“reason to believe”

Devkinandan Bagadia, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

been worked out at Rs. 97,68,665/-. In view of the foregoing facts, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax in the form of interest in cash of at least of Rs. 97,68,665/- over and above the official portion of interest ... obtaining approval of the superior officers. Merely stating the reasons in a letter addressed by the AO, is not enough. Then, the reasons to believe escapement of income need to spell out all the reasons and grounds available with the AO for reopening the assessment. The reasons must also paraphrase

Shiva Shakti Enclaves Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 49, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Shiva Shakti Enclaves Pvt. Ltd. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Raigad Darshan (Appeals)–49 Oppsite Indian Oil Company, 605, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Vs. J.P. Road, Andheri (W) Mumbai-400 050 Mumbai-400 053 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aagcs5014B Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ar Revenue By : Shri Himanshu Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2022

circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (A) erred in conforming the view of the ld. AO in creating reasons to believed escaped assessment u/s 147. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the order ... independent enquiry has been made by the AO, reassessment has been initiated by the AO when he has reason to suspect and not reason to believe. For this proposition, he referred to the reasons recorded at page number 23 – 33 of the paper book. 09. On the merits

Sailesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. CIT(A), NFAC

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Maharashtra. The assessee has obtained the accommodation entries/bogus purchases from 11 parties aggregating to Rs.1,01,39,508/-, therefore, the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped the Assesseement and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 11.02.2014. 4. In compliance of notice

Sailesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. CIT(A), NFAC

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Maharashtra. The assessee has obtained the accommodation entries/bogus purchases from 11 parties aggregating to Rs.1,01,39,508/-, therefore, the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped the Assesseement and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 11.02.2014. 4. In compliance of notice

Sailesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. CIT(A), NFAC

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Maharashtra. The assessee has obtained the accommodation entries/bogus purchases from 11 parties aggregating to Rs.1,01,39,508/-, therefore, the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped the Assesseement and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 11.02.2014. 4. In compliance of notice

Sailesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. CIT(A), NFAC

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Maharashtra. The assessee has obtained the accommodation entries/bogus purchases from 11 parties aggregating to Rs.1,01,39,508/-, therefore, the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped the Assesseement and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 11.02.2014. 4. In compliance of notice

M/S. Bharti Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 9(2) (1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

provider namely Mr. Praveen Kumar Jain. In view of the extensive investigation of revenue Department, information unearthed clearly shows that assessing officer has reason to believe that income of the assessee escaped to the extent of loan of Rs 2 lakhs obtained from Olive overseas private limited. The issue

DCIT 8(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vyoman Tradelink India Pvt. Ltd.(Ealier Known As M/S. Rupee Finance and Management Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3032/Mum/2019 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S Vyoman Tradelink Dcit-8(3)(2), India Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier R. No. 615, Aayakar Known As M/S Rupee Bhavan, M. K. Road, बनाम/ Finance & Management Mumbai-400020 Pvt. Ltd.), 135, Continental Vs. Building, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabcr9194C (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Nimesh Yadav, Ld. Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Jay Bhansali, Ld. Ar सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ : 20.06.2022 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 29.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Impugned Order Dated 05.12.2018 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-14, Mumbai

disclose fully and truly all material fact necessary for its assessment for the year under consideration. In view of the above, I have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax u/s 14 A Rule 8D to the tune of Rs. 31,64,455/,- have escaped assessment

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai vs. Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed, while appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

provisions of section 13(1)(d), exemption u/s.11 should have been denied on the net sale proceeds of Rs.267.5 Crores. Therefore, I have reason to believe that the income to the extent of Rs.267.5 Crores has escaped assessment for A.Y.2010-11. B) The assessee has claimed exemption u/s.10(33) of Rs.96 ... assessee. Therefore an income of Rs.54,56,784/- has escaped income for the A.Y.2010-11. In view of the above facts, I have reason to believe that the income to the extent of Rs.267.5 Crores + Rs.96,16,26,397 + Rs.54,56,784 = Rs.364.2 Crores has escaped assessment for A.Y.2010-11. As such

Navjbai Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. Additional Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) Range-II(Now Assessed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 17(2)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed, while appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

provisions of section 13(1)(d), exemption u/s.11 should have been denied on the net sale proceeds of Rs.267.5 Crores. Therefore, I have reason to believe that the income to the extent of Rs.267.5 Crores has escaped assessment for A.Y.2010-11. B) The assessee has claimed exemption u/s.10(33) of Rs.96 ... assessee. Therefore an income of Rs.54,56,784/- has escaped income for the A.Y.2010-11. In view of the above facts, I have reason to believe that the income to the extent of Rs.267.5 Crores + Rs.96,16,26,397 + Rs.54,56,784 = Rs.364.2 Crores has escaped assessment for A.Y.2010-11. As such

Ghanshyam Vashishta, Surat vs. ACIT CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different assessees are allowed in terms as indicated above

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am

above facts and various evidences garnered during the course of assessment proceedings as discussed above and after independent enquiry, the under signed has reason to believe that income" exceeding Rs.10,50,190/- (More than one lac) has escaped the assessment in the case for A.Y.2015-16. Accordingly, sanction

Hitesh Chhatwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC -5(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed while for the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

11 Appeals Shri Hitesh Chhatwal Vs. DCIT, CC-5(4) 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Lalit Kumar M Sharma, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 18/Mum/2019 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dcit Cen. Cir.-6(1), Lalit Kumar M Air India Building, Sharma, Mumbai-400 021 Room No. 308, 3Rd Floor, बनाम/ 237-Prabhu Building, Vs. S. G. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400 011 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaips5358P (अपीलधथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलधथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Written Submission प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Mehul Jain, Ld. Dr सुनवधईकीतधरीख/ : 01.06.2022 Date Of Hearing घोर्णधकीतधरीख / : 24.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 30.10.2018 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-54, Mumbai For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds:-

Shri Lalit M. 31980101003843 17,04,02,549/- Sharma 8 In view of the above fact, I have reason to believe that certain income amounting to Rs. 19,88,48,049/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for A. Y. 2009-10. The transferring of huge amount of funds from ... table which is a part of the reasons recorded. However, below the table he writes "In view of the above fact, I have reason to believe that certain income amounting to Rs. 19,88,48,049/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for A.Y. 2009-10." At para

ACIT - 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Lord Krishna Bank Ltd. (No Merged With Hdfc Bank Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

levy of interest u/s.234D in the assessment order. These issues need to be examined. In the light of the discussion above, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the I T. Act, 1961.” 4.3 It is, therefore ... substitution of section 147 by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Acts,1987 and 1989. After the amendment, the AO has to have reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, but this does not imply that the AO can reopen an assessment on mere change of opinion. The concept

Alibhai Safruddin Malik, Mumbai vs. ITO, WD 23(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalalibhai Safruddin Malik Vs. Ito – 23(1)(1) 22 Sea Pebbles, Near Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Joggers Park, Carter Nana Chowk, Mumbai – Road, Bandra, Mumbai 400007. – 400050. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Azmpm7354A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Shankar Balasubramaniam.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Kavita Kaushik.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), New Delhi Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 144 & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

Safruddin Malik, Mumbai statement (ITS) available in ITD. Since the assessee has not filed the return of income, the Assessing officer (A.O.) has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. Subsequently, the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued

Mr. Dhaval R. Ajmera, Mumbai vs. ITO, 17(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

bogus entry, the assessee has introduced his unaccounted money through the above fictitious transaction. In view of the aforesaid facts, I have reason to believe that Rs. 7,89.745/-has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. " 3.1. The assessee during the course

Shri. Chirag Rajendra Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 31(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleshri Chirag R. Shah V. Income Tax Officer – 31(1)(3) 801, Laxmi Villa, Road No. 3 Kautilya Bhavan Plot No. 281, Jawahar Nagar G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Near Suvidha Hospital Bandra(E), Mumbai - 400051 Goregaon (W), Mumbai – 400104 Pan: Avqps7888H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department By : Shri B.K. Bagchi

appreciate that (a) Proceeding initiated under section 147 /148 of the Act is on the basis of reason to suspect and not on reason to believe. (b) There is no new tangible material in possession of the Assessing Officer which justify issuance of notice

Radha Krishna Silk Mill, Mumbai vs. ITO 31 (3)(1), Mumbai

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

paper book, the assessee has made payments by way of cheques and further the TDS has been deducted. Hence there is no reason to believe the books of account of the assessee on the reasoning that the recipient has confirmed lesser amount. It is quite possible that the recipient might

Jeni Ahay Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 27(1) (C), Vashi

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

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalejeni Abhay Shah Vs. Ito – 27(1)(5) 902, A Wing, Bldg Vashi Rly Station No.88, R.S. Money, Navi Mumabi – Supermarket, Vrushali 400701. Apartments, Tilak Nagar, Mumbai – 400089. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Axvps3431M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri S.N.Kabra.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 06.06.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi Passed U/S 271(1)(C) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal. Jeni Abhay Shah, Mumbai 1. The Ld. Ao Erred On Facts & In Law In Levying Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) On Adhoc & On Unverified Presumptive Addition Of Alleged Bogus Purchases.

assessee has obtained the bogus purchases bills to the extent of Rs. 39,82,532/- from ten parties. Therefore the A.O has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In compliance to notice the assessee has filed the details