← 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

Irm Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1590/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1590/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Irm Private Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Irm House, बनाम/ Of Income Tax, V/S. Off. C.G Raod, Circle 2(1)(1), Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380009. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaci3678M अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, SR-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 194HSection 194J

based on specific information received through various sources, including the Individual Transaction Statement (ITS), NMS database. The DR emphasised that in view of such tangible material coming into the possession of the AO post original assessment, reopening of the assessment could not be faulted either in law or on facts ... reassessment initiated by the AO by issuance of notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2018 on two principal grounds: (i) that there was no tangible material to justify reopening, and (ii) that the reassessment was time-barred as per the first proviso to section 147. From

Income Tax Officer, Parwanoo, H.P vs. Deyem Industry, Nalagarh Solan

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 708/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 708/Chd/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The ITO Parwanoo, Himachal Pradesh बनाम DEYEM INDUSTRY Nalagarh, Ropar Road Near Hazat Khana, Nalagarh, H.P.- 174101 स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AAGFD0437L अपीलार्थी/ Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ankit Awal, Ms. Khushbu Sood, Advocates राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual) सुनवाई की ता

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Awal & Ms. Khushbu Sood, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(47)Section 271(1)(c)Section 53A

sale and the escrow amount, were disclosed during the original assessment proceedings under Section 143(3). The Assessing Officer (AO) failed to provide new tangible material or evidence of suppression by the appellant to support the reassessment. The CIT(A) noted that the reasons for reopening relied solely on existing ... paragraph 5.1, it was observed that the reasons recorded for reopening were based solely on the information already on record, and no fresh or tangible material had been brought forth. 6.3 Hence, it is evident that the reassessment is based purely on a change of opinion, which is impermissible under

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Sportking India Limited, Village Kanech Gt Road

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 16/CHANDI/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jun 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 16/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-Central Circle-2 M/S Sportking India Limited बनाम/ Sco 1-6, 3Rd Floor Village Kanech, Gt Road, Sahnewal Vs. Kichlu Nagar, Ludhiana-141001 Khurd, Punjab 141120 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3037-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ Co No.30/Chandi/2024 (In Ita No.16/Chandi/2024) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Sportking India Limited Dcit-Central Circle-2 बनाम/ Village Kanech, Gt Road, Sco 1-6, 3Rd Floor Vs. Sahnewal Khurd, Punjab 141120 Kichlu Nagar, Ludhiana-141001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3037-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar (Ca) & Ms. Deepali Aggarwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-06-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. The Revenue Is In Further Appeal Before Us For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar (CA) & Ms. DeepaliFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 68

adjudication of legal grounds is contained in para 6.2.3 of the impugned order. The Ld. CIT(A) held that information was a tangible material and Ld. AO was within his right to reopen the case on the basis of this information. At the time of issuance of notice

Nagar Panchayat, Banda vs. The Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle Sagar, Sagar

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

ITA 118/JAB/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2012-13 Nagar Panchayat, Banda, Vs. The Acit, Nagar Parishad Building, Banda, Sagar, Circle Sagar, Sagar Banda Nagar S.O. Madhya Pradesh Pan:Aaaln0246R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Milind Wadhwani, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.05.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 7.05.2024 Whereby The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Dcit, Circle-Sagar, Madhya Pradesh Passed On 10.12.2019 Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre ('Nfac) Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle-Sagar ('Ao) In Adding A Sum Of Rs. 68,21,182/- To The Income Of The Assessee U/S. 69A As Unexplained Money. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 10.12.2019 Is Without Jurisdiction, Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed.3 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Is Opposed To The Principles Of Equity, Natural Justice & Fair Play.

For Appellant: Sh. Milind Wadhwani, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

believe that the income had escaped assessment in the hands of the appellant. 7. That the assessment was not reopened based on any new tangible material. 8. That there was no live link between material available on record and reasons to believe. 9. On the facts and circumstances