“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

Sunil Hanamant Naikwad, Belgaum vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Belagavi

The appeal is ALLOWED as above

ITA 220/PAN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji22 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Sunil Hanmantsa Naikwad 1156, Saraf Galli, Shahapur, Belgaum Pan:Abeph0397N . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Belgaum. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr JD Kalpavruksha [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 4

appeal. At the physical hearing, the Ld. AR urged that, section 4. 147 of the Act postulates that upon the formation of a reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, the Ld. AO may assess or reassess such income ‘and also ... proceedings the Assessing Officer comes to conclusion that some items have escaped assessment, then notwithstanding that those items were not included in the reasons to believe as recorded for initiation of the proceedings and the notice, he would be competent to make assessment of those items. However, the Legislature could

Sanjivani Shikshan Sansthan, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 6(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 1207/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rahoan Sogani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR &

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

assessment. Therefore it is a fit case for initiation of assessment proceeding for escapement of income by the assessee. Thus, I have reason to believe that that income of Rs.6,33,60,000/-has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Income ... transaction of sale of property and has not filed original ITR and not shown any capital gain thereon, hence, the AO has recorded reason to believe that the appellant has escaped income. Subsequently, 8 Sanjivani Shikshan Sansthan, Jaipur. after taking the necessary approval, the appellant has been issued notice

R D Tea Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1555/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1555/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 R D Tea Limited……………………..……………………………..………….……Appellant Dhandhania House, 2Nd Floor, 4, Middleton Street, Kolkata – 700071. [Pan: Aabcr3010M] Vs. Acit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata…..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 22, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.06.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Company Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13 On 30.09.2012 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.67,34,990/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Assessed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 19.03.2015 By Assessing Total Income Of Rs.86,23,780/- Which Was Subsequently Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act On 27.04.2015 By Assessing Total Income Of Rs.83,90,960/-. Thereafter, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 Of The Act On 27.03.2019 After Obtaining Approval From The Competent Authority. In Response To Such Notice, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Again Declaring The Same Income As Earlier I.E. Rs.67,34,990/-. During The

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250Section 68

stated that the information from the Investigation Wing formed the basis for reopening. Based on this information, the Assessing Officer had reasons to believe that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment. Notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued after due approval from the competent authority ... Bombay High Court is as under: “19. Reading of the proviso to Section 147 makes it clear that 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

Income Tax Officer Ward 25 (3)(1), Mumbai, Kautliya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex vs. Nikunj Ambalal Patel (HUF), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4303/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 4303/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Rampriya Raghavan

Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

read with section 147, even though he did not make any addition on the reason in respect of which he had reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and which formed the basis of a notice under section 148. The Learned A.O. erred in not considering that ... income, which does not form the subject-matter of the notice where no addition on the reason in respect of which he had reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and which formed the basis of a notice under section 148.” P a g e | 3 ITA No. 4303/Mum/2024

Shri Ganesh Serva Seva Sangha Shripur, Solapur vs. CIT(E), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1230/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1230/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Pratik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

assessee have been examined. Assessment is concluded accepting the return of income submitted by the assessee”. In the assessment order after mentioning the reason to believe, there is no further discussion on the issue and straightaway the assessment has been completed at Nil income. Taking note of the assessment ... supports the submissions of FAO given to the ld. CIT. In the re-assessment order in para 4, ld. AO states that the reasons to believe for reopening are recorded. In para 5, the assessment is concluded in two lines stating that “the submission/documents of the assessee have been examined

Kailash Regency Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 12(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2514/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

basis of report / information made by the investigation wing, Ahmedabad, in respect of client code modification after recording the reasons to believe and obtaining the permission from the competent authority. The statutory notices were duly issued and served upon the assessee which were also complied with by filing the necessary ... rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, I find that the reopening was made by the Id. AO after recording reasons to believe, copy of which is available at page no. 1 and is extracted below for the sake of ready reference:- "Name of the Assessee: M/s. Kailash

Sri. Vinayaka Education Institution R, Mandya vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Mysore

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

ITA 35/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tharun Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)

Section 10Section 139Section 234ASection 69A

view that the cash deposits are not commensurate with the income declared by the assessee. Therefore, the AO forms the reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has been escaped and reopened the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act, dated

DCIT, Circle 42(1)(1), Income Tax Department vs. Ghanshyam Rasiklal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 4707/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shrinarendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjeedcit, Circle 42(1)(1), Mumbai Vs Ghanshyam Rasiklal Shah Room 732, 7Th Floor, B-1408, Shankar Park, Agrawal Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra Residency, Shankar Lane, Kandivali East, Mumbai-400 051 West, Mumbai-400 067 Pan: Aafps1306Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi - CAFor Respondent: Shri BhangepatilPushkaraj Ramesh

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 69A

concrete evidence of unaccounted income of the as-sessee (the seized documents). He recorded satisfaction and obtained approval from the statute. The reason to believe was eminently justified. The fact that the eventual additions in assessment included items beyond (or different from) the initial specific tip-off does not vitiate

ACIT-24(1), Mumbai vs. Dipti Sureshchandra Bajaj, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3769/MUM/2024[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2025

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

analysis of details available on records, it is noticed that the genuineness of the said transactions is not conclusively proved. Hence, I have reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax more than Rs. 1,00,000/-has escaped assessment by reason of the failure on the part ... price through doctored transaction but yet he is not sure if there is a gain or loss shown by the assessee. In his reason to believe, he is not sure what is the nature of accommodation entry which assessee might have taken and what is the basis to entertain

ACIT-24(1), Mumbai vs. Dipti Sureshchandra Bajaj, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3767/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

Madhu Goyal, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 496/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Raipur17 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.496/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Madhu Goyal D-36, Wallfort City, Bhatagaon, Raipur-492 001 (C.G) Pan: Aeypg1038E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sakshi Gopal Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 148Section 68

passed by A.O is bad in law, void ab initio and liable to be quashed on account of following defects:- i. That the reasons to believe was formed merely on basis of report of investigation wing without conducting any independent enquiry thus failing to form his own formation of believe ... That reasons to believe was based on wrong facts that the transaction of sale of share was not disclosed in ROI but in fact the appellant had very well shown long term capital gain on sale of shares and claimed the same to be exempt u/s.10

K.V. Sankar (HUF), Cuddalore vs. ITO, Ward-4, Cuddalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 312/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 312/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. K.V. Sankar (Huf), The Income Tax Officer, 93,V.O.C Street, V. Ward-4, Panruti, Cuddalore – 607 106. Cuddalore – 607 001. [Pan: Aaghk 7331E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms.T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms.T.V. Muthu Abirami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 115BSection 69

time barred and hence the reassessment is bad in law. 5. For National Faceless Appeal Centre failed to appreciate that there is no reason to believe for the Assessing Officer to reopen the assessment and hence the reassessment are bad in law. 6. For National Faceless Appeal Centre failed

Indo Pacific Finlease Ltd, Chandigarh vs. PCIT- Chandigarh 1, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals are filed by the

ITA 449/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shrilaliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं . / I.T.A. Nos.448 & 449/Chd/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Sh.Rohit Sharma, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 203(1)Section 263

Dated: 31/03/2021 DIN & Notice No: ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1032094794(1) Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Whereas I have reasons to believe that your Income chargeable to Tax for the Assessment Year 2014-15 has escaped Assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income ... DATED: 31/03/2021 DIN & Notice No: ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1032094794(1) Sir/Madam/ M/s, Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Whereas I have reasons to believe that your Income chargeable to Tax for the Assessment Year 2014-15 has escaped Assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income

Indo Pacific Finlease Ltd, Chandigarh vs. PCIT Chandigarh 1, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals are filed by the

ITA 448/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrilaliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं . / I.T.A. Nos.448 & 449/Chd/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Vs Pcitchandigarh 1, Chandigarh Indo Pacific Finlease Ltd., Sco-98-99, Sector 34 Sub City Centre, Chandigarh 160002 स्थायीलेखासं./Panno. Aaaci2176E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By : Sh. Ashok Goel, C.A. Revenue By : Sh.Rohit Sharma, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing :19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement ;16/04/2025 Physical Hearing Order Per Laliet Kumar, J.M.: Both The Appeals Are Being Filed By The Assessee, Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chandigarh-1 Dated 28.03.2024& 23.03.2024 U/S 263 For The Assessment Years: 2014-15& 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Common Grounds Of Appeal In Ita Nos.448 & 449/Chd/2024 As Under:

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Sh.Rohit Sharma, CIT-D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 203(1)Section 263

Dated: 31/03/2021 DIN & Notice No: ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1032094794(1) Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Sir/Madam/ M/s, Whereas I have reasons to believe that your Income chargeable to Tax for the Assessment Year 2014-15 has escaped Assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income ... Dated: 31/03/2021 DIN & Notice No: ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1032094794(1) Notice Under Section 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Sir/Madam/ M/s, Whereas I have reasons to believe that your Income chargeable to Tax for the Assessment Year 2014-15 has escaped Assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income

Asif Ali Mohd, Mahabubnagar vs. ITO., Ward-1, Mahabubnagar

In the result, ITA.No.407/Hyd

ITA 408/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri P Vinod, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR

Section 143(2)Section 144(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282Section 44ASection 69A

from AST and ITBA, the assessee has not filed return of income for the assessment year 2013-14. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Accordingly, after recording reasons u/sec.147 of the Income tax Act, 1961 and after obtaining necessary

Asif Ali Mohd, Mahabubnagar vs. ITO., Ward-1, Mahabubnagar

In the result, ITA.No.407/Hyd

ITA 407/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri P Vinod, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR

Section 143(2)Section 144(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282Section 44ASection 69A

Bses Yamuna Power Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-5(1), New Del;Hi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4853/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalbses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Dy. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., Asst. Cit, Bses Bhawan, Cicle-5(1), Nehru Place, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110019 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Yamuna Power Dy. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors Vs. Acit Bses Yamuna Power Asst. Cit, Limited, Cicle-5(1), Shakti Kiran Building, Vs. New Delhi. Karkardoooma, Delhi-110092 Pan-Aagcs3187H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Sh. Deepesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/04/2025 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

reopening which are available on the paper book pages BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Ors vs. ACIT 88 to 89, the AO has reason to believe of escapement of income on three issues which has already been considered and detailed inquiries were made in this regard in the original assessment orders ... initiated on mere change of opinion, in the absence any new tangible material/information available with the assessing officer, (c) There is no valid reason to believe to allege escapement of income in the hands of the assessee; (d) Re-assessment was completed without providing complete reasons, in particular the sanction

Bses Yamuna Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issues

ITA 4852/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250

Kishan Beej, Jamnagar vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Jamnagar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 384/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.384/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kishan Beej Ito, Wared-2(1) बनाम Kashivishvanath Road Jamnagar – 361 001 Nr. P & T Office Vs. Jamnagar – 361 001 Pan : Aacfk 2114 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 69Section 69A

invoke section 147 and issue notice under section 148. 14. Under the old law, the opening words were 'If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year'. As against that, in the amended section, the opening words ... assessee, has escaped assessment for any assessment year'. Therefore, the term missing in the new Kishan Beej Vs. ITO 11 section is 'reason to believe'. Under the new provisions, section 147 can be invoked only if any income chargeable to tax has 'escaped assessment'. Thus, the AO is required

Ajay Bakliwal, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1275/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 129Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

relevant year also, the assessee had taken loan from SBL; and that on that basis the Assessing Officer had reason to believe that income in the form of deemed dividend as per section 2(22)(e) had escaped assessment. Held that the fact necessary to ascertain whether payment in question