“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

Seema Singh, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Central-1, Guwahati

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 89/GTY/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That the learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that there was no tangible material on record during the search operation to form a "reason to believe" or part thereof, as the case may be, may be deemed

Dilip Budhadev, Indore, Madhya Pradesh vs. The ITO, Sendhwa, Madhya Pradesh

ITA 307/IND/2025[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Indore16 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 147Section 153CSection 246ASection 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 253Section 69A

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld Assessing Officer erred in reopening the case of the 8 appellant in 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. 9. That

Aryavart Bank, Lucknow vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Lucknow

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

ITA 800/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2012-13 Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank, Vs. Dcit-Range 1, (Successor To Erstwhile Allahabad U.P. Lucknow Gramin Bank), Head Office, 2Nd & 3Rd Floor, Nbcc Commercial Complex, Vardan Khand, Gomti Nagar Extension, Lucknow Pan: Aaaju0568R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. C. Naresh, Fca Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Setting Aside The Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer That Were Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 On 30.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Cit(A), Nfac Erred In Not Granting Opportunity To The Appellant Bank To Present The Case Through Video Conferencing As Specified Under Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2020 Provided U/S. 250(68) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act"). The Hon'Ble Cit(A) Be Directed To Grant Personal Hearing Through Video Conferencing In The Interest Of Justice. Without Prejudice To The Above 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Proviso To Section 251(1)(A) & Setting Aside The Order To Ao Without Appreciating That The Order Was Not Passed U/S 144. 3. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Id. Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Din Was Issued In The Name Of Non-Existing Entity & Hence The Order Passed Is Invalid. Without Prejudice To The Above

For Appellant: Sh. C. Naresh, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 244ASection 250(68)Section 251(1)(a)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80P

assessment year and there was no failure on part of appellant to fully and truly disclose all information and there was no new tangible material based on which the reopening was made. Without prejudice to the above 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... year and there was no failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose all the information and there was no tangible material upon which the reopening was made. Besides this, the ld. AR pointed out that the ld. CIT(A) had failed to decide

Sneha Pawan Agarwal, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1369/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Padshah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act, which was based solely on third-party information without any independent application of mind OR tangible material establishing escapement of income on part of the assessee. The reopening is therefore invalid and liable to be quashed. The learned CIT(A) erred

Sneha Pawan Agarwal, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 1(1)(3), Ahmedabad

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1368/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Padshah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

Pravesh Kumar Jaiswal, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 62(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1269/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarmapravesh Kumar Jaiswal Vs Ito, Ward-62(1), Kolkata 245A, Apc Road, Manicktalla, Kol-700006. Pan No. :Acspj9691A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P. N. Barnwal, Cir- Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/10/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm : This Appeal By The Assessee Arises Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata, Whereby The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Making An Addition Of ₹1,27,38,506/- Under Section 69C Read With Section 115Bbe Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Was Confirmed. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny As It Was Noticed That The Assessee Had Made Substantial Purchases From Certain Suppliers Who Were Either Non- Filers Of Income Tax Returns, Filed Returns With Abnormally Low Turnover, Or Whose Gst Registrations Were Either Cancelled Or Suo Motu Suspended As Per Adg (Gst) Data. Based On This Information, The Assessing Officer Formed A View That There Was A Possibility Of The Assessee Booking Bogus Or Inflated Purchase Expenses To Reduce Taxable Profit & Accordingly, Scrutiny Proceedings Were Initiated By Issue Of Statutory Notices. During

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIR- DR

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 69C

found any defect in quantitative tally or discrepancy in the trading account. The addition was made purely on presumptions and not based on any tangible material. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court and several coordinate Benches have consistently held that when payments are made through banking channels and sales

J vs. Exports, Maduraivs.DCIT, Ncc-2, Madurai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2059/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2059/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14 Jvs Export, Deputy Commissioner Of No.32, Sarojini Street, Vs. Income Tax, Chinna Chokkikulam, Non-Corporate Circle-2 Madurai, Madurai. Tamil Nadu-625 002. [Pan:Aabfj2836N] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh, Am : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi, (In Short Ld.Cit(A) For The Assessment Year 2013-14, Vide Order Dated 21.05.2025. 2. The Preliminary Issue Raised By The Assessee Is Challenging The Validity Of Assumption Of Jurisdiction For Reopening The Assessment In The Instant Case. 3. We Have Heard The Rival Submissions & Perused The Materials Available On Record. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Had Filed Its

For Appellant: Mr.N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 43(5)Section 73(1)

only on perusal of the profit and loss account which is already placed on record.This goes to prove that there is absolutely no fresh tangible material that had come into the possession of the learned AO post the completion of original scrutiny assessment under section ... warranting him to reopen the case of the assessee under section 147 of the Act.In the absence of fresh tangible material, the formation of belief vanishes, as it would only be reappraisal of the already available materials on record. Admittedly, the profit and loss account was filed by the assessee

Hitesh Shashikant Jhaveri, Borivali West vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 42(1)(1), Kautilya Bhavan

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 4344/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt.Renu Jauhri & Hitesh Shashikantjhaveri Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of A/304, Alanknanda Income Tax Circle 42(1)(1) Building, 51St Tps Road, C41-43, G Block Bkc, Near Veer Sawarkar Garden, Gilban Area, Bandra Kurla Borivali (West), Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai-400092. Mumbai-400051. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Adepj1181A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri RaghunathSarangapaniFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi- Sr. DR

Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without any fresh tangible material and merely on the basis of a general report from the Directorate of Investigation, which does not establish any live link or nexus with

Hitesh Shashikant Jhaveri, Borivali West vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 42(1)(1), Kautilya Bhavan

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 4343/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri RaghunathSarangapaniFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi- Sr. DR

Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana vs. Bhavneet Kaur Walia, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 247/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Vipin Gupta, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that the initiation of proceedings under section 147/148 was mechanical, based on borrowed satisfaction, and without any tangible material. Consequently, the reassessment order is unsustainable in law. 8.4 In view of the above discussion and the categorical findings of the Ld. CIT(A), which

Ramesh Sistla, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 45/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: CA Y. V. Bhanu Narayan RaoFor Respondent: Dr.Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT(DR)

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 68Section 69A

ITA No 45 of 2025 Ramesh Sistla आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad 'DB

Raghav Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-29, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 3215/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR

Section 132Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

addition of Rs.22,50,75,000/- u/s 69 and Rs. 22,50,750/- u/s 69A on the alleged ground of unexplained supported from any tangible material or evidence, the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the same and accordingly it is prayed that the additions may kindly be deleted

Raghav Kumar, Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle 29, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 3214/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR

Section 132Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, Delhi

ITA 2309/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

ADIT(Inv)/Unit-4(2), New Delhi was furnished to the petitioner/assessee.” “19. We are of the opinion that the AO did not have the tangible material on record that could have persuaded him to form a belief that income, otherwise chargeable to tax, had escaped assessment

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 13, Delhi

ITA 2308/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, Delhi

ITA 2306/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Deepak Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, Delhi

ITA 2305/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153ASection 68

Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle 29, New Delhi

ITA 5519/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2015-16 Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Vs. Acit, 98, Okhla Industrial Estate Central Circle-29, Phase Iii, New Delhi. Tehkhand, New Delhi – 110 020. Pan: Aaacd0132H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi; Shri Satya Jeet Goel; & Shri Rajat Garg, Cas Revenue By : Shri Amit Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2025 Order

For Appellant: Shri R.S. SinghviFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 144CSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 69ASection 80ISection 92C

This also leads us to sustain the averments that the allegation of income escaping assessment is unsubstantiated, uncorroborated and not based on any tangible material but mere assumption of assesse being privy to alleged violations of VAT provisions. In this connection, we may note that on bare perusal of reasons ... Consignee agents, if any. Thus the 11 order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act appears to be without independent application of mind or tangible material, in the hands of AO. It has been alleged that appellant company has deposited 100 crores of VAT liability which proves its involvement

Assimilate Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT Circle, 1(1), Delhi

In the result, the ground raised by the assessee in this regard is dismissed

ITA 5357/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassimilate Solutions India Private Limited, Vs. Dcit/Acit, C/O Sanjiv Sapra & Associates Llp, Circle 1 (1), Chartered Accountants, New Delhi. C – 763, New Friends Colony, New Delhi – 110 025. (Pan :Aakca4501H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjiv Sapra, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dharam Veer Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Order : 15.10.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2015 Passed By The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13)R.W.S. 144B Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2021-22 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act. 2. M/S. Assimilate Solutions India Private Limited, The Assessee Was Incorporated On 19.04,2012 & Is Engaged In The Business Of Providing

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Sapra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Veer Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

intention on the part of the Assessee of avoidance of tax and the authorities below have failed to point out existence of any tangible material and valid reasons that there was avoidance of tax. Comparability analysis undertaken by the Assessee is based on well accepted TP principles

Tupperware India Private Limited, Connaught Place New Delhi vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre Through Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ip Estate New Delhi

The appeal is allowed partly

ITA 4475/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2020-21

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 92BSection 92C

Whirlpool USA. There is merit in the contention of the Assessee that the initial onus is 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 AMP expenses ... Court is of the view that as far as the present appeals are concerned, the Revenue has been unable to demonstrate by some tangible material that there is an international transaction involving AMP expenses between WOIL and Whirlpool USA. In the absence of that first step, the question of determining