← 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

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(OSD), Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. M/S Casagrand Builder Private Limited, Chennai

Appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 720/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.720/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Jcit(Osd) M/S. Casagrand Premier Builder Limited बनाम Corporate Circle-1(1) (Earlier Known As M/S Casa Grand Builder P. Ltd.) 5Th Floor, Npl Devi, New No.111, Old No.59. Lb Chennai. / Vs. Road, Thiruvanmiyur,Chennai-600 041 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccc-2758-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Revenue By : Mrs. Swapna Nanu Ambath & Sh. V. Nanda Kumar Ld. Cit-Drs A/W Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit) – Ld. Sr. Dr " थ" की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan (Ca) - Ld.Ar

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapna Nanu Ambath & Sh. V. Nanda
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 72

wherein the assessee has submitted that reopening is bad-in-law since the same amounts to change of opinion, there being no fresh tangible material coming to the possession of Ld. AO. 1.4 The Ld. CIT-DR advanced arguments supporting the assessment order whereas Ld. AR, while supporting impugned order

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. Add/Joint/Deputy/ACIT, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, ground no. 1 raised by the revenue is

ITA 569/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaand

For Appellant: Shri Biswanath Das, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri Faroog Irani, Ld. AR
Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(ii)Section 36(2)(viia)

issuing the notice either by adding and/or substituting the reasons by 30 ITA Nos.4056/Mum/2023 & Others M/s. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. affidavit or otherwise. The tangible material, i.e., letter dated 15-1- 2007 on which the revenue relies upon for issuing of the notice, could have undoubtedly been the basis ... sought to be reopened are identical to the objection of the audit authority dated 29-12-2009. The reasons do not rely upon any tangible material in the audit report but merely upon an opinion and the existing material already on record. This it-self indicates that there

DCIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited, Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 1 raised by the revenue is

ITA 4056/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaand

For Appellant: Shri Biswanath Das, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri Faroog Irani, Ld. AR
Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)(ii)Section 36(2)(viia)

issuing the notice either by adding and/or substituting the reasons by 30 ITA Nos.4056/Mum/2023 & Others M/s. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. affidavit or otherwise. The tangible material, i.e., letter dated 15-1- 2007 on which the revenue relies upon for issuing of the notice, could have undoubtedly been the basis ... sought to be reopened are identical to the objection of the audit authority dated 29-12-2009. The reasons do not rely upon any tangible material in the audit report but merely upon an opinion and the existing material already on record. This it-self indicates that there

M/S Indovision Commodities Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 500/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.500/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Indovision Commodities Ltd. .....……………………....………....Appellant Block-B, Suit No.1A Mangalam, 24 & 26 Hemanta Basu Sarani, Dalhousie, Kol-1. [Pan: Aabcm8943Q] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(2), Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 06, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.02.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Notice U/S 148 & The Reassessment Completed By Ito Wd 6(4) Was Without Jurisdiction, Invalid & Bad In Law & Therefore The Entire Reassessment Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. For That The Proceedings Initiated U/S 147 On Vague Reasons Without Any Tangible Material Or Independent Application Of Mind Simply On Borrowed Satisfaction, Suspicion & Surmises Were Bad In Law & Therefore The Entire Reassessment Is Liable To Be Quashed.

Section 120Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

therefore the entire reassessment is liable to be quashed. 2. For that the proceedings initiated u/s 147 on vague reasons without any tangible material or independent application of mind simply on borrowed satisfaction, suspicion and surmises were bad in law and therefore the entire reassessment is liable to be quashed

Late Smt. Mariam Bai (Through Legal Heir Shri Abdul Razak Chara), Indore (M.P.) vs. The Income-Tax Officer - 4(3), Indore, Indore (M.P.)

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 249/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Indore06 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsmt. Mariam Bai (Through Income Tax Officer 4(3), Legal Heir Shri Abdul Razak Indore Chara), Vs. 12, Daulaganj, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Advpc5505A Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2024 O R D E R

Section 147Section 148Section 69A

deposit in the bank account of the appellant even when no income chargeable to tax had escaped from assessment and in absence of any tangible material and live link of concealment of income merely on the basis of borrowed opinion without independent application of mind. 4. That on the facts

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad vs. Vista Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1340/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

Sec.l42(2) of the Act to respective parties. 3. The Ld. Assessing Officer further erred in re- opening the completed assessment without any tangible material before him at the time of issuing Notice under Sec.148 of the Act and hence, the basic mandate of Section 147 of the Act, Reason ... submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that the 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 formation of belief

Allied Engineers and Elastomers, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 18(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1687/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram a/w Shri Rahul KFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69C

considered view the entire reopening is carried out only on the basis of report of investigation wing without any independent enquiry and without any tangible material in the hands of the AO to show that the assessee was involved in taking accommodation entry towards bogus purchases. Considering the facts unique

Chandrakant Gordhanbhai Patel HUF, Dabhoi vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 485/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: The Final Hearing Of This Appeal Petition…”

For Appellant: None(Written Submission filed by the assessee)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

filed income tax return where in all relevant facts and issues necessary to determine the correct income were disclosed and so without any tangible material before the AO to reopen assessment or In the absence of surfacing of any fresh tangible material, initiation of proceedings

Arvindkumar Amulkh Tanna, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2 (3), Ahmeadabad

ITA 577/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

principle that reassessment should be based on incriminating material is likely to hold, even under the new provisions, as the rationale behind requiring tangible material for reopening an assessment remains a cornerstone of the reassessment process. Hon’ble The Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Kelvinator of India ... emphasized that the AO must have tangible material to justify the reopening of assessments. This principle continues to be relevant under the amended Sections 147 and 148 of the Act. The judicial principles laid down in the Saumya Construction case regarding the necessity of incriminating material for reassessment

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Nagpur vs. Vinodkumar Rajendralal Kochhar, Kamptee

In the result, the appeal filed by the department is dismissed

ITA 386/NAG/2023[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jul 2024

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

receipt of this Audit Objection Memo. 6. We find that the reopening has been made on the mere change of opinion without any tangible material. The Assessing Officer had applied its mind at the time of assessment since the facts were on record and reopening ... change of opinion is not permissible even within 4 years. “Reopening of an assessment on mere change of opinion without any tangible material is unsustainable - Assessing Officer deemed to have applied his mind if facts are on record and reopening under section 147 on change of opinion is not permissible

Rakesh Kumar Somani, Khandwa vs. ITO-1, Khandwa

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 215/IND/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manish Boradrakesh Kumar Somani, Ito-1, 10, Ramganj Road, Khandwa Vs. Khandwa (M.P) (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Azgps3988J Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 29.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2024 O R D E R

Section 133ASection 147

validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 even when reopening was done in absence of any tangible material and live link of concealment of income more so when it was held by the Ld. CIT(A) while deciding the appeal in the case ... Ground No.1 raised by the assessee challenges the re- opening proceedings on the ground that the reopening was not done on the basis of tangible material and that there is no live link of 4 Rakesh Kumar Somani concealment of income. However during the course of hearing Ld. Counsel

Mani D Seervai, Mumbai vs. ITO 34(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 232/MUM/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Golvala & Ms. Aruna Aiyar, A/RsFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 69

detailed investigation regarding escapement of income in the assessment but it certainly does require him to form a prima facie opinion based on tangible material which provides a nexus or link to arrive at reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment. In the present case, ld. AO has grossly ... opinion that income of the assessee had escaped assessment for the year under consideration. 7.2. Thus, in absence of this necessary nexus between the tangible material and formation of belief, the re-assessment proceedings cannot be I.T.A. No. 232/Mum/2024 8 sustained. We thus, hold that the reopening of assessment

Himanshu Dilip Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 19(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 129/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Himanshu Dilip Jain Income Tax Officer-19(1)(5) 173, Kika Street, Gulal Wadi, Room No. 228, Matru Mandir, Mumbai-400 004 Vs. Tardeo, Grant Road, Mumbai-400 007

For Respondent: Shri P D Chougule
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

liable to be quashed. b. The ld. AO erred in reopening the assessment u/s. 147 based on suspicion and surmises without any tangible material showing escapement if income and as such, the reopening is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2. That on the facts and circumstances

Vijay Kumar Jain, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Civic Centre

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1730/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareekvijay Kumar Jain Vs. Income Tax Officer Wz-34/1, Golden Park, Civic Centre Rampura, Delhi – 110 035 Minto Road, Delhi – 110 002 Pan No. Aafpj 6413 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Adv. Ms. Bhoomija Verma, Adv. & Shri Lakshya Budhiraja, C.A. Revenue By Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am :

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

circumstantial evidences as noted above. 10.2 The Revenue, in our view, has based itself findings on suspicion and conjectures and on improper rejection of tangible material. The assessee on the other hand has successfully demonstrated the propriety of cash sales by corresponding purchases, reduction in stock and declaration of profits ... instant case, has sufficiently demonstrated the source of cash deposits. On a broader reckoning, the apprehension raised by the Revenue authorities militates against the tangible material and is thus extraneous. The additions made under section 68 of the Act is thus unsustainable in the facts of the case. The order

Sunil Kumar, Saharanpur vs. ITO, Ward 3(3)(5), Saharanpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 565/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 50C

Property of Rs.26,00,000.00 against value of Circle rate at Rs. 1,55,36,000.00 and failed to establish the live nexus between tangible material and income escaped assessment, which is vague, incorrect and baseless, hence, the proceedings initiated is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. The NFAC

Ashwin General Merchants Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-6(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3022/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

have held the notice u/s 148 and consequential re-assessment order u/s. 147 as bad- in-law, since had been issued in absence of tangible material and without independent application of mind and without having reason to believe of escapement of income; 4.0 On facts and circumstances of the case

Mahavir Metal and Alloys, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Matrumandir Nana Chowk, Mumbai

ITA 3008/MUM/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

reasons recorded must be self-explanatory disclosing application of mind by the Assessing Officer. Further, the reasons recorded must identify the link between the tangible material and formation of belief that income as escaped assessment. Accordingly, we proceed to examine the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment which read ... conclude that in the present case income shall be deemed to have escaped assessment. Thus, there is no link between the tangible material and the formation of belief that income has escaped assessment. Further, we note that in the reasons recorded for reopening assessment it has been stated that

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-6(1)(1) Bangalore, Koramangala, Bengaluru vs. Shri Bommai Sommappa Basavaraj, Bangalore

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO filed by the assessee is dismissed, as not pressed

ITA 922/BANG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 250(4)

based on such material is bad in law. Hence, the reasons recorded by the learned assessing officer are invalid. (iii) There is no tangible material for invoking provisions of section 147 of the Act and therefore the decision of Hon’ble supreme court in CIT(A) Vs. Kelvinator India Limited ... different coded name has been used for the assessee. ITA Nos.914 and 922/Bang/2024 Page 14 of 27 5.11 There is no tangible material for invoking provisions of section 147 of the Act. Therefore, the notice issued u/s.148 of the IT Act is hereby quashed. 5.12 It is also seen from

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-6(1)(1) Bangalore, Koramangala, Bengaluru vs. Shri Bommai Sommappa Basavaraj, Bangalore

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO filed by the assessee is dismissed, as not pressed

ITA 914/BANG/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 250(4)

based on such material is bad in law. Hence, the reasons recorded by the learned assessing officer are invalid. (iii) There is no tangible material for invoking provisions of section 147 of the Act and therefore the decision of Hon’ble supreme court in CIT(A) Vs. Kelvinator India Limited ... different coded name has been used for the assessee. ITA Nos.914 and 922/Bang/2024 Page 14 of 27 5.11 There is no tangible material for invoking provisions of section 147 of the Act. Therefore, the notice issued u/s.148 of the IT Act is hereby quashed. 5.12 It is also seen from

M/S. Concorde Housing Corporation Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 531/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

bringing single incriminating, unambiguous, cogent and positive evidences beyond any doubt than that of the Appellant's evidence, not brought out the satisfaction with tangible materials pertaining to the relevant assessment year as required by the scheme of the Act, allegations made in the penalty order are not borne ... independent proceedings than that of assessment proceedings; burden of proof was not discharged by the Ld. AO and no independent enquiry was made. e. Tangible materials were not brought to record during the scrutiny proceedings and more importantly in the penalty proceedings to hold that the Appellant had concealed