-8161, Fc- Matru Mandir Bldg 8162, Brarat Diamond Mumbai- 400007 Bourse, Bkc, Bandra E Mumbai - 400051. Pan/Gir No. : Aacfs2654D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ketan Vajani.Ar Respondent By : Shri R.P. Veena.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 3, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Mumbai that the assessee has obtained bogus purchases bills from M/s Little Diam of Rs.96,06,064. Therefore the Assessing Officer (AO) has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee has filed the objections and the objections were

Ishardas Aggarwal & Sons, Mumbai vs. ITO - 17 (2)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S Ishardas Aggarwal & Vs. Ito – 17(2)(1) Sons 123B, 1St Floor, 39, Latif House, Sant Aayakar Bhavan, Tukaram Road, Iron New Marine Lines, Market, Mumbai – 40009 Mumbai – 400020. Pan/Gir No. : Aabf12423E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya.Ar Respondent By : Shri R.P.Veena.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 56, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

information received from investigation wing. c) Reassessment proceeding cannot be initiated when the LD. CIT (A) have reason to suspect and not reason to believe. 3. The Ld CIT(A) erred in confirming and treating being 3 percent of the total purchases of Rs.3,67,31,998/- as bogus ... Maharashtra that the assessee has obtained accommodation entries/bogus purchase bills from 17 parties aggregating to Rs.3,67,31,998/- Therefore the A.O. has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act and in compliance to the notice, the assessee has filed

Green Valley Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT- Central-RG. 7 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Kavitha Rajagopal () Green Valley Developers Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax S-07, 2Nd Floor, Glomax Mall Central Range-7(3), Mumbai Room No.655, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Plot No.17, 18 & 19, Sector 2 Station Road, Kharghar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Navi Mumbai-410 210 Pan : Aagfg6558D Appellant Respondent

Bogus Transaction Amount Entry 1. Seven Star Gems Pvt Ltd Unsecured 65,00,000 Loan 5. In view of above, I have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax as indicated by the accommodation entry of unsecured loan of Rs. 65,00, OOO/- from the aforesaid party ... Pravinkumar Jain which also includes M/s Seven Stars Gems Pvt Ltd. The Assessing Officer had reopened the assessment of the assessee on the reason to believe that income chargeable to tax as specified in the accommodation entry of unsecured loan of Rs.65 lakhs from the aforesaid party has escaped assessment

ITO -Intl Tax Circle 3(3) (2), Mumbai vs. Rahul Rajnikant Parikh, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

view, the said provisions of section 147(a) can be invoked only in a case where the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 for any assessment year ... Page 3 of 8 "Before proceedings under section 34(1)(a) could be validly initiated, the Income-tax Officer must have reasons to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return of his income under section

Rahul Rajnikant Parikh, Mumbai vs. ITO Intl Tax Circle 3(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

view, the said provisions of section 147(a) can be invoked only in a case where the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 for any assessment year ... Page 3 of 8 "Before proceedings under section 34(1)(a) could be validly initiated, the Income-tax Officer must have reasons to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return of his income under section

Kalpesh Ramniklal Jhaveri, Mumbai vs. ITO Intl Tax Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

view, the said provisions of section 147(a) can be invoked only in a case where the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 for any assessment year ... Page 3 of 8 "Before proceedings under section 34(1)(a) could be validly initiated, the Income-tax Officer must have reasons to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return of his income under section

Kalpesh Rashmikant Jhaveri, Mumbai vs. ITO It, Circle- 3(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

view, the said provisions of section 147(a) can be invoked only in a case where the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under section 139 for any assessment year ... Page 3 of 8 "Before proceedings under section 34(1)(a) could be validly initiated, the Income-tax Officer must have reasons to believe that by reason of the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return of his income under section

Amol Omprakash Porwal, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 26(1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Amol Omprakash Porwal, Ito Ward 26(1)(1), 1901, Richmond Tower, Cliff Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Avenue, Near Hiranandani Vs. Complex, Gardens Powai, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400076. Pan No. Arupp 0066 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anand Mundra Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Sinha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 03/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2022

invoking provisions of section 147 without having any section 147 without having any material in possession to form material in possession to form reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped reason to believe that income chargeable

M/S Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. JCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

over-invoicing the import purchases and also by introducing fictitious expenses. In the backdrop of the above, the undersigned has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment to the extent of Rs.91.60 crores, within the meaning of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3.1. Accordingly, notice ... been made for an issue contemplated in the reasons recorded by the ld. AO, then the entire satisfaction of the ld. AO of “reason to believe” and “formation of belief ”, within the M/s. Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., meaning of section 147 of the Act, fails. Hence

M/S Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Private Limited (Earlier Know As M/S Edelweiss Commodities Services Limited), Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

over-invoicing the import purchases and also by introducing fictitious expenses. In the backdrop of the above, the undersigned has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment to the extent of Rs.91.60 crores, within the meaning of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3.1. Accordingly, notice ... been made for an issue contemplated in the reasons recorded by the ld. AO, then the entire satisfaction of the ld. AO of “reason to believe” and “formation of belief ”, within the M/s. Edelweiss Rural & Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., meaning of section 147 of the Act, fails. Hence

Hindustan Construction Company, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-6, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

from the date on which the order reopening the reassessment has been passed. 9. Section 147 empowers the Assessing Officer, if he has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year to assess or reassess the said income and also any other ... section 147 as well as Explanation 3 enables the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax which he has reason to believe had escaped assessment and other income which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under

Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade, Badlapur vs. ITO Ward 2 (4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H Of Late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (W), 421 301 (East)-421 503 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent

classified as an agricultural land. The Assessing Officer alleged that the assessee has not disclosed the sale of the said TDR and upon reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment as per provisions of section 147 of the I.T. Act. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1

Dr. Shailendra Singh (Alias Shailendra Singh), Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 2 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

given Rs. 22 lacs in form of on money for the purchase of flats. In view of the above facts, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tx to the extent of Rs. 22,00,000/- has escaped assessment for A. Y. 2007-08 by reason ... ACIT [2018] 89 taxmann.com 266 (Mumbai – Trib.). 11. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that there is sufficient evidence is enough reason to believe to reopen the assessment and at the time of reopening what is relevant is reason to believe. In this case Assessing Officer has proper reason

Dr Pushpa Singh (Alias Pushpa Singh), Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 2 (3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

given Rs. 22 lacs in form of on money for the purchase of flats. In view of the above facts, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tx to the extent of Rs. 22,00,000/- has escaped assessment for A. Y. 2007-08 by reason ... ACIT [2018] 89 taxmann.com 266 (Mumbai – Trib.). 11. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that there is sufficient evidence is enough reason to believe to reopen the assessment and at the time of reopening what is relevant is reason to believe. In this case Assessing Officer has proper reason

Subhash Maruti Ghorpade, Thane vs. ITO Ward 2 (4), Kalyan

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H Of Late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (W), 421 301 (East)-421 503 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent

classified as an agricultural land. The Assessing Officer alleged that the assessee has not disclosed the sale of the said TDR and upon reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment as per provisions of section 147 of the I.T. Act. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1

Shankar Rama Ghorpade, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H Of Late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (W), 421 301 (East)-421 503 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent

classified as an agricultural land. The Assessing Officer alleged that the assessee has not disclosed the sale of the said TDR and upon reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment as per provisions of section 147 of the I.T. Act. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1

Subhash Maruti Ghorpade, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H Of Late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (W), 421 301 (East)-421 503 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent

classified as an agricultural land. The Assessing Officer alleged that the assessee has not disclosed the sale of the said TDR and upon reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment as per provisions of section 147 of the I.T. Act. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1

Shri Amit Mangilal Jain, Mumbai vs. ACIT, - 33(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed and the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 3331 & 3332/Mum/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Shri Amit Mangilal Jain Vs. Acit – 33(1) 2Nd Floor, Arkade House, 103, 1St Floor, Atmaram Sawnt Marg, Eastern House, Kandivali (E), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400101. Mumbai – 400021. Pan/Gir No. : Aabpj0925G Appellant .. Respondent

true disclosure of these material facts in the relevant assessment year, as far as the above issue is concerned. Therefore, I have a reason to believe that the income of Rs. 6,80,00,000/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Income ... Perusal of the reasons recorded clearly shows that the AO has applied his mind on the material received by him and he had reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. It is further noted that the factual information of cash investment in Bridge Land(Humau) in Kandivali was within