← All Phrases

“reason to believe”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 1474,202 judgments

The decision most relied on for reason to believe is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), cited in 1,673 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reason to believe

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.
291 ITR 500 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,030
citing judgments

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO
236 ITR 34 · 1999 · Supreme Court
862
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings under Section 148, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material to have a reason to believe income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or evaluation of the sufficiency and correctness of such material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice.

ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das
103 ITR 437 · 1976 · Supreme Court
721
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings, the 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment must be based on some material and not mere suspicion, establishing a live link between the information and the belief. Furthermore, for reassessment beyond four years, there must be a specific finding of the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts.

CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.
331 ITR 236 · 2011 · High Court
694
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.
395 ITR 677 · 2017 · High Court
471
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated solely based on an investigation wing/appraisal report, without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment, are beyond jurisdiction, bad in law, and void ab initio.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
256 ITR 1 · 2002 · High Court
439
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment under Section 147 based on a mere change of opinion regarding the same material available during the original assessment. Reopening requires fresh, tangible material or information that leads to a reason to believe income has escaped assessment.

Judgments citing reason to believe

Educo Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2024/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: the AO.

Section 133ASection 147Section 250Section 68

case, I find various lacunae and short-coming in the decision of the AO. First of all. the AO in the reason to believe recorded for initiating the proceeding u/s 147 of the Act and at various other places in the Assessment Order has stated that survey proceedings u/s 133A ... case, I find various legal flaws and short-coming in the decision of the AO. First of all the AO in the reason to believe for the initiation of the proceeding u/s 147 of the Act and at various other places in the Assessment Order has stated that survey proceedings

Kilaru Venkata Satish, Krishna Dist vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 933/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us), Which Reads As Under:

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 68

reasons, the same gave rise to numerous litigations and the reopening were challenged inter alia, on the grounds such as (1) no valid “reason to believe” (2) no tangible/reliable material /information in possession of the assessing officer leading to formation of belief that income has escaped assessment, (3) no enquiry

Laxmi Venkata Krishna Rice Corporation, Nalgonda vs. ITO, Ward-1, Suryapet

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1700/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 69A

reasons, the same gave rise to numerous litigations and the reopening were challenged inter alia, on the grounds such as (1) no valid “reason to believe” (2) no tangible/reliable material /information in possession of the assessing officer leading to formation of belief that income has escaped assessment, (3) no enquiry

Vama International, Mumbai vs. ACIT 22(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5456/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

initiating reassessment proceedings without appreciating the fact that no income of the appellant chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. There was no reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. 3. The learned AO erred in reopening the assessment for the second time without having any fresh ... material based on which he had reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment. 4. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) and the leaned AO failed to appreciate the fact that an assessment cannot be reopened on the basis of change of opinion or reappraisal of existing documents. 5. The Learned Commissioner

Gian Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 33(1), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal is allowed

ITA 1307/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1307/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम Gian Gupta, Acit, Kh. No. 389/2/2-415, Vs. Circle 33(1), Civic Centre, Ford Service Centre, Nh-8, Rangpuri, Minto Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaapg7797G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

utilized for this investment was not explained during the course of assessment proceedings u/s 143(3). In light of the above, I have reason to believe that the assessee has escaped assessment on account of above bogus transactions with M/s Kartika Investment……..” 1.1 The Ld. AO completed the reassessment

Gujarat Vaibhav Publications Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1359/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37

relevant to A.Y. 2015-16 to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/-. In view of the above, I have reason to believe that there is escapement of income from tax to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- by reason of failure on part of the assessee to disclose fully ... scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was made. Accordingly, in this case the only requirement to initiate proceedings u/s.147 is reason to believe which has been recorded above. 5. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case the assessee has filed return of income for the year

Gujarat Vaibhav Publications Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1358/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37

relevant to A.Y. 2015-16 to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/-. In view of the above, I have reason to believe that there is escapement of income from tax to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- by reason of failure on part of the assessee to disclose fully ... scrutiny assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was made. Accordingly, in this case the only requirement to initiate proceedings u/s.147 is reason to believe which has been recorded above. 5. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case the assessee has filed return of income for the year

Sumangal Jewels P. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-4(3), Kolkata

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2357/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2025AY 2009-2010
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 22.03.2016 after recording a reasons to believe which are available at page No. 30 of the paper book. For the sake of ready reference, the reasons are extracted below: “A search & Seizure action ... brought in M/s Sumangal jewels Pvt. Ltd., is not genuine. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer had reason to believe that income of the assessee at least to the extent of Rs. 10,00,000/- had escaped assessment in terms of section 147 of the Income

Career Abroad Educational Consultants Private Limited, Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 84/CHANDI/2025[2012-13 ]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Dec 2025

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

That the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law as well as on facts in as much as there has been no reason to believe that there was an escapement of income in as much as the reasons recorded are based only on borrowed information and as such the assessment ... assessee contended that the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 148 are void ab initio, as there was no material to form a valid “reason to believe” regarding escapement of income, and the reasons recorded are based solely on borrowed information without any independent satisfaction of the Assessing Officer

Bhamiraben Prashantkumar Patel, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Anand

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 654/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.654/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bhamiraben Prashantkumar Patel The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 14, Vaividhya Bungalows Ward-1 V/S. Dr. H.M. Patel Anand – 388 001 Anand Vallabh Vidhyanagar Road, Anand – 388 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Azcpp 7413 M (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajeev Garg, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/12/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Garg, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 250Section 69A

reasons recorded, it emerges that the Assessing Officer, considering the information received from the insight portal, has issued impugned notice forming reason to believe that the income has escaped the assessment on the presumption that the petitioner has been involved in creating the non-genuine profit which is already offered ... conclusion that there is failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose truly and fully all material facts to have reason to believe for escapement of income. Therefore, on the basis of the information received from another agency on insight portal or from the SEBI report, there cannot

Income Tax Officer, Gurgaon vs. Anil Kumar, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the CO of the 7

ITA 4013/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshincome Tax Officer, Vs. Anil Kumar, Ward-1(1), J-10, South City-1, Gurgaon Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aampk9521G Co No. 88/Del/2024 (Ita No. 4013/Del/2024) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Anil Kumar, Vs. Income Tax Officer, J-10, South City-1, Ward-1(1), Gurgaon, Haryana Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aampk9521G

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69

clear in this regard and the same is re-produced as under: CO No. 88/Del/2024 Anil Kumar “.147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections

Manoj Kumar Agarwal, Farukhabad vs. Assessing Officer, Farrukhabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for AY 2017-18 and appeal of the assessee for AY 2015-16 is partly allowed

ITA 76/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

case u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is necessary at this stage. 4. In view of above facts, I have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax to the extent of Rs. 1,23,46,358/- has escaped assessment in the hands of the assessee within

Manoj Kumar Agarwal, Farrukhabad vs. DCIT Circle-4(2)(1) Farrukhabad, Farrukhabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for AY 2017-18 and appeal of the assessee for AY 2015-16 is partly allowed

ITA 54/AGR/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

case u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is necessary at this stage. 4. In view of above facts, I have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax to the extent of Rs. 1,23,46,358/- has escaped assessment in the hands of the assessee within

Selvaraj Arokia Sagaya Raj, Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-22(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 3597/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3597/Chny/2025 & S.A No.118/Chny/2025 िनधा%रण वष% /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Selvaraj Arokia Sagaya Raj, The Dy. Commissioner Of Income 6/9 Ff1, Soundariya Apartments, Vs. Tax, Voc 2Nd Main Road, Non Corporate Circle-22(1), Kodambakkam, Tambaram, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. Pan: Aeypa 8464Q

For Appellant: Mr. N.V.Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Babitha, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

income filed for A.Y 2018-19 which is filed on 02.08.2018 the assessee has not included the above mentioned transaction and accordingly had reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax as escaped assessment. The A.O initiated the re-assessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s. 148A

Sri Krisha Traders, Sivagangai vs. DCIT, Non Corporate Circle-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2223/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2223/Chny/2025 िनधा%रण वष% /Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Mr. N. Vijay Kumar, C.A *+For Respondent: Ms. Babitha, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 40A(3)

read with Section 148 of the Act, unless it assesses to tax that income with reference to which the Assessing Officer had formed reason to believe (within the meaning of Section 147), that it had escaped assessment. 21. To my mind, a careful reading of Section ... would show that it empowers an Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment, if, he has reason to believe, that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the relevant year, ''and also bring to tax", any other income, which may attract assessment, though, it is brought to his notice

ACIT, Circle-2, Noida vs. Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Noida

In the result, the assessing officer is directed to allow both the disallowances

ITA 6732/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6540/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 (Physical Hearing) Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Circle-2, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, A-Block, Sector-24, Pan No.Aaaln0639A Noida, Uttar Pradesh. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6541/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit,Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6732/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Acit, बनाम Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By Shri Ram Avtar Sharma, Ca & Shri Bhupesh Agarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement On 12.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh:

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 34Section 80ASection 80I

circumstances of the case lower authorities have erred in invoking the provisions of section 147/148 without there being existence of any valid reason to believe that the income of appellant has escaped assessment. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case ... principal of governing jurisdiction under section 147. The reassessment can only be initiated if the Assessing Officer forms a bona fide and independent ‘reason to believe’, based on tangible material which has came to his notice. There are two essential condition i.e. existence of fresh ‘tangible material’ and formation

Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Noida

In the result, the assessing officer is directed to allow both the disallowances

ITA 6541/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6540/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 (Physical Hearing) Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Circle-2, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, A-Block, Sector-24, Pan No.Aaaln0639A Noida, Uttar Pradesh. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6541/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit,Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6732/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Acit, बनाम Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By Shri Ram Avtar Sharma, Ca & Shri Bhupesh Agarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement On 12.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh:

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 34Section 80ASection 80I

circumstances of the case lower authorities have erred in invoking the provisions of section 147/148 without there being existence of any valid reason to believe that the income of appellant has escaped assessment. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case ... principal of governing jurisdiction under section 147. The reassessment can only be initiated if the Assessing Officer forms a bona fide and independent ‘reason to believe’, based on tangible material which has came to his notice. There are two essential condition i.e. existence of fresh ‘tangible material’ and formation

Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Noida

In the result, the assessing officer is directed to allow both the disallowances

ITA 6540/DEL/2018[20101-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025

Bench: Shripawan Singhand Shribrajesh Kumar Singhआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6540/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 (Physical Hearing) Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Circle-2, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, A-Block, Sector-24, Pan No.Aaaln0639A Noida, Uttar Pradesh. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6541/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, बनाम Dcit,Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Vs. Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6732/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Acit, बनाम Noida Special Economic Zone Authority, Circle-2, Phase-Ii, Dadri Road, Noida, Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, 2D, Uttar Pradesh. A-Block, Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No.Aaaln0639A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By Shri Ram Avtar Sharma, Ca & Shri Bhupesh Agarwal, Ca Revenue By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement On 12.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh:

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 34Section 80ASection 80I

circumstances of the case lower authorities have erred in invoking the provisions of section 147/148 without there being existence of any valid reason to believe that the income of appellant has escaped assessment. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case ... principal of governing jurisdiction under section 147. The reassessment can only be initiated if the Assessing Officer forms a bona fide and independent ‘reason to believe’, based on tangible material which has came to his notice. There are two essential condition i.e. existence of fresh ‘tangible material’ and formation

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Sambalpur vs. Smt. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 182/CTK/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Bhadra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

Iron ore had escaped assessment. The AD accepted information from an outside source without subjecting it to a critical scrutiny and her "reason to believe that income had escaped assessment was not based on an independant application of mind. Hence, the re-assessment proceedings ... null and void. The AO did not have tangible material to form a ‘reason to believe’ that income for AY.- 2009-10 had escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer accepted the allegation made in the Justice M. B. Shah Commission report against the assessee without any independent application of mind

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Sambalpur vs. Smt. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 181/CTK/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Bhadra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37

Iron ore had escaped assessment. The AD accepted information from an outside source without subjecting it to a critical scrutiny and her "reason to believe that income had escaped assessment was not based on an independant application of mind. Hence, the re-assessment proceedings ... null and void. The AO did not have tangible material to form a ‘reason to believe’ that income for AY.- 2009-10 had escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer accepted the allegation made in the Justice M. B. Shah Commission report against the assessee without any independent application of mind