“tangible material”

Saloni Girrajkishor Agrawal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 25(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankarsaloni Girrajkishor Agrawal V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1601/1602, Green Acre, बनाम –25(1)(1),Kautilya Bhavan, Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri Bandra Kurla Complex, (West), Mumbai – 400 053, Bandra (East), Mumbai – Maharashtra 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Anupa1692D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the validity of notice u/s 148 issued in absence of new tangible material, without independent application of mind and without having the reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment; 2. On facts

ACIT-CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. Swikrutee Finance Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit-Cc-7(3) Swikrutee Finance Private Room No. 655, Floor 6Th, Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Office No. Ii 289 Emca Vs. Mumbai- 400020 House, S B S Road, Mumbai 400001 Pan: Aaocs2723H (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Shri Anand Mundra Revenue By : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Ld. Sr.A.R. Date Of Hearing : 29.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 24.06.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Center (Nfac)/ Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) (In Short ‘Ld. Commissioner’) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. In The Instant Case, The Assessee Is Registered As Non-Banking Financial Company (Nbfc) With Reserve Bank Of India & Engaged In The Financial Requirement Of Emerging Small & Medium Enterprises (Sme) Segment, Including Rendering An Advisory Services Relating To Financial Aspect.

first re-assessment u/s 147 of the Act, as the same was received post assessment from the investigation, which can be considered as tangible material. The Ld. DR further submitted that the Ld. Commissioner has erred in ignoring the fact that M/s. Panchkoti Promoters Pvt. Ltd was strike of company

Zahid Abdullah Lakhani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt.Renu Jauhri

actual profit margin is arbitrary and excessive. 5. The reopening of assessment u/s 147 is bad in law, without proper satisfaction and without tangible material to believe that income has escaped assessment. “6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal

Zahid Abdullah Lakhani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhri

actual profit margin is arbitrary and excessive. 5. The reopening of assessment u/s 147 is bad in law, without proper satisfaction and without tangible material to believe that income has escaped assessment. “6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal

Zahid Abdullah Lakhani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt.Renu Jauhri

actual profit margin is arbitrary and excessive. 5. The reopening of assessment u/s 147 is bad in law, without proper satisfaction and without tangible material to believe that income has escaped assessment. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal

R S Construction, Mumbai vs. Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without satisfying the mandatory jurisdictional conditions and without bringing on record any fresh tangible material directly pertaining to the appellant. 2. Invalid Reliance on Third-Party Search The reassessment proceedings are based solely on alleged information gathered during search

Sbi Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt. Renu Jauhri

based solely on the PCIT's assumption regarding provision of tax made in the books of accounts and without any new tangible material or evidence to suggest that the issue was not adequately addressed in the original assessments for those years. 6.5 In view of the above, order passed under

Sbi Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Tax -1, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt. Renu Jauhri

based solely on the PCIT's assumption regarding provision of tax made in the books of accounts and without any new tangible material or evidence to suggest that the issue was not adequately addressed in the original assessments for those years. 6.5 In view of the above, order passed under

ITO-15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sanjaykumar Shankarlal Export Private Limited, Navi Mumba

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Court was wrongly mentioned. The judgment is of Hon’ble Supreme Court) In the present case, the Assessing Officer (AO) was in possession of tangible material emanating from a survey conducted on 30.11.2018 under Section 133A in the case of M/s Ridhi Sidhi Impex, wherein Shri Ashok Gupta categorically admitted ... present case is untenable The said proviso applies only where the limitation period under the pre- amendment law had expired, and there was no tangible material or escaped income represented in the form of an asset exceeding 50 lakh. However, in the instant case, the material gathered during survey proceedings

ACIT 27 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Bhavesh Ranchhodas Madiyar, Mumbai

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Court was wrongly mentioned. The judgment is of Hon’ble Supreme Court) In the present case, the Assessing Officer (AO) was in possession of tangible material emanating from a survey conducted on 30.11.2018 under Section 133A in the case of M/s Ridhi Sidhi Impex, wherein Shri Ashok Gupta categorically admitted ... present case is untenable The said proviso applies only where the limitation period under the pre- amendment law had expired, and there was no tangible material or escaped income represented in the form of an asset exceeding 50 lakh. However, in the instant case, the material gathered during survey proceedings

ACIT 27 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Bhavesh Ranchhodas Madiyar, Mumbai

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Court was wrongly mentioned. The judgment is of Hon’ble Supreme Court) In the present case, the Assessing Officer (AO) was in possession of tangible material emanating from a survey conducted on 30.11.2018 under Section 133A in the case of M/s Ridhi Sidhi Impex, wherein Shri Ashok Gupta categorically admitted ... present case is untenable The said proviso applies only where the limitation period under the pre- amendment law had expired, and there was no tangible material or escaped income represented in the form of an asset exceeding 50 lakh. However, in the instant case, the material gathered during survey proceedings