“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

Bharatkumar Anraj Bhansali, Mumbai vs. ITO-19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, ground number 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the appeal are dismissed

ITA 340/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi (Am) I.T.A. No. 340/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2009-10) Bharat Kumar Anraj Bhansali Vs. Ito, Ward 19(1)(2) Room No. 10, 3Rd Floor. Matru Mandir Saraswat Building 2Nd Floor Banganga Road Tardeo Road Walkeshwar, Mumbai-400 Mumbai-400 007. 006. Pan : Aaepb8134C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ravi Gupta Department By Shri R.R. Makwana Date Of Hearing 10.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.07.2024 O R D E R 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Appellate Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi (The Learned Cit – A) For Assessment Year 2009 – 10 Dated 24/2/2023 Wherein The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 With Section 148 Read With Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 28/3/2015 Was Dismissed. 2. Therefore, The Assessee Is Aggrieved With The Same Has Preferred This Appeal Raising Several Grounds. 3. The Fact Of The Case Shows That The Assessee Is An Individual Where He Filed His Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs. 164,870 As He Is Dealing As A Trader In Farah’S & Nonferrous Metal. The Name Of The Assessee Appears As A Beneficiary In Obtaining Accommodation Entries & Hawala Bills From Non-Existing Entity Is Discovered By Maharashtra Sales Tax Department & Information Passed On To The Assessing Officer By The Director General Of Income Tax, Investigation

Section 142Section 144Section 147Section 148

learned CIT appeal is not given is absolutely false. On the issue of reopening of the assessment it was submitted that there is a tangible material in the form of information received that assessee has obtained the bogus invoices from one party. The assessee failed to prove the genuineness ... case, the information was received that assessee is one of the beneficiaries of obtaining accommodation bills of bogus purchases from one party. There is tangible material, information available from the sales tax department as well as the director general of income tax investigation. Assessee did not respond to the notice

M/S Arvind Champaklal Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 17(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4385/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana

Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 68

beneficiary of accommodation entry of INR 35,00,000/-. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Assessing Officer did not have any fresh tangible material for initiating re-assessment proceedings. In our view, the Assessing Officer had sufficient tangible material to form a belief that income had escaped 3 Assessment

K & S Fincon Pvt. Ltd., U.P vs. ITO, Ward-14(1), Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 550/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 68

returned back. 14. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO has erred in providing any tangible material and nexus to prove that the said transaction of Rs. 1,25,28,102 is an accommodation entry. 15. That in the facts and circumstances of the case

ACIT, Central Circle - 3 (3), Chennai vs. M/S Land Marvel Homes, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1055/CHNY/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1055/Chny/2022 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Land Marvel Homes, The Acit, V. 45-47, Old No. 22-23, Central Circle -3(3), 3Rd Floor, 1St Main Road, Chennai. Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. [Pan:Aabfl-4387-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri. Yeshwanth Kumar, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. V. Nandakumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. T. Banusekar, Advocate &

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

were available with the authority as part of the record. 11.The phrase reason to believe in section 147 relates to such other new or tangible material as may have come to the knowledge of the assessing officer pursuant to the original proceedings for assessment. The Supreme Court ... Having missed the bus earlier, the Department cannot be permitted to avail of the extended time limit in the absence of any new or tangible material, when the time for scrutiny assessment has elapsed on 31.3.2001, prior to issue of notice u/s 148. The notice under section 148 dated

Hemant Chheda, Mumbai vs. ITO 29(1)(4), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4383/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

established income has escaped assessment. Reasons to believe at the stage of reopening is whether income had escaped assessment and the Ld. AO had tangible material before him for the formation of that belief. A “reason to believe” is what is relevant, not an established fact of the escapement ... case of Ideal Associates Vs. ACIT (2023) 146 taxman.com 225 (Bom), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has observed that “if the AO has such tangible material, power to reopen can be exercised.” It is settled law that at the stage when the Ld. AO reopens the assessment

Shreevasaird Swetamber Murtipujak Tapagachh Jain Sang, Vasai West vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 2800/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Shreevasaird Swetamber Cit Exemption, Pune, Murtipujak Tapagachh Jain Sang, 322, Income Tax Office Pmt Vs. Plot No. 15A, Ambadi Road, Vasai Building Shankar Seth Road, Road, West Palghar-401202 Pune-411037. Pan No. Aahts 4589 H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. R.A. Dhyani, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. Jytoi Samant

Section 12(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(a)

have failed to comply with the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In absence of any such tangible material the Income Tax Act, 1961. In absence of any such tangible material the Income Tax Act, 1961. In absence of any such tangible material

Joint Commossioner of Income-Tax(OSD), Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. Idfc Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 19/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.19/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri M. Murali, CITFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Sheth, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viiia)

check abuse of power by the Assessing Officer. Hence, after 1st April, 1989, 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 the formation of the belief

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax(OSD), Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai vs. Idfc Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 18/CHNY/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.18/Chny/2024 िनधा9रण वष9 /Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri M. Murali, CITFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Sheth, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(viiia)

Shailesh K. Wadnere, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-2(2), Kalyan

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in

ITA 793/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 69

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the validity of notice u/s 148, in absence of tangible material and without having reason to believe of escapement of income; 4.0 On facts and circumstances of the case

Shailesh K. Wadnere, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-2(2), Kalyan

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in

ITA 738/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2015-16 & Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 69

Ghelani Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemp)1(3), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 2116/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R

Section 11(2)Section 11(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50C

assessee’s instant first and foremost legal ground in very terms once the learned Assessing Officer had recorded his reasons based on tangible material only. It is rejected accordingly. 5. Next comes the issue of section 50C addition amounting to Rs.2,50,25,760/- made in both the lower proceedings

DCIT CC -4(4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3614/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

upholding validity of reassessment proceedings, despite the same having been initiated on the basis of mere change of opinion, without any new tangible material to the possession of the assessing officer M CITCA) subsequent to completion of assessment under section 143(3) r. w.s. 153A r.w.s. 144C ... finding of the Ld. CIT(A) in respect of validity of the reopening. In our opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) has restricted to the tangible material gathered during the course of the survey while rejecting the grounds challenging validity of the reopening. We do not finding any infirmity

DCIT CC -4(4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3610/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

DCIT CC 4 (4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3606/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 69C

tangible the basis of mere change of opinion, without any new tangible the basis of mere change of opinion, without any new tangible material to the possession of the assessing officer M CI material to the possession of the assessing officer M CI material to the possession of the assessing ... change of reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of mere reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of mere opinion’ without being any being any tangible material in possessi possession of the Assessing Officer s subsequent to completion of the regular ubsequent to completion of the regular assessment

DCIT CC 4 (4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3605/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 69C

DCIT CC 4(4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3603/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 69C

DCIT CC 4(4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3602/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

ITA 3491/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

upholding validity of reassessment proceedings, despite the same having been initiated on the basis of mere change of opinion, without any new tangible material to the possession of the assessing officer M CITCA) subsequent to completion of assessment under section 143(3) r. w.s. 153A r.w.s. 144C ... additional ground No. 1.2, the assessee has challenged reassessment proceedings initiated on the basis of mere 'change of opinion' without being any tangible material in possession of the Assessing Officer subsequent to completion of the regular assessment. The Ld. CIT(A) has rejected this objection of the assessee observing

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Central Circle 4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3474/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 69C

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

ITA 3473/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C