← All Phrases

“mere change of opinion”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 147952 judgments

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

Leading authorities on mere change of opinion

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.

Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar
268 ITR 332 · 2004 · High Court
695
citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147, by issuing a notice under Section 148, must be judged solely on the reasons originally recorded by the Assessing Officer. These recorded reasons cannot be supplemented, improved upon, or modified at any later stage.

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.

CIT v. Orient Craft Ltd.
354 ITR 536 · 2013 · High Court
366
citing judgments

Reassessment of income, especially after a summary assessment under Section 143(1), requires the Assessing Officer to possess fresh, tangible material to form a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment; a mere reappraisal of existing records or a change of opinion without new material is not permissible.

CIT v. Foramer France
264 ITR 566 · 2003 · Supreme Court
253
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year are invalid unless the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Without such failure, the notice issued under Section 148 is time-barred and without jurisdiction.

Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company v. CIT
308 ITR 38 · 2009 · High Court
248
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings are invalid if the reasons recorded for initiating action under section 148 are not served on the assessee within the limitation period prescribed by section 149. Furthermore, reassessment cannot be based on a mere change of opinion without tangible material, particularly when the assessee has made a full and true disclosure of material facts.

CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd.
325 ITR 285 · 2010 · High Court
243
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid and void ab initio if initiated based on 'borrowed satisfaction' without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind, or merely on documents already available on record without fresh tangible material.

CIT v. Usha International Ltd.
348 ITR 485 · 2012 · High Court
231
citing judgments

A reassessment is invalid due to 'mere change of opinion' if an issue was raised during original assessment but no addition was made, implying the issue was examined. However, if a subject matter was not examined and no opinion was formed, the principle of 'change of opinion' does not apply.

Judgments citing mere change of opinion

Balasinor Vikas Co. Op. Credit Society Ltd., Mahisagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Vadodara-1, Vadodara

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

ITA 908/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 908/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) बनाम/ Balasinor Vikas Co.Op. The Principal Credit Society Ltd. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Rajpuri Darwaja, Opp. Tax Masjit, Balasinor - Vadodara-1, Baroda - 388255, Gujarat 390007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaab4748H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit. Dr : Date Of Hearing 02/09/2024 01/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Principle Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pcit, Vadodara-1 (In Short ‘The Pcit’), Dated 22.03.2024 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Filed His Return Of Income For A.Y. 2017-18 On 18.10.2017 Declaring Nil Income. The Original Assessment Was Completed U/S.143(3) Of The

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

taken on this issue. Further, the same issue was already examined during the course of regular assessment and reopening on mere change of opinion is not in consonance with the decisions of jurisdictional high court and the Apex Court which are cited by assessee. The reason formed in violation ... further recorded that this issue was also examined during the course of original assessment and that the reopening was based on mere change of opinion. In essence, the AO had dropped the reopened assessment proceeding and the income as determined in the original assessment u/s.143