← 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

DCIT, Central Circle-14, Delhi vs. Parveen Aggarwal, Gurgaon

Accordingly the same are hereby upheld. Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 197/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Parveen Aggarwal, Vs Acit, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden Central Circle-14, Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon New Delhi Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs Parveen Aggarwal, Central Circle-14, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden New Delhi Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri K.Sampath, Adv. & Shri V.Rajkumar, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.10.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Cross-Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)- 27, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.11.2022 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-27/10482/2019-20 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dt. 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13. Ita Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

from the end of the relevant year has expired in this case, the requirements to initiate proceedings u/s 147 of the Act are reason to believe that income for the Year under consideration has escaped assessment because of failure on the ITA Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023 part of the assessee to discuss ... fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment for the assessment year under consideration. It is pertinent to mention here that reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment for the year under consideration have been recorded above [refer paragraphs-6]. I have carefully considered the assessment records

Parveen Aggarwal, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi

Accordingly the same are hereby upheld. Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 178/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Parveen Aggarwal, Vs Acit, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden Central Circle-14, Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon New Delhi Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs Parveen Aggarwal, Central Circle-14, Ma-1/7, 3D, Garden New Delhi Estate, M.G.Road, Gurgaon, Haryana-122002. Pan-Aahpa0660R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri K.Sampath, Adv. & Shri V.Rajkumar, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Pooja Swaroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.10.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Captioned Cross-Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)- 27, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 28.11.2022 In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-27/10482/2019-20 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dt. 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13. Ita Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

from the end of the relevant year has expired in this case, the requirements to initiate proceedings u/s 147 of the Act are reason to believe that income for the Year under consideration has escaped assessment because of failure on the ITA Nos.178 & 197/Del/2023 part of the assessee to discuss ... fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment for the assessment year under consideration. It is pertinent to mention here that reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment for the year under consideration have been recorded above [refer paragraphs-6]. I have carefully considered the assessment records

Bababhai Sadarbhai Shaikh, Ahmednagar vs. ITO Ward 1, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 144/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Bababhai Sadarbhai Shaikh Ito, Ward 1, Nr Goraba Takies Jamkhed, Vs. Ahmednagar Ahmednagar – 413201 Pan: Hozps1445M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas P Bora Department By : Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23-10-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69A

during the course of assessment proceedings the society could not explain 2 the source for the same. The Assessing Officer, therefore, had reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment to the tune of Rs.81,03,323/-. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened and notice

Makaran Foundry Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2017/CHNY/2025[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Uttamchand Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

admitted only rental income of Rs.6,66,667/- against which administrative expenses of Rs.2,69,364/- has been claimed. Therefore, there was reason to believe that income escaped assessment. Accordingly, notice u/s.148 was issued to the assessee on 29.03.2010. In response, the assessee filed a letter dated 28.10.2010 requesting

Subban Selvam, Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-2, Namakkal

ITA 1981/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Section 144Section 147Section 148

department for his assessment. Hence, having perused the information available on record and the facts of the assessee's case forms the reason to believe that the income at least to the extent of Rs.21,67,275/- being unexplained cash deposits made by him, liable to tax, has escaped assessment

Abdulsami Abdulhamid Zariwala, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(3), Surat

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

ITA 95/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Diesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh B Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 271FSection 77

appearing in NMS module. According to information the assessee has deposited cash Rs.7,47,500/- .in HDFC BANK. The Ld. AO had reason to believe that the income of Rs.8,72,000/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the A.Y 2012-13. The case was reopened and notice

Balachandra Builders Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp. Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 989/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 989/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 V. Balchandra Builders Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of No.10 Venkataratnam Nagar, Adyar, Income Tax, Chennai- 600 020. Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai. [Pan: Aaacb6727A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate, : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28.07.2025 : घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 21.10.2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

appeared from time to time and submitted the details called for. The assessment for A.Y.2010-11 was reopened u/s 147, since there was a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment by claiming capital gain arisen as sale of agricultural land. The assessee is engaged in Real Estate and Construction ... from 1st April, 1989], they are given a go~by and only one condition has remained, viz., that where the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment, confers jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. Therefore, post 1st April, 1989, power to reopen is much wider. However

Hewlett Packard Financial Services (India) P. Ltd, Bangalore vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(1)(2), Bangaluru

Accordingly, the ground is dismissed as not pressed

ITA 915/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 41

based on apprehension, cannot issue a notice u/s 148. It was well settled that cause of action u/s 148 only arises from a reason to believe about escapement of income based on the concrete material. Just having apprehension does not empower the Assessing Officer to issue notice

Ganesh Puranchand Agrawal, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 575/NAG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleganesh Puranchand Agrawal, 120, Chikli Layout, Kalamna Marketroad, ……………. Appellant Nagpur-440008, Maharashtra. Pan – Afypa6620B V/S Income Tax Officer Ward–4(1), ……………. Respondent Nagpur-440008, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.Abhishek Kumar.Ar Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing – 17/10/2025 Date Of Order –17/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri.Abhishek Kumar.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 234FSection 271ASection 69C

received information from the GST Authorities that the assessee has obtained bogus purchases from M/s Pyramid Corporation in the F.Y.2018-19.The Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act and in compliance to this notice, the assessee filed return

Shri Chakradhar Swamy Mahila Gramin Bigarsheti Patpurwtha Sahkari Santha, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(5), Nagpur

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

ITA 558/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadaleshri Chakradhar Swamy Mahila Graminbigarshetipatpurwthasahakari Sanstha 1St Floor, Chimurkar Apartment ……………. Appellant Wardha Road, Chinchbhavan Nagpur 440025. Maharashtra, Pan–Aajas6767L V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–1(5), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By: None(Letter Dt 14.10.2025) Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: None(Letter Dt 14.10.2025)For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 147Section 23Section 234ASection 250

notice u/sec 133(6) of the Act on the Abhyudaya Co–operative Bank Ltd. and obtained the bank statements. The Asseseing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 and there was no compliance. Further, the assessee was provided opportunities by issuing notice

Lata Sharadrao Khadse, Nagpur vs. ITO WD3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 549/NAG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

section 2(14) of the Act and the lands are situated within 8 kms of Nagpur Municipal Corporation. The Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. The assessee has filed return of income

Alkesh Sharadraoji Khadse, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 544/NAG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

section 2(14) of the Act and the lands are situated within 8 kms of Nagpur Municipal Corporation. The Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. The assessee has filed return of income

Lata Sharadrao Khadse, Nagpur vs. A.O. Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 537/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

section 2(14) of the Act and the lands are situated within 8 kms of Nagpur Municipal Corporation. The Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. The assessee has filed return of income

Alkesh Sharadraoji Khadse, Nagpur vs. A.O. Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 536/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

section 2(14) of the Act and the lands are situated within 8 kms of Nagpur Municipal Corporation. The Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. The assessee has filed return of income

Pawan Sharadrao Khadse, Nagpur vs. A.O. Ward 3(4), Nagpur

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

ITA 534/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Krishnakumar Gupta. ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 50C

section 2(14) of the Act and the lands are situated within 8 kms of Nagpur Municipal Corporation. The Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. The assessee has filed return of income

Raghunath Narayan Dhote, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 1(2), Nagpur

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

ITA 505/NAG/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri.Naresh Jakhotia.A.RFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 56(2)(x)Section 69A

property was purchased below the market rate and provisions of sec56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act are applicable. The Assessing Officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. In compliance to the notice, the assessee has filed the return

Income Tax Officer, Tenali vs. Suryaprakasarao Kanaparthy, Bethapudi, Repalle

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations, while for the appeal filed by the revenue having been rendered as academic in nature, is ...

ITA 239/VIZ/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.239/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2018-19) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Suryaprakasarao Tenali. Kanaparthy, Bethapudi, Repalle, Bapatla. Pan: Dmqpk7509P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 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

Mr. Arpanbhai Virambhai Desai, Gandhinagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 759/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri D K Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT.DR
Section 12Section 147Section 263

application of mind by the Assessing Officer, to the materials produced prior to the reopening of the assessment, to conclude that he has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Unless that basic jurisdictional requirement is satisfied-a postmortem exercise of analysing the materials produced subsequent to the reopening ... been made under sub-section (3) of section 143, two conditions are required to be satisfied; (i) The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (ii) Such escapement occurred by reason of failure on the part of the assessee either

Mr. Arpanbhai Virambhai Desai, Gandhinagar vs. Pr.CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 758/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D K Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT.DR
Section 12Section 147Section 263

application of mind by the Assessing Officer, to the materials produced prior to the reopening of the assessment, to conclude that he has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Unless that basic jurisdictional requirement is satisfied-a postmortem exercise of analysing the materials produced subsequent to the reopening ... been made under sub-section (3) of section 143, two conditions are required to be satisfied; (i) The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (ii) Such escapement occurred by reason of failure on the part of the assessee either

Mr. Arpanbhai Virambhai Desai, Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Int.Tax., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 339/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D K Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT.DR
Section 12Section 147Section 263

application of mind by the Assessing Officer, to the materials produced prior to the reopening of the assessment, to conclude that he has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Unless that basic jurisdictional requirement is satisfied-a postmortem exercise of analysing the materials produced subsequent to the reopening ... been made under sub-section (3) of section 143, two conditions are required to be satisfied; (i) The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; (ii) Such escapement occurred by reason of failure on the part of the assessee either