← 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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. Vedanta Resources Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed and

ITA 1845/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Page |3 ITA No. 1845/KOL/2025&CO No. 80/KOL/2025 Vedanta Resources Private Limited; A.Y. 2016-17 not done any enquiry to bring out any tangible materials and at can best be treated as a patent example of borrowed satisfaction by the AO. 3.2. After hearing both the sides and perusing ... held that reopening made on the basis of borrowed satisfaction cannot be sustained where the reasons failed to demonstrate live link between the tangible material and formation of [5 ITA No. 1845/KOL/2025&CO No. 80/KOL/2025 Vedanta Resources Private Limited; A.Y. 2016-17 the reason to believe that the income

M/S. Sagun Sales Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1194/KOL/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2026AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148

information from DIT (Investigation) that assessee had received accommodation entry but and there was no independent application of mind by Assessing Officer to tangible material and reasons failed to demonstrate link between tangible material and formation of reason to believe that income had escaped assessment, reassessment was not justified

M/S. Aryan Share and Stock Brockers Limited, Chennai vs. ITO, Corp Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2115/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2115/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Aryan Share & Stock Brokers V. Ito Corp Ward-1, Limited., Itd, M G Road, No. 07, 07Th Cross Street, Nungambakkam, 2Nd Floor, Shreeji Metropolis, Chennai-600034 Aminjikarai, Chennai-600030 Tamil Nadu Tamil Nadu [Pan:Aadca 1233 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Y Sridhar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.01.2026

For Appellant: Mr. Y Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 147Section 69A

stated what is the reason to believe that the said Rs.40,48,000/- is fictitious losses. (b) No tangible material: Ld.AR submitted that assessment cannot be reopened in the absence of any tangible material that came before the Assessing Officer. He submitted that the assessee had disclosed its transactions with ... trading. A bare perusal of the reasons recorded reveals that the Assessing Officer has merely reproduced the alleged information without bringing on record any tangible material or independent analysis to demonstrate how and why the losses claimed by the assessee were fictitious. There is no reference to any enquiry conducted

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

The appeal are allowed with above direction

ITA 1899/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 144CSection 37Section 40

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

Abhishek Jayketu Joshi, Mumbai vs. Ac Cir-42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5775/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarabhishek Jayketu Joshi Ac Cir-42(2)(1), C-73, Venus Society, R. G. Kautilya Bhavan, Thadani Marg, Worli Sea Vs. Mumbai-400 051 Face, Mumbai-400 018 Pan/Gir No. Ackpj8583H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri M. M. Golvala, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 13.01.2026

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

reassessment proceedings is vitiated, as the said notice was issued on the basis of vague, generalized and borrowed information, without there being any tangible material demonstrating escapement of income in the case of the assessee. According to the learned Authorized Representative, the notice merely reproduces allegations arising out of search ... Authorised Representative submitted that the disallowance has been made solely on the basis of generalised allegations, investigation inputs and third-party statements, without any tangible material establishing that the assessee received any benefit in return for the donation. It was contended that once the assessee has discharged the initial onus

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the cross-objection of the assessee is partly

ITA 2831/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

assessment on the basis of change of opinion: 6. erred in reopening assessment only on the basis of change of opinion without any new tangible material and _ without appreciating the fact that disallowance of interest expense under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Rules ... debited. The reopening made u/s 147 of the LT Act is based on the facts/information already available before the AO. No new information or tangible material was available with the AO to reopen the assessment u/s 147 of the IT Act. Therefore, the reopening of the assessment

Harish Chandra Purohit, Ratlam vs. Income Tax Officer - 1, Ratlam

In the result- the Impugned order is set aside as and by way

ITA 221/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 253Section 69A

erred in initiating the reassessment proceedings, merely for the purpose of making roving inquires without any fresh tangible material on record and without having and information which suggests that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Thus, the reassessment proceedings are liable to be set aside and the Assessment

Ktm Impex Private Limited, Panipat vs. ITO, Panipat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2377/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kaushik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

upholding the reopening of assessment u/s 147. The reopening was initiated based on generalized third- party information without any independent application of mind or tangible material relating specifically to the Appellant. Relied on. 2. Reassessment based on borrowed satisfaction and constitutes mere change of opinion The AO acted mechanically based ... upholding the reopening of assessment u/s 147. The reopening was initiated based on generalized third-party information without any independent application of mind or tangible material relating specifically to the assessee. He further submitted that reassessment based on borrowed satisfaction and constitutes mere change of opinion, the AO acted mechanically

Alok Kumar Rungta, Lucknow vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 598/LKW/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2014-15 Alok Kumar Rungta V. National Faceless Appeal B-40 Flat No.34 Manoram Centre Apartment Aliganj, Lucknow- Delhi. 226024. Pan:Ajqpr0755G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Prakash Agarwal, Advocate Shri Akshay Agarwal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28 10 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 01 2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Prakash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl CIT(DR)
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 150(1)

against original assessment is bad in law. 5. That the notice issued u/s 148 issued by Learned Assessing Officer without bringing new tangible material on record after four years is bad in law. Page 2 of 8 6. That the appellant case was selected for limited scrutiny and the Learned

Pinnacle Consrto and Ecohomes Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. DCIT Circle-4, Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2818/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2818/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Pinnacle Contro & V Dcit, Ecohomes Pvt. Ltd., S Circle-4, Pune. Madhav Heritage, Tilak Road, Sadashiv Peth, Pune – 411030. Pan: Aaecp0400E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas P. Bora Revenue By Shri Madhukar Anand-Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 07/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18Dated 01.10.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 Of The Act, Dated 27.08.2021. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Reassessment Bad In Law.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 250(6)

reassessment order was passed without disposing of the appellant's objections to reopening of assessment and without passing a speaking order. 2. No fresh tangible material for reopening. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the reopening though no new fresh tangible material and corroborative evidence warranting the reopening ... India Limited [2010] 320 ITR 561 vide dated 18.01.2010 has observed as under : Quote “4………………………Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided 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

Apcotex Industries Limited, Raogarh vs. Income Tax Officer - Circle 15(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, having regard to the foregoing discussion and

ITA 6022/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shuk

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 24Section 250Section 32

Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. He further held that the Assessing Officer 5 ITA No. 6022/Mum/2025 Apcotex Industries Limited had tangible material to form a belief that income had escaped assessment. 7. On merits, the CIT(A) held that the assessee failed to produce any evidence

Red Hat India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -6, Mumbai

ITA 3016/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2026AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 92C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘J’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT

Vilayil Satyan Pillai, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 2279/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Kishan Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132ASection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153ASection 250

Ashish Agarwal case, before re- 2 | P a g e Vilayil Satyan Pillai vs Assessment Unit, NFAC Delhi opening the assessment case and tangible materials discussed & presumed to be fit for reopening & escapement of income before by declaring reason to believe at the time of opening the re-assessment case

Parvindar Indar Singh, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1002/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 14ASection 154

omission or failure on part of assessee in fully and truly disclosing all relevant aspects of matter - No new tangible material could be said to have come to knowledge of Assessing Officer after framing of assessment - Whether therefore, Instant case could be said to be one of mere change ... upon for purpose of reopening were very much before Assessing Officer when scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) was carried out and no new tangible material could be said to have come to knowledge of Assessing Officer after framing of assessment - Whether therefore, reopening of assessment being mere change

Parvindar Indar Singh, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1001/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 14ASection 154

omission or failure on part of assessee in fully and truly disclosing all relevant aspects of matter - No new tangible material could be said to have come to knowledge of Assessing Officer after framing of assessment - Whether therefore, Instant case could be said to be one of mere change ... upon for purpose of reopening were very much before Assessing Officer when scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) was carried out and no new tangible material could be said to have come to knowledge of Assessing Officer after framing of assessment - Whether therefore, reopening of assessment being mere change

Balguri Rajeshwar Rao, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward- 11(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1728/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1728/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: T Chaitanya Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Helen Ruby Jesindha, Sr. AR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

Sanghi Textiles Private Limited, Hyderbad vs. ITO., Ward-3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1311/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 250Section 37(1)

proceed to adjudicate the appeal as under. 5.1.1. The appellant contends that the reassessment proceedings are void ab initio as the AO lacked tangible material and formed no proper belief of income escapement. The appellant also challenges jurisdiction on technical grounds, including alleged non-furnishing of reasons and lack ... Textiles Privarte Limited vs. ITO time deposits of Rs. 19.54 lakhs were reflected in the 26AS statement, but remained unaccounted. The information clearly constitutes "tangible material" justifying reopening as held in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO [(1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC)) and ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri

West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT/ACIT, Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1591/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jan 2026AY 2013-2014
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 24(1)Section 250

check abuse of power by the assessing officer. Hence, after 1-4-1989, the assessing officer has power to reopen, provided there is "tangible material" to come to the 6 ITA No. 1590 & 1591/Kol/2024 West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Limited conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons ... case of Mangalam Publications Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2024) 461 ITR 159 (SC) has held in absence of any new tangible material, initiating of the reassessment proceeding on the basis of primary documents already on record showed that the impugned assessment proceedings have been initiated

West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T./A.C.I.T., Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1590/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jan 2026AY 2012-2013
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 24(1)Section 250

check abuse of power by the assessing officer. Hence, after 1-4-1989, the assessing officer has power to reopen, provided there is "tangible material" to come to the 6 ITA No. 1590 & 1591/Kol/2024 West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Limited conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons ... case of Mangalam Publications Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2024) 461 ITR 159 (SC) has held in absence of any new tangible material, initiating of the reassessment proceeding on the basis of primary documents already on record showed that the impugned assessment proceedings have been initiated

Income Tax Officer-19(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Babulal Mishrimalji Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are

ITA 6131/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Arun Khodpia(Physical Hearing) Income Tax Officer-19(1)(1), Babulal Mishrimalji Mehta 501, 5Th Floor, Piramal Chamber, Vs 7 Marker Building, Office No.91St Lalbaug, Mumbai Panjarapole Lane, Mumbai [Pan:Afbpm0921N] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 254(1)Section 68Section 69C

that ld. CIT (A) upon considering the submission of assessee held that the Assessing Officer has not conducted any further inquiry. There is no tangible material to corroborate the investigation contained in the Insight Portal. The assessee furnished ledger copies, bank statement and reconciled the goods purchases against the sales