“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

M/S. Bna Commerce Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 154/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Ankur Goyal, DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148

reasons but the conclusions of the AO one after the other and there was no independent application of mind by the AO to the tangible material which forms the basis of the reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment. The Hon'ble High Court has held that the conclusions

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Shyam Sunder Jindal, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5671/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 127Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

permissible to make any addition solely on the basis of any statement, which is not backed by corroborative/ tangible material/ evidence, and that too, a statement which is subsequently, explained/retracted/clarified by the assessee. 65. Considered in light of the aforesaid legal position, it is respectfully submitted that the aforesaid involuntary

Nina Kshetry, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle Int.Tax. 2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

ITA 1878/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 148

ITA No.1876/Del/2023 AY2016-17 Sangita Kshetry &Oths Vs ACIT Circle – Int. Tax. 2 (1)(2) New Delhi IN THE INCOME

Hersh Vardhan Kshetry, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax. 2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

ITA 1877/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 148

ITA No.1876/Del/2023 AY2016-17 Sangita Kshetry &Oths Vs ACIT Circle – Int. Tax. 2 (1)(2) New Delhi IN THE INCOME

Sangita Kshetry, Noida vs. ACIT, Circle Int.Tax. 2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesses in ITA 1876/Del/2023, ITA

ITA 1876/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C.N. Prasad & Sh. Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 148

ITA No.1876/Del/2023 AY2016-17 Sangita Kshetry &Oths Vs ACIT Circle – Int. Tax. 2 (1)(2) New Delhi IN THE INCOME

Dipakkumar Pushkarray Vyas, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 105/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh J. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 151

reopening of assessment is void ab initio and to be quashed. The Learned Assessing officer has failed to prove prima facie opinion based on Tangible material which provide nexus or link to having reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. Thus, there was no reason nor any justification given

DCIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Manish Uppal, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 3061/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 68

check abuse of power by the Assessing Officer. Hence, after 1st April, 1989, Assessing Officer has power to re-open, 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 of the belief ... other entity. The so called 'belief formed by the Assessing Officer towards escapement of chargeable income is thus without the availability of relevant or tangible material and merely follows the opinion expressed by the Investigation wing. The reasons assigned by the Assessing Officer towards escapement is de hors any tangible

Seema Swami, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Haryana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 737/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Smt Seema Swami, Vs. Acit, L/H Late Sh. Manoj Kumar Rohtak, Haryana Swami, Apptt No. 402, Tower B-2, Uniworld City, Sector-30, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Airps1185R

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CaFor Respondent: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)

instant case has been made within Smt Seema Swami 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year, still the existence of a tangible material with the learned AO which would have a live link to form a belief that income of the assessee had escaped assessment should ... Hence it could be safely concluded that the reasons recorded by the Learned AO for reopening the assessment has been done without having any tangible material before him at the time of recording the reasons. Hence the absence of a tangible material having live link to form a belief that

Manjit Singh Dhatt S/O Sh. Dalip Singh H.No.62, Vpo Dhatt Ludhiana, Ludhiana vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-3(4) Jao the Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Ludhiana

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

ITA 1137/CHANDI/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 151Section 69A

heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the material available on the record. In the present case, the AO had recorded reasons based on tangible material, namely the cash deposits in the joint bank account, and had obtained the necessary approval under section 151 before issuing the notice under section

Hetal Pagare, ACIT 16(2), Mumbai vs. Hasmukh Kababhai Ravat, Mulund West

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is accordingly dismissed in above terms

ITA 120/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanacit 16(2), Vs. Hasmukh Kababhai Ravat, Room No. 481, Aayakar Bhavan, 1901, Moksh Mahal Building, Mumbai-400 020 Maharashtra-400 080 Pan: Aabpr2061D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250

test to check abuse of power by the Assessing Officer. Hence, after 1-4-1989 , 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 ... were considered and has been accepted in the original assessment proceedings, the reopening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act without any new tangible material which was not considered during the original assessment, is bad in law and such reopening of assessment is void abinitio. No contrary judgment

Ajay Kumar Khurana, New Delhi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2666/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumar[Assessment Year : 2015-16] Ajay Kumar Khurana Vs Pr.Cit-20 37-B, Pocket-Iv New Delhi Mayur Vihar, Phase-I Delhi-110091 Pan-Aagpk1260N Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms.Monika Ghai, Adv. Shri Sharad Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Dipanshu Agarwal, Adv. Respondent By Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14.05.2025

Section 147Section 263

well as prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The AO has concluded the issue having regard to the totality of facts and based on tangible material available before him and thus cannot be branded as erroneous in the name of alleged inadequacy of inquiry. 12.2. The Ld. Counsel

Pravinbhai Ladhabhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1595/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, AR. &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Asudani, SR-DR

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147

this appeal: - “01 The learned CITA) has erred in confirming the reassessment notice under Section 147 in as much as there was no tangible material or any other evidences for the purpose of Assessing Officer to form a view about reason to believe and that there is no escapement

DCIT Central Circle-7(2), Mumbai vs. Ruchi Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 389/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Malav Sheth, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Govindrao J. Ninawe, Sr. D/R

Section 143(3)Section 148ASection 80ISection 80i

perusal of the aforementioned reason shows that the basis is the case records available with the AO which means that there was no new tangible material for the reopening of the assessment which is mandatory as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income

DCIT Central Circle-7(2), Mumbai vs. Ruchi Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 388/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Malav Sheth, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Govindrao J. Ninawe, Sr. D/R

Section 143(3)Section 148ASection 80ISection 80i

Alka Rajesh Vanigota, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-52, Mumbai

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

ITA 229/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 271ASection 69Section 69A

assessee has purchased shares of M/s Greencrest Financial Services Limited. c) On this basis the assessee's case was brought under assessment without any tangible material on record and on basis of information and statement of third party. THE SUMMARY DETAILS, FACTS AND EXPLANATIONS IN THE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER ... credit, from the material facts on record were quite evident that it was from the sale of shares. As there was no tangible material brought on record to convert these transactions then it is very difficult to treat the sale proceeds of the shares as unexplained cash credit

Reena Verma, Haridwar vs. ITO, Ward-1(3)(5), Roorkee

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed as above

ITA 2215/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40ASection 68

appreciate that, issuance of notice u/s 148 merely amounted to change of opinion as original assessment was completed u/s 143(3) and, no tangible material surfaced after the completion of assessment and, therefore notice was illegal and, without jurisdiction. 2 That Commissioner learned the of (Appeals) has erred both ... round of scrutiny proceeding after the original order u/s 143(3) was deleted on technical ground. The undersigned holds that the AO did have tangible material on record to initiate these proceedings to open the assessment and the action of the AO is therefore upheld. This is evident from

Reena Verma, Haridwar vs. ITO, Ward-1(3)(5), Roorkee

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is stand dismissed

ITA 2214/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.2214/Del/2018, A.Y. 2009-10 Reena Verma Income Tax Officer, C/O Shri Pawana Singh Ward 1(3)(5), Roorkee Khedi Kala, Mubaraqpur Vs. Laksar, Haridwar, Uttaranchal Pan: Agvpv0526B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/05/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter, The ‘Ay’) 2009-10 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.01.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dehradun [Hereinafter, The ‘Cit(A)’].

Section 147Section 148Section 69ASection 69h

hence deserved to be quashed as such. 2.2 That the both has failed to appreciate that there was no specific relevant, reliable and tangible material on record to form a "reason to believe that income of the appellant had escaped assessment and in view thereof the proceedings initiated are illegal

Regis Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 972/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Abhishak Bansal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

Sri Maharaja Refineries, Erode vs. ACIT, Circle-I, Erode

ITA 1956/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1955 & 1956/Chny/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Sri Maharaja Refineries, # 128, Bhavani Road, Erode-638 004. Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Erode. Pan: Aaffs-8491-N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Appellant By प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) : Mr. R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 07.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Both Dated 07.06.2024 For

For Respondent: Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(5)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92

following the mandate of the jurisdictional Madras High Court with regard to forming an honest opinion based on well-founded reasons, supported by tangible material before him to invoke Section 40A(2), without considering the scope and effect of Section 40A(2)(a). 3. The assessee has raised similar grounds ... available with the Department. Assuming but not admitting your above reference is valid, then, as mentioned earlier, certified copies, as already asked for, and tangible materials, based on which THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS OF THE OPINION, may be supplied. As, right from the beginning in the present proceedings, the Revenue

Sri Maharaja Refineries, Erode vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Erode

ITA 1955/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1955 & 1956/Chny/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Sri Maharaja Refineries, # 128, Bhavani Road, Erode-638 004. Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Erode. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Pan: Aaffs-8491-N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 07.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Both Dated 07.06.2024 For

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Mr. R.Clement Ramesh Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(5)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92