← All Phrases

“tangible material”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 1472,812 judgments

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

Leading authorities on tangible material

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.

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.

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.

222 Taxman 15 (Gujarat)(MAG.), Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-4 v. G & G Pharma India Ltd.
384 ITR 147 · 2016 · High Court
274
citing judgments

An assessment can be reopened if there is tangible material indicating escapement of income, demonstrating a live link between the material and the reasons recorded for reopening. The Assessing Officer must apply their mind to the material facts, and the sanction under section 151 should not be based on borrowed satisfaction.

PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.
396 ITR 5 · 2017 · High Court
272
citing judgments

Reassessment based solely on information from the Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer conducting further inquiry or demonstrating an independent application of mind, is unjustified and invalid.

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.

Judgments citing tangible material

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 8363/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

levy of interest. The CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer by holding that: - the reopening was based on tangible material received from the Investigation Wing; 5 ITA No. 8361 to 8364/Mum/2025 Jamnadas Virji Shares & Stock Brokers Private Ltd - the assessee failed to conclusively prove the genuineness ... statement had already been retracted and the Tribunal had accepted such retraction in the case of the seller. Therefore, there was no tangible material available with the Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction under section 147, and the reopening was based entirely on borrowed satisfaction. 3.4. On merits, the AR submitted

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 8362/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

levy of interest. The CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer by holding that: - the reopening was based on tangible material received from the Investigation Wing; 5 ITA No. 8361 to 8364/Mum/2025 Jamnadas Virji Shares & Stock Brokers Private Ltd - the assessee failed to conclusively prove the genuineness ... statement had already been retracted and the Tribunal had accepted such retraction in the case of the seller. Therefore, there was no tangible material available with the Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction under section 147, and the reopening was based entirely on borrowed satisfaction. 3.4. On merits, the AR submitted

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, 4(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 8361/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

levy of interest. The CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer by holding that: - the reopening was based on tangible material received from the Investigation Wing; 5 ITA No. 8361 to 8364/Mum/2025 Jamnadas Virji Shares & Stock Brokers Private Ltd - the assessee failed to conclusively prove the genuineness ... statement had already been retracted and the Tribunal had accepted such retraction in the case of the seller. Therefore, there was no tangible material available with the Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction under section 147, and the reopening was based entirely on borrowed satisfaction. 3.4. On merits, the AR submitted

Arvind Bhaguji Kangane, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-27(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 2 and 3 of appeal are

ITA 4158/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Ms. Padmavathy S(Physical Hearing) Arvind Bhanguji Kangane Dcit, Circle – 27(1), Mumbai Shreyas Building, 11Th Road, Plot No. 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Vs 553, Flat No. 901, 9Th Floor, Opp. Railway Station Building, Navi Heritage Pride Building, Chembur, Mumbai – 400703. Mumbai – 400026. [Pan: Afypk1856R] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 254(1)Section 68

case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the validity of notice u/s 148 issued in mechanical manner, in absence of new tangible material and on the basis of borrowed satisfaction and without having reason to believe of escapement of income; 2.0 On facts and circumstances ... increased drastically during the relevant period. On validity of reopening the assessee submitted that objection of assessee was rejected mechanically. There was no sufficient tangible material. The reopening was based on borrowed satisfaction. 5. The ld. CIT(A) on considering the submission of assessee and the assessment order upheld that

Aakash Value Realty Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2560/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 12ASection 147Section 148Section 35(1)(ii)

benefit, in substance resolves into a far more foundational judicial inquiry, namely, whether the Revenue has discharged its burden of establishing, by cogent and tangible material, that the assessee’s donation was not a genuine payment to a duly approved institution under section 35(1)(ii), or that the assessee ... section 35(1)(ii) stand fulfilled. The assessee has discharged its burden. The Revenue has failed to rebut the same by any cogent or tangible material. 21. Accordingly, in our considered opinion, the disallowance of ₹1,79,37,500/- made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the learned

Sandhya Singh, Rohit Nagar, Bhopal vs. ITO 2(3) Bhopal, Aaykar Bhawan, Bhopal

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 584/IND/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jan 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Gagan TiwariFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

appeal, the CIT(Appeals) first dealt with the challenge to reopening and observed that the Assessing Officer had clearly recorded reasons based on tangible material showing huge unexplained credits in bank accounts linked to the assessee’s PAN, which were not disclosed in the return of income. Relying on settled

Bharat Kalwani, Indore vs. ITO-4(3), Indore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the payment of costs as directed above

ITA 180/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: CA Sh. S.N. AgrawalFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 131Section 147Section 69A

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in reopening the case of the appellant in the absence of any tangible material and live link of concealment of income and merely on the basis of borrowed opinion without independent application of mind. 4. That

Bharat Kalwani, Indore vs. ITO-4(3), Indore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the payment of costs as directed above

ITA 179/IND/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: CA Sh. S.N. AgrawalFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 131Section 147Section 69A

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in reopening the case of the appellant in the absence of any tangible material and live link of concealment of income and merely on the basis of borrowed opinion without independent application of mind. 4. That

Bharat Kalwani, Indore vs. ITO-4(3), Indore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the payment of costs as directed above

ITA 178/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: CA Sh. S.N. AgrawalFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 131Section 147Section 69A

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in reopening the case of the appellant in the absence of any tangible material and live link of concealment of income and merely on the basis of borrowed opinion without independent application of mind. 4. That

Vimal Alloys Private Limited, Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab vs. Jao the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle, Patiala, Punjab

ITA 890/CHANDI/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

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

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Vipen Sethi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69A

incriminating material found during search, that the assessee failed to rebut the same, and that the reopening was validly initiated on the basis of tangible material. 5.1 The Ld. CIT(A), while dismissing the appeal of the assessee, held that the excel sheet constituted incriminating material found during search proceedings ... Assessing Officer with cogent evidence. 5.2 The Ld. CIT(A) further held that the reopening was valid as it was based on tangible material received from the Investigation Wing and that the Assessing Officer had valid jurisdiction over the assessee. 6. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee

Natharam Panaji Choudhary, Pune vs. I.T.O. Ward 8(1), Pune

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

ITA 1826/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar (Virtually)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

KalyanjiMavji and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s.148, tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidences on record itself. The reference

Natharam Panaji Choudhary, Pune vs. I.T.O. Ward 8(1), Pune

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

ITA 1823/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar (Virtually)For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

KalyanjiMavji and Company vs. CIT 102 ITR 287 (SC). It is also pertinent to mention that for reopening of completed assessment u/s.148, tangible material need not be from outside the return of income. It can be obtained from the return of income or evidences on record itself. The reference

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Sitaram Jewellers, Madurai

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

ITA 915/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri.T.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T
Section 131Section 132Section 69C

reasoned order after considering seized material, statements, legal requirements u/s.69 of the Act and the jurisdictional Tribunal decision. The Revenue has not brought any tangible material to controvert the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) or to show perversity therein. Therefore, we find that the ld.CIT(A) has rightly restricted

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Sitaram Jewellers, Madurai

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

ITA 913/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri.T.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T
Section 131Section 132Section 69C

reasoned order after considering seized material, statements, legal requirements u/s.69 of the Act and the jurisdictional Tribunal decision. The Revenue has not brought any tangible material to controvert the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) or to show perversity therein. Therefore, we find that the ld.CIT(A) has rightly restricted

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

ITA 1670/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC), is misplaced. She submits that the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment based on fresh tangible material obtained during survey under section 133A of the Act on 10 I.T.A. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chny/24 25.02.2019, wherein, Shri V. Rajendran, Chairman of the assessee Trust stated ... argued that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. (supra) held that reopening is permissible if there is tangible material to believe income had escaped assessment and not merely on the change of opinion on the same facts and in the present case

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,

ITA 1669/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC), is misplaced. She submits that the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment based on fresh tangible material obtained during survey under section 133A of the Act on 10 ITA. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chny/24 25.02.2019, wherein, Shri V. Rajendran, Chairman of the assessee Trust stated ... argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. (supra) held that reopening is permissible if there is tangible material to believe income had escaped assessment and not merely on the change of opinion on the same facts and in the present case

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-4, Chennai

ITA 1667/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Street, Adambakkam, Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 4, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit 28.10.2025 21.01.2026 : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश/Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] 320 ITR 561 (SC), is misplaced. She submits that the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment based on fresh tangible material obtained during survey under section 133A of the Act on 25.02.2019, wherein, Shri V. Rajendran, Chairman of the assessee Trust stated on oath that the Trust ... argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator of India Ltd. (supra) held that reopening is permissible if there is tangible material to believe income had escaped assessment and not merely on the change of opinion on the same facts and in the present case

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5375/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

Officer is only required to form a prima facie belief based on Officer is only required to form a prima facie belief based on tangible material. According to the learned DR, tangible material. According to the learned DR, whether the amount whether the amount of ₹20,00,000/– was ultimately ... assessee during the year under consideration. assessee during the year under consideration. What is required is What is required is the existence of tangible material the existence of tangible material having a live link with the having a live link with the formation of belief that income has escaped assessment

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5374/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

sufficiency of material is not to be examined and that the Assessing Officer is only required to form a prima facie belief based on tangible material. According to the learned DR, whether the amount of ₹20,00,000/- was ultimately received as share application money is a matter ... what was the amount of share application money received by the assessee during the year under consideration. What is required is the existence of tangible material having a live link with the formation of belief that income has escaped assessment. 7.5 According to Id counsel for the assessee, recording

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5373/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

sufficiency of material is not to be examined and that the Assessing Officer is only required to form a prima facie belief based on tangible material. According to the learned DR, whether the amount of ₹20,00,000/- was ultimately received as share application money is a matter