← 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

Mehli Mehta Music Foundation, Mumbai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 4306/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala/ Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana (SR. D.R.)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

time barred and the re-assessment proceedings have been initiated after the statutory period. Perusal of the re-assessment order reveals that there was tangible materials in his hand while recording the reason of believe for reopening of assessment and all procedures/conditions have been duly complied before issuing notice ... activities were primarily held to be in the nature of advancement of any other object of general public utility'. Hence, the AO has tangible material to form reason to belief for the reopening of the case. The AO has relied on the decision of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court

Mehli Mehta Music Foundation, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 4261/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala/ Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana (SR. D.R.)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

time barred and the re-assessment proceedings have been initiated after the statutory period. Perusal of the re-assessment order reveals that there was tangible materials in his hand while recording the reason of believe for reopening of assessment and all procedures/conditions have been duly complied before issuing notice ... activities were primarily held to be in the nature of advancement of any other object of general public utility'. Hence, the AO has tangible material to form reason to belief for the reopening of the case. The AO has relied on the decision of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court

Mehli Mehta Music Foundation, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 4260/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala/ Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana (SR. D.R.)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

time barred and the re-assessment proceedings have been initiated after the statutory period. Perusal of the re-assessment order reveals that there was tangible materials in his hand while recording the reason of believe for reopening of assessment and all procedures/conditions have been duly complied before issuing notice ... activities were primarily held to be in the nature of advancement of any other object of general public utility'. Hence, the AO has tangible material to form reason to belief for the reopening of the case. The AO has relied on the decision of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court

Bhagwanram Chimnaramji Prajapat, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 494/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. (Accountant Member), Shri K. Narasimha Chary (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, ARFor Respondent: : Shri K.Meghnath Chowhan
Section 143(3)Section 263

conclusion that the assessee was entitled to depreciation on the value of securities held in the trading account. In the absence of any tangible material to the contrary, the Commissioner could not have treated that finding to be erroneous or to be prejudicial to the interest of the revenue

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle, Madurai vs. M/S Ramco Systems Limited, Rajapalayam

ITA 1269/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2024AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Mr.S. Muralidhar, FCA &For Respondent: Mr. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH: CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA

Vijay Vinod Duragkar, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(4), Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 339/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The power is not akin to a review. The existence of tangible material is necessary to ensure against an arbitrary exercise of power.” 12. The learned Counsel for the assessee, in support of his arguments on account

Late Muthumalainadar Krishnavel, Represented by 6 Legal Heirs, Tuticorin vs. PCIT-1, Madurai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1018/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1018/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. K.Indira, Pcit-1 Shri K.Muthuvel, Madurai. Shri Selvakumaran, Shri M.K.Balaji बनाम/ Shri K.Ragupathy, Shri K.Sudhakar Vs. All L/Hs Of Late Shri Muthumalainadar Krishnavel, 15, Melanavaladivillai, Arumuganeri, Tuticorin-628 202. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bctpk-6952-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S.Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S.Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)

passed in assuming incorrect jurisdiction in terms of Section 147 of the Act and ought to have appreciated that in the absence of fresh / tangible material relatable to the income alleged to have escaped assessment, the consequential assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act to revise an invalid

Ambalal Patel Land Developers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Circle 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2718/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriambalal Patel Land V/S. Dcit 12(1)(1) Developers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम Aayakar Bhavan, M K 3Rd Floor, Prabhu Niwas, Road, 99, Jawahar Nagar, Road Mumbai-400020 No. 10, Goregoan (W), Mumbai=400062 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Awaaca9849G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Malav P. ShethFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 143(3)Section 250

there is no income that has escaped assessment; b) the reasons recorded are contrary to the facts of the case; c) there is no tangible material on the basis of which the assessment of the Appellant is reopened; d) the reopening is based upon borrowed satisfaction and is merely reason

Ekal Gramothan Utpad Foundation, Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 323/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Ekal Gramothan-ITA 322 & 323 genuineness of the activities of the trust. Learned CIT(E) erred in over looking and summarily rejecting/not considering tangible material submitted during the proceedings. So, the matter may be restored to the file of Learned CIT(E) for order afresh. 5. Learned authorized representative

Ekal Gramothan Utpad Foundation, Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption), New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 322/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Ekal Gramothan-ITA 322 & 323 genuineness of the activities of the trust. Learned CIT(E) erred in over looking and summarily rejecting/not considering tangible material submitted during the proceedings. So, the matter may be restored to the file of Learned CIT(E) for order afresh. 5. Learned authorized representative

Ashok Kumar Kolla, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 876/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. & आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.876/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Ashok Kumar Kolla Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 6(1) Pan:Afwpk8481L Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V.Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri K.N. Suresh Babu, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri K.N. Suresh Babu, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

erroneous in law, void ab initio because, the Assessing Officer had reopened the assessment, merely on ‘change of opinion’, without there being any fresh tangible material, which come to the possession of the Assessing Officer, subsequent to the completion of the original assessment Page ... same material and formed reasonable belief of escapement. From the above, it is undisputedly clear that the Assessing Officer does not have any fresh tangible material in his possession and thus, it can be said that, it is a case of change of opinion, which is not permissible under

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. N K Proteins Pvt. Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 339/AHD/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri T R Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 43(5)

I.T.A No. 339/Ahd/2022 & CO 29/Ahd/2022 A.Y. 2009-10 Page No. ACIT vs. NK Proteins Ltd. & NK Proteins Ltd. vs. ACIT again without any tangible material available with the Assessing Officer based on the same materials, which were relied at the time of original assessment proceedings, has reason to believe that

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 54/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)Section 80I

time barred. The Ld. AR submitted that the reopening sought to be done based on the material already on record. There was no fresh tangible material available after the scrutiny is over. Thus, the reopening in such circumstances is impermissible. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision ... authority to just go on repeating the exercise of examining the issue which has already been gone into. There appears to be no tangible material distinct from what was made a part of the assessment proceedings and, therefore, reopening of the assessment is not permissible. The proposition

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1867/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)Section 80I

time barred. The Ld. AR submitted that the reopening sought to be done based on the material already on record. There was no fresh tangible material available after the scrutiny is over. Thus, the reopening in such circumstances is impermissible. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision ... authority to just go on repeating the exercise of examining the issue which has already been gone into. There appears to be no tangible material distinct from what was made a part of the assessment proceedings and, therefore, reopening of the assessment is not permissible. The proposition

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Nungambakkam Chennai vs. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai

ITA 1437/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1437/Chny/2024 & Co No.: 46/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner M/S. Cholamandalam Ms Of Income Tax, V. General Insurance Company Non-Corporate Circle -8, Limited, Room No. 507, 5Th Floor, No.2, Dare House, Chenai Annexe Building, G.P.O., Parrys, No. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai - 600 001. Chennai - 600 034. [Pan:Aabcc-6633-K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee By : Ms. Kamakshi, Advocate For Mr. Sandeepbagmar, Advocate Department By : Mr.Nilaybaransom, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee Aredirected Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 07.03.2024 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) In

For Appellant: Ms. Kamakshi, Advocate forFor Respondent: Mr.NilayBaranSom, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

India (2010) 2 SCC 723: 320 ITR 561 (SC). 2. in the present case, the AO has not produced any fresh or new tangible material based on which the re-opening of assessment is initiated. Now, on the basis of same material furnished, coming to a different conclusion is nothing

ACIT Circle-2(2)(1) International Taxation, New Delhi vs. Lalit Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

ITA 8655/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143Section 148

High Court observed that in the present case, there is no close nexus or live link between the tangible material and the reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment. The information received from the Investment Wing of the Revenue cannot be sole basis for forming a belief that ... elaborately discussed on the issue of utilising the information received from Investigation Wing and he held that information received from Investigation Wing is tangible material and he has elaborately discussed that Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment based on the tangible material available on record. He further relied on various

Lalit Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-11(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

ITA 8466/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143Section 148

High Court observed that in the present case, there is no close nexus or live link between the tangible material and the reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment. The information received from the Investment Wing of the Revenue cannot be sole basis for forming a belief that ... elaborately discussed on the issue of utilising the information received from Investigation Wing and he held that information received from Investigation Wing is tangible material and he has elaborately discussed that Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment based on the tangible material available on record. He further relied on various

ACIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. K.C.P.Shivaraman, Karur

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2183/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Nov 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2183/Chny/2018 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Acit Shri K.C.P. Shivaraman बनाम/ Central Circle-2(1), #330, Chinna Andan Koil Road, Vs. Chennai. Karur-639 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaxps-4844-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)-Ld. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 147

merits. 2. The Ld. CIT-DR advanced arguments supporting the case of Ld. AO whereas Ld. AR pleaded that there was no tangible material before Ld. AO for arriving at a belief of escapement of income. It was on mere change of opinion. The Ld. AR also submitted that there ... 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

Nita Padamchand Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-24(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3122/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "K(SMC)" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. M. GolvalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Pardeshi
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of change of opinion. 4. The Assessing officer erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s147, in the absence of tangible material. 5. The Assessing officer erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s 147 as in the present case there is neither any material available, nor any live ... Assessee and had passed Assessment Order, dated 26/03/2015, under Section 143(3) of the Act accepting the returned loss. There was no fresh tangible material available with the Assessing Officer to form belief that income had escaped assessment and that the reassessment proceedings were initiated on account of mere change

Bkr Capital Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 4(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 3399/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132(4)Section 147Section 153CSection 68

case, assessment made u/s 147 is liable to be quashed being proceedings u/s 147 of the Act initiated without having cogent or tangible material which suggest escapement of income by relying upon information uploaded on Insight portal without providing copies of the same and also without making any independent enquiry