“reason to believe”

M/S vs. R Enterprises, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2007-08

items wide name :pyaaz, “Aalu”, “Adrak” and “Seb”. After considering carefully the contents and nature of the information available before me, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of M/s VSR Enterprises for Asstt. Year 2007-08. Hence, proceeding ... escaped assessment and any other income found during the course of assessment proceedings which is chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. I have reasons to believe that the above said income/transaction of Rs.1200000/- and any other income found during the course of assessment proceedings which is 11 chargeable

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. K.S. Chawla & Songs (HUF), New Delhi

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

filed on 28.03.2010 to be considered as return filed under Section 148. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer provided the assessee an unstamped copy of reasons to believe on which neither the date of signing of notice nor the satisfaction of appropriate authority has been recorded. In response to the reasons ... 2724/Del/2015. In response to this, the assessee filed cross objections vide c/o no. 456/Del/2015. The Ld. AR submitted that on perusal of the reasons to believe provided by the Assessing Officer, it can be observed that the Assessing Officer has not provided approval of appropriate authority for reopening the case

Addl. CIT, Special Range-7, New Delhi vs. Rites Ltd., New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

assessee did not show any evidence of payment the said donation. 5. After perusal of the above mentioned information and facts, I have reason to believe that an income of at least Rs. 2353.62 lacs for AY. 2009-10 has escaped from assessment. Approval for initiating proceedings ... escaped assessment. It is also observed there was due compliance of provisions of section 151 of IT Act, 1961. Thus, there was reason to believe that income of the appellant- facts/particulars of its income necessary for its assessment. For the reasons mentioned above, it has to be held that

Rites Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Spl. Range- 7, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

assessee did not show any evidence of payment the said donation. 5. After perusal of the above mentioned information and facts, I have reason to believe that an income of at least Rs. 2353.62 lacs for AY. 2009-10 has escaped from assessment. Approval for initiating proceedings ... escaped assessment. It is also observed there was due compliance of provisions of section 151 of IT Act, 1961. Thus, there was reason to believe that income of the appellant- facts/particulars of its income necessary for its assessment. For the reasons mentioned above, it has to be held that

DCIT, Circle- 62(1), New Delhi vs. Paveljeet Singh Ruppal, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Amit Shukla

supplies : Rs.70,30,807/- Proportionate interest to be disallowed : Rs.10513743 (14670851/40954814*29349927) Form these facts and after due application of mind, I have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the A.Y. 2008-09 for the reason of failure on the part of the assessee ... However, the AO reopened the case u/s 147 of the Act on 17.03.2015 by recording reasons to believe that the income amounting to Rs. 1,05,13,743/- has escaped assessment and the interest of this amount is required to be disallowed

Simranpal Singh Suri, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 45(5), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2010-11 Simranpal Singh Suri, Vs Ito, Jg-1/77, Vikaspuri, Ward 45(5), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Akzps3760Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V.K. Sabharwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Farath Khan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.05.2021 Order

source of cash deposit in saving bank account amounting to Rs. 14,52,000/- remained unexplained. Therefore I have reason to believe that the income of the assessee to the extent of Rs 14,52,000/- for Asstt. Year 2010-11 has escaped assessment and hence ... service of notice to the assessee before the Assessing Officer proceeds to assess, reassess or recompute escaped income. Section 147 mandates recording of reasons to believe by the Assessing Officer that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. All these conditions are required to be fulfilled to assess

Spj Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-24(2), New Delhi

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya, S. M. C.

records available, the assessee has not filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2007-08. In view of above, I have reason to believe that income of Rs.10,00,000/- has escaped assessment within the meanings of the provisions of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore ... quashed. The relevant findings of the Tribunal, read as under :- “ 13.2. Since the facts are totally different as A.O. had reason to believe that Rs.10 lakhs has escaped assessment on account of Rs.5 lakhs received from two companies referred to above, which was ultimately found to be incorrect

Anand Pershad Jaiswal, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

filed any return of income for the A.Y. 2006-07. As the assessee had not offered any income on this account, I have reason to believe that income amounting Rs. 13,70,47,686/- (USD1=INR 44.95) chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in A.Y. 2006-07. This ... justified. 24. We find some force in the above arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee. A perusal of the reason to believe which is reproduced in the preceding paragraph reveals that the Assessing Officer has assumed jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of information received

Anand Pershad Jaiswal, New Delhi vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

filed any return of income for the A.Y. 2006-07. As the assessee had not offered any income on this account, I have reason to believe that income amounting Rs. 13,70,47,686/- (USD1=INR 44.95) chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in A.Y. 2006-07. This ... justified. 24. We find some force in the above arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee. A perusal of the reason to believe which is reproduced in the preceding paragraph reveals that the Assessing Officer has assumed jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of information received

Sh. Karamjit S. Jaiwswal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

filed any return of income for the A.Y. 2006-07. As the assessee had not offered any income on this account, I have reason to believe that income amounting Rs. 13,70,47,686/- (USD1=INR 44.95) chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in A.Y. 2006-07. This ... justified. 24. We find some force in the above arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee. A perusal of the reason to believe which is reproduced in the preceding paragraph reveals that the Assessing Officer has assumed jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of information received

Sh. Karamjit S. Jaiwswal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all appeals filed by the respective assesses are

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

filed any return of income for the A.Y. 2006-07. As the assessee had not offered any income on this account, I have reason to believe that income amounting Rs. 13,70,47,686/- (USD1=INR 44.95) chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in A.Y. 2006-07. This ... justified. 24. We find some force in the above arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee. A perusal of the reason to believe which is reproduced in the preceding paragraph reveals that the Assessing Officer has assumed jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of information received

Mikado Realtors (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT (Central), Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

case of M/s. SPJ Hotels Pvt. Ltd. vs The PCIT-8 13.2. Since the facts are totally different as A.O. had reason to believe that Rs.10 lakhs has escaped assessment on account of Rs.5 lakhs received from two companies referred to above, which was ultimately found to be incorrect

Digvijay Advisor Pvt. Ltd, Ghaziabad Up vs. ITO Ward-7(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year : 2008-09

allowed on 06.04.2015, but reasons dated 31.03.2015 is recorded for non-compliance of the said letter. He submitted that there is neither any ‘reason to believe’ nor there is credible material/live link with Assessing Officer and at the most he acted on borrowed satisfaction. Further, the lower authorities have given

ITO, Ward-17(1), New Delhi vs. Momentum Technologies P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result ground number 1, 2 of the appeal are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, the Assessing Officer shall,— (i) where he has reason to believe that any claim of loss, exemption, deduction, allowance or relief made in the return is inadmissible, serve on the assessee a notice specifying particulars

Garg Zevar Palace Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 9542/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Garg Zevar Palace Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer(E), C/O Kapil Goel, Adv., Ward-1(3), F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Faridabad, Haryana New Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccg0565H Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Prakash Dubey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.03.2021

assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2010-11 on 05.09.2010 declaring income of Rs.14,37,730/-. Hence, there is reason to believe that the assessee has earned income of Rs. 60,00,000/- from undisclosed sources by taking the bogus credit entries in his bank account. Therefore ... material facts necessary for computing correct income and filing his return of income for the A. Y. 2010-11. 3. Therefore, I have reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment to the extent of Rs. 60,00,000/-. In order to bring undisclosed income

M/S Super Industries, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2006-07 Super Industries, Vs Ito, Prop. S. Jagjit Singh, Ward-33(3), L/H Shri Joginder Singh, New Delhi. N.7, Gali No.9, Anand Parbat Industrial Area, New Delhi. Pan: Aasps8033M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ramesh Goyal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Ranu Mukherjee, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.03.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15Th September, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-17, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2006- 07. 2. This Appeal Was Earlier Dismissed By The Tribunal For Non-Appearance. Subsequently, The Tribunal, Vide Ma No.118/Del/2017, Order Dated 16Th February, 2018, Recalled Its Earlier Order. Hence, This Is A Recalled Matter. 3. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & The Proprietor Of M/S Super Industries. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 27Th October, 2006 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.1,89,640/-. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened On The Basis Of Information Obtained That The Assessee Indulged In Bogus Purchases/Accommodation Entries Provided By Shri Rakesh Gupta, Shri Vishesh Gupta, Shri Navneet & Shri Vaibhav Jain. Accordingly, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened After Recording Reasons As Per The Provisions Of Section 147 Of The Act. Notice U/S 148 Dated 28Th March, 2013 Was Issued & Served Upon The Assessee. The Ao, Thereafter, Issued Statutory Notices. Rejecting The Various Explanations Given By The Assessee & Observing That The Assessee Has Made Bogus Purchase Of Rs.13,03,692/- From Shree Bankey Bihari Trading Co. & Shree Shyam Trading Co., Which Are Owned By The Persons Named Earlier, Made Addition Of Rs.13,03,692/- U/S 69C Of The It Act.

assessment is application of mind by the Assessing Officer, to the materials produced prior to reopening the assessment, to conclude that he has reason to believe that income has 6 escaped assessment. Unless that basic jurisdictional requirement is satisfied a post mortem exercise of analysing materials produced subsequent ... prima facie opinion on the basis of material produced, it was not possible for the Assessing Officer to conclude that he had reason to believe that income had escaped assessment." 8. Similarly, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Signature Hotels

M/S. Kalinga Conduits Electricables (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 9, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2010-11 Kalinga Conduits Electricables (P) Vs Pr. Cit-9, Ltd., New Delhi. 81/41, Punjabi Bagh West, New Delhi. Pan : Aacck5784H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate; Shri Rajiv Sabharwal, Ca; & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca. Revenue By : Mrs. Aashna Paul, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.03.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23Rd March, 2017 Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act, 1961 By The Pcit, New Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 30Th September, 2010 Declaring An Income Of Rs.5,940/-. The Said Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act. Subsequently, The Cit-Ii, New Delhi, Vide His Letter No. File 148/2012-13/2817 Dated 15Th March, 2013, Forwarded The Letter Of Investigation Ii, Delhi, Vide F. No.Dit (Inv.)-Ii/U/S 148/2012-13/197 Dated 12Th March, 2013 Giving Information About An Accommodation Entry Of Rs.40 Lakhs Received By The Assessee From M/S Victory Software Pvt. Ltd., Zenith Automotive Pvt. Ltd. & Humtum Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Based On The Above, The Ao Issued Notice U/S 148 After Recording The Reasons.

issued mechanically without application of mind much less independent application of mind and without having any tangible, relevant credible material to form a reason to believe that income of the appellant has escaped assessment therefore the order of assessment u/s 147/143(3) of the Act was without jurisdiction

Sungrow Impex Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-24(3), New Delhi

In the result appeal of assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

entry received by routing its own unaccounted money. 5. Considering the above referred credible information, and analysis subsequent to the information, I have reason to believe that an amount at least of Rs.50,00,000 has escaped assessment in case the of M/s Sungrow Impex ... gone through the details of the information and has not even applied his mind and merely concluded that he has reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In the reasons A.O. has recorded that assessee has received accommodation entry of Rs.2.45 crores, but, ultimately made

Savita Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 22(4), New Delhi

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R Kumar

whom the amount were received are listed as paper companies controlled by Sh. S.K. Jain group. Thus, in view of above, I have reason to believe that the income pertaining to the AY 2010-11 has escaped assessment to the extent of Rs. 50,00,000/-. The escapement of income ... that income of the assessee has escaped assessment. There is non-application of mind by the AO could not be said to have reason to believe as to justify reopening of the assessment”. The AO could have made enquiries prior to recording the reasons by undertaking enquiries u/s 131/133

Dua Health Care Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Assessing Officer accepts the contention of the assessee and holds that the income which he has initially formed a reason to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income. 10. The relevant findings ... notice under Section 148, he accepted the contention of the assessee and holds that the income which he has initially formed a reason to believe had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact not escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income