← 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

Suraj Pulses Pvt.Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-24(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 5477/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Shah Singh, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 263Section 68

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL

Bikash Deb, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT Circle- 2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 357/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.357 & 388/Ctk/2019 /2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010 10 & 2010-11 Bikash Dev Bikash Dev, Flat No.101, Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-2(1), Haraprity Haraprity Apar Apartment, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Vivekananda Vivekananda Marg, Marg, Old Old Town, Bhubaneswar. Town, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Ahepd 0737 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv K.K.Bal, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01 /01/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 21(5)

apply his mind to the reasons furnished by the AO. 45. Reasons to believe are there. The reasons are based on tangible material. The return and account books of assessee had not undergone scrutiny at the time of assessment. The information is specific and not vague. A reasonable person

Airads Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-2(1), New Delhi

ITA 6652/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaairads Limited Vs. Dcit, 4624/ 18, Ansari Road, Circle-2(1), Darya Ganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110002 Pan : Aaaca5793R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

being no failure on the part of the assessee company in making a true and complete disclosure of all material facts, and no fresh tangible material coming in possession with the Ld. AO, proceedings initiated and carried out u/s 147 in March, 2017, are without jurisdiction and are barred

Shri Ravi Prakash Langer Prop M/S Langer Auto Sales & Sevices, Ujjain vs. ACIT 2 (1), Ujjain

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

ITA 106/IND/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Apurva Mehta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 54B

assessment and the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same without appreciating that the assessment has been reopened without any fresh tangible material and reopening the assessment without any fresh tangible material is liable to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... therefore, the reopening itself is bad in law. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that the assessment was reopened without any fresh tangible material. The assessment has been reopened nearly on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing and there was no tangible material taken into account by the Assessing

The Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1), Raipur vs. M/S Sankalp Realities, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 47/RPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur13 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.47/Rpr/2018 Co. No.01/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Sankalp Realities, 28/620 Anand Niwas, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Abcsf6391P ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Hence, after 1st April, 1989, AO has power to reopen, provided 11 DCIT, Circle-3(1) Vs. M/s. Sankalp Realities CO No.01/RPR/2018 there is "tangible material" to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons must have a live link with the formation

Hetram Bokan, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward - 2(1), Gurgaon

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

ITA 1688/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Hetram Bokan, Vs Ito, 226, 2Nd Floor, Jmd Megapolis, Ward-2(1), Sohna Road, Sector-48, Gurgaon. Gurgaon, Haryana-122001. Pan-Amkpb3430B Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 12.01.2023

Section 139(4)Section 147Section 234A

That the reasons recorded u/s 147 of the I.T. Act,1961 by the Ld. A.O. were merely based on the suspicion and without any tangible material so as to suggest any escapement of income. Hence the reassessment proceedings are liable to be quashed. 2. That the assessment order is void

Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is al

ITA 990/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Maharashtra State Electricity Income-Tax Officer, Ward Transmission Company Ltd., 14(2)(3), Plot No. C-19 E Block, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Prakashganga, Bandra-Kurla Karve Road, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaecm 2936 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ketan Ved, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Harishankar Lal, Dr : Date Of Hearing 15/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/12/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Harishankar Lal, DR
Section 148

even the case assessment proceedings, we find that it is not even the case of Respondent No. 1 that any new tangible material was of Respondent No. 1 that any new tangible material was of Respondent No. 1 that any new tangible material was brought to his notice which

Sunshine Merchants P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1539/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sunshine Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Dcit Cc-4(1), 601, Sunshine Plaza, Niagaum Air India Building, 19Th Floor, Cross Road, Dadar East, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400014. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aagca 1771 R Appellant Respondent : Assessee By None : Revenue By Mr. Ashish Heliwal, Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 29/12/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by None
Section 143(3)

reference without establishing investigation wing in its reference without establishing investigation wing in its reference without establishing any direct link between the tangible material and any direct link between the tangible material and any direct link between the tangible material and formation of formation of the reason to believe that ... there is reiterated that a reopening can be done only when there is reiterated that a reopening can be done only when there is tangible material before the AO which is the basis for forming tangible material before the AO which is the basis for forming tangible material before

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. Nsl Properties Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of Revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 22/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 22/Hyd/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Nsl Properties Private Income Tax, Vs. Limited, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan No. Aaccn7387G] (अपीलधर्थी / Appellant) (प्रत् यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

recorded by the learned Assessing Officer, proposing to reopen the concluded assessment clearly show that such proposed re-opening is not based on any tangible material that was brought on record. It is only on reading the material available on record at the time of the original assessment proceedings ... inasmuch as the information received by the learned Assessing Officer to re-open the concluded proceedings must be based on new tangible material in view of the language employed in such section. Learned CIT(A) accordingly concluded that the re-opening of assessment in this matter under section

DCIT, CC - 2(4), Mumbai vs. Mishal Nickunj Shah Shri. L/H. of Late Nickunj Gunvantrai Shah, Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2312/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 10(38)Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

relevant aspect of incriminating material is that it should be found during the search proceedings. It is not necessary that there is some tangible material to be considered as incriminating material. However, one thing which is imperative is that the findings of search are conclusive enough to initiate assessment proceedings

DCIT, CC - 2(4), Mumbai vs. Mishal Nickunj Shah Shri. L/H. of Late Nickunj Gunvantrai Shah, Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2311/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 10(38)Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

relevant aspect of incriminating material is that it should be found during the search proceedings. It is not necessary that there is some tangible material to be considered as incriminating material. However, one thing which is imperative is that the findings of search are conclusive enough to initiate assessment proceedings

Hitesh Jitendra Parikh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-5(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2370/MUM/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Biren Gabhawala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 271(1)

absence of any failure on the part of the appellant to disclose fully and truly all material facts and without there being any tangible material to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... since the very initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act is beyond the period of four years without there being any tangible material and without there being any conclusion that there is an escapement of income from assessment reopening is bad in law, he would prefer

Focal Trading Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO - 12(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2771/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

Section 147Section 234BSection 69

grossly erred both in law and on facts in failing to appreciate that learned AO has initiated the reassessment proceedings without having any tangible material for the formation of reasons to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment, and hence assumption of jurisdiction

M/S Sakaar Commercial (P) Ltd., Howrah vs. I.T.O., Ward-13(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2184/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 137Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein it has been held that where there is no independent application of mind by the AO to tangible material and conclusion of AO was reproduction of the investigation report, reasons failing to demonstrate link between tangible material and formation of reason to believe that

Pine Tree Consultants P.Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Circle - 3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1695/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No.1696/Mum/2020 (A.Y: 2013-14) Pine Tree Consultants Vs. Dcit, Circle – 3(2)(2) Pvt Ltd, No.104, Raheja Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, 1St Floor, Mk Road, Free Press Journal Mumbai -400020. Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai -400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcp8816F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Neelkanth Khandelwal.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Deepika Arora.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Are The Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Cit(A))-8 Mumbai Passed Under Sec250 Of The Act

For Appellant: Mr.Neelkanth Khandelwal.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Deepika Arora.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

assessment The re-opening of assessment to be successful has to be tested on the touchstone of 'reason to believe' on the basis of tangible material that income has escaped ITA No. 1695, 1696& 1697/Mum/2020 Pine Tree Solutions Pvt Ltd, Mumbai. assessment. There should be a live link between ... tangible material and the formation of belief on the basis of the reasons recorded that income has escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer has miserably failed in developing that link inasmuch as he only mentions the transaction that has been carried out between the appellants and various companies, alleged

ITO -8(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Symmetree Realty Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4005/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 148

That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -14, Mumbai has erred in not declaring the reopening u/s 147 made without any fresh tangible material having a live link to reasons to believe as bad in law and it is prayed that the notice u/s 148 be quashed

ITO-8(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Symmetree Realty Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4004/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 148

That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -14, Mumbai has erred in not declaring the reopening u/s 147 made without any fresh tangible material having a live link to reasons to believe as bad in law and it is prayed that the notice u/s 148 be quashed

Alcon Laboratories (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 224/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

assessee were at the instance or on behalf of the foreign company. The initial onus was on the Revenue to demonstrate through some tangible material that the two parties acted in concert and further that there was an agreement to enter into an international transaction concerning advertising, marketing and sales

Seth Industries Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT C 2(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4685/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.4685/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S Seth Industries Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Acit Circle- 2(3)(2) 16, Ashoka Shopping Centre, Room No. 552, Vs. Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Aayakar Bhavan Crawford Market Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400001. स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs9189D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Salil Kapoor & Shri Sunil Lalchandani Revenue By: Shri. Mahender Ahuja सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement; 16/12/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor & Shri SunilFor Respondent: Shri. Mahender Ahuja
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee has clearly brought out the facts regarding the sale of immovable property as discussed (supra). It is further noted that there was no tangible material from which the AO had recorded his satisfaction about escapement of income that too after four years from the end of the relevant assessment ... loss ………”. Therefore, in the light of the aforesaid facts discussed (supra) it noted that the there was no tangible material which was in the possession of the of the AO which would justify the reopening u/s 147 of the Act as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

Arvind Mohanlal Jain, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-3, Thane

In the result, we quash the reassessment initiation

ITA 1798/MUM/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Arvind Mohanlal Jain Cit(A)-3 Flat No.304, Room No-30, D-Wing, Vishwanath Nagar, B-Wing, Asher It Park, Vs. Gandhi Chowk, Wagle Industrial Estate, Kulgaon, Badlapur (E) Thane 400 604 Mumbai-421 503 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aarpj2456J

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ujjawal Chavan, SR AR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

honorable CIT(A)-3 Thane, failed to appreciate that the Ld. A.O. erred in reopening the assessment of the Appellant without having any new tangible material to show that the any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Thus, the reopening of the assessment and subsequent assessment order passed under