← All Phrases

“fresh tangible material”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 147398 judgments

The decision most relied on for fresh tangible material is CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (320 ITR 561), cited in 1,673 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on fresh 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.

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.

CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd.
325 ITR 285 · 2010 · High Court
243
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid and void ab initio if initiated based on 'borrowed satisfaction' without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind, or merely on documents already available on record without fresh tangible material.

CIT v. Usha International Ltd.
348 ITR 485 · 2012 · High Court
231
citing judgments

A reassessment is invalid due to 'mere change of opinion' if an issue was raised during original assessment but no addition was made, implying the issue was examined. However, if a subject matter was not examined and no opinion was formed, the principle of 'change of opinion' does not apply.

ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd.
92 Taxmann.com 361 · 2018 · Supreme Court
194
citing judgments

Reassessment under Section 147/148 is invalid if it constitutes a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer without any fresh tangible material, especially after the assessee made a full and truthful disclosure during the original scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3).

Prashant S. Joshi v. ITO
324 ITR 154 · 2010 · High Court
179
citing judgments

Reasons recorded under Section 148 for reopening an assessment are jurisdictional facts that form the sole basis for assuming power and cannot be changed, supplemented, or corrected later. Such reasons must be based on fresh tangible material indicating income escapement.

Asian Paints Ltd. v. DCIT
308 ITR 195 · 2009 · High Court
175
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot issue a notice under Section 148 to reopen an assessment when all material facts were already before the AO during the original assessment, even if the AO failed to apply their mind at that time. Such an action constitutes an impermissible review of a concluded assessment rather than a reassessment based on fresh tangible material.

Judgments citing fresh tangible material

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 14/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay
Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

order passed by Ld. AO under section 147 of the Act which was reopened based on the change on opinion without bringing any fresh tangible material on record and thereby further erred in overlooking the fact that the issue of taxation of share premium was duly examined during the course

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 13/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay
Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

order passed by Ld. AO under section 147 of the Act which was reopened based on the change on opinion without bringing any fresh tangible material on record and thereby further erred in overlooking the fact that the issue of taxation of share premium was duly examined during the course

Dr Reddys Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 409/HYD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G., Hon’Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.409/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dr. Reddy’S Laboratories Deputy Commissioner Limited Vs. Of Income Tax Hyderabad Circle-8(1) [Pan: Aaacd7999Q] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S.P.Chidambaram, Ar राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 07/04/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 09.06.2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri S.P.Chidambaram, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234C

assessee and also taking note of provisions of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) of the Act held that there is a fresh tangible material in the form of information received from ADIT (I&CI), Hyderabad that during the calendar year, the assessee company has received interest income of Rs.9 ... said information has been received after completion of original assessment proceedings in the case of the assessee which partakes the nature of fresh tangible material, which is sufficient to form basis for escapement of income and for issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. Therefore, rejected the contention

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bhushan Steel Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1470/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2006-07] S. C. Johnson Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 5Th Floor, Plot No.68, Circle-7(1), Sector-44, Gurugram, New Delhi Haryana-122003. Pan-Aaacl3128M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2007-08] S. C. Johnson Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 5Th Floor, Plot No.68, Circle-22(2), Sector-44, Gurugram, New Delhi Haryana-122003. Pan-Aaacl3128M Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2008-09] S. C. Johnson Pvt. Ltd., Vs Add.Cit, 5Th Floor, Plot No.68, Special Range-8, Sector-44, Gurugram, New Delhi Haryana-122003. Pan-Aaacl3128M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri K. M. Gupta, Adv. & Ms. Shruti Khimta, Ar Respondent By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 02.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.08.2025

Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80I

appreciating that the alleged reasons to believe recorded are merely in the nature of pretence and vague as no fresh tangible material surfaced after completion of original assessment proceedings. 1.4 That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in not appreciating that the initiation of reassessment proceedings was merely

India Luxco Retail Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2406/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ravi Sharma & Jaskaran SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orient Craft Ltd., 215 Taxman 28 (Delhi) held that in the absence of any fresh tangible material, the re- opening of assessment u/s.147 of the Act is without jurisdiction. 7. In the instant case, the reasons for reopening states that

ITO (E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Andhra Pradesh Technology Development & Promotion Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2406/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ravi Sharma & Jaskaran SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orient Craft Ltd., 215 Taxman 28 (Delhi) held that in the absence of any fresh tangible material, the re- opening of assessment u/s.147 of the Act is without jurisdiction. 7. In the instant case, the reasons for reopening states that

Income Tax Officer, Chennai vs. Ambattur Constructions Private Limited, Chennai

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 288/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.288/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Ito M/S. Ambattur Constructions Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Corporate Ward-1(1) 86E-2, Industrial Estate, Vs. Chennai. Ambattur, Chennai-600 058. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-7390-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No.47/Chny/2024 (In Ita No.288/Chny/2024) (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Ambattur Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Ito (Merged With Ambattur Infra India Pvt. Ltd.) बनाम/ Corporate Ward-1(1), 86E-2, Industrial Estate, Vs. Chennai. Ambattur, Chennai-600 058. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-7390-N (Cross-Objector) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri T. Banusekar (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Smt. D. Babitha (Jcit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23-01-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25-03-2025

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. D. Babitha (JCIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Thus, the reopening was undertaken to add the impugned credits u/s 68 of the Act. 2.4 The assessee contended that there was no fresh tangible material for reopening the case of the assessee and the same was merely on the basis of information which was already available on record. However ... para-8, noted that the case was reopened on the basis of audit objection without there being any fresh tangible material. Upon perusal of Audit Memo dated 21-10-2020, Ld. AO mentioned that the observation memo was beyond the scope of assessment and the observation made in the audit

Deputy Commissioner of Incometax, Chennai vs. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 1489/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. Sandeep BagmarFor Respondent: Mr. Nilay
Section 115J

opening the assessment were arising from the details submitted by the assessee during the original assessment proceedings, and that without any fresh tangible material in his possession, the AO ought not to have resorted to re-opening of the assessment and inter alia cited the decision ... this case. In such a scenario, the initiation of reassessment would have been permissible only if the AO was having in his possession fresh & tangible material which came in his possession, [subsequent to passing of the order u/s 143(3)] and its (tangible material) relation with formation of belief

Deputy Commissioner of Incometax, Chennai vs. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai

ITA 1488/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1279/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General- V. The Dcit, Insurance Co. Ltd., Non Corporate Circle-8, Dare House, 2Nd Floor, Chennai. No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1338/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Dcit, Non Corporate Circle-8, Chennai. V. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, 2Nd Floor, No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1280/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General- Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, 2Nd Floor, No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Non Corporate Circle-8, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 115J

opening the assessment were arising from the details submitted by the assessee during the original assessment proceedings, and that without any fresh tangible material in his possession, the AO ought not to have resorted to re-opening of the assessment and inter alia cited the decision

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corp Circle 8, Chennai

ITA 1281/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1279/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General- V. The Dcit, Insurance Co. Ltd., Non Corporate Circle-8, Dare House, 2Nd Floor, Chennai. No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1338/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Dcit, Non Corporate Circle-8, Chennai. V. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, 2Nd Floor, No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1280/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General- Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, 2Nd Floor, No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Non Corporate Circle-8, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 115J

opening the assessment were arising from the details submitted by the assessee during the original assessment proceedings, and that without any fresh tangible material in his possession, the AO ought not to have resorted to re-opening of the assessment and inter alia cited the decision

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corp Circle 8, Chennai

ITA 1280/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. Sandeep Bagmar
Section 115Section 115J

opening the assessment were arising from the details submitted by the assessee during the original assessment proceedings, and that without any fresh tangible material in his possession, the AO ought not to have resorted to re-opening of the assessment and inter alia cited the decision ... this case. In such a scenario, the initiation of reassessment would have been permissible only if the AO was having in his possession fresh & tangible material which came in his possession, [subsequent to passing of the order u/s 143(3)] and its (tangible material) relation with formation of belief

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corp Circle 8, Chennai

ITA 1279/CHNY/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Mar 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1279/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General- Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, 2Nd Floor, No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Non Corporate Circle-8, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1338/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Dcit, Non Corporate Circle-8, Chennai. V. M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, 2Nd Floor, No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1280/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Cholamandalam Ms General- Insurance Co. Ltd., Dare House, 2Nd Floor, No.2, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai-600 001. [Pan: Aabcc 6633 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Non Corporate Circle-8, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 115J

opening the assessment were arising from the details submitted by the assessee during the original assessment proceedings, and that without any fresh tangible material in his possession, the AO ought not to have resorted to re-opening of the assessment and inter alia cited the decision

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Moderate Credit Corporation Pvt. Ltd., West Bengal

ITA 6223/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 147

complied with, however, no arguments were raised before the ld CIT(A) with evidences. However, it was argued that there was no fresh tangible material for reopening of the assessment was available with the ld AO but in fact the statement of Shri Asheem Kumar Gupta who is a director

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 901/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

opinion when no fresh material is available, which is not applicable here. o The reopening in the present case is based on fresh tangible material unearthed during the investigation of Shri Mukesh Banka and his associates, revealing the use of shell companies to provide accommodation entries to the appellant

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 875/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

opinion when no fresh material is available, which is not applicable here. o The reopening in the present case is based on fresh tangible material unearthed during the investigation of Shri Mukesh Banka and his associates, revealing the use of shell companies to provide accommodation entries to the appellant

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 872/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

change of opinion when no fresh material is available, which is not applicable here. - The reopening in the present case is based on fresh tangible material unearthed during the investigation of Shri Mukesh Banka and his associates, revealing the use of shell companies to provide accommodation entries to the appellant

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7 Pune, Pune vs. Kolte Patil Integrated Townships Limited, Pune

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

ITA 2023/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

appellant etc. were already available from the financials. The appellant in Ground No.1 has rightly presented the case that there was no fresh tangible material was brought on record to reopen the case. As per the appellant it was merely change of opinion. This Ground is valid as there ... other hand heavily relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. So far as the issue relating to no fresh tangible material was available with the Assessing Officer as per ground No.1 by the Revenue is concerned, he submitted that the assessee company is engaged in real estate

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 7 Pune, Pune vs. Kolte Patil Integrated Townships Limited, Pune

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

ITA 2011/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

appellant etc. were already available from the financials. The appellant in Ground No.1 has rightly presented the case that there was no fresh tangible material was brought on record to reopen the case. As per the appellant it was merely change of opinion. This Ground is valid as there ... other hand heavily relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. So far as the issue relating to no fresh tangible material was available with the Assessing Officer as per ground No.1 by the Revenue is concerned, he submitted that the assessee company is engaged in real estate

The Nicoloson Co-Operative Town Bank Limited, Thanjavur vs. Income Tax Officer, Thanjavur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1783/CHNY/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Mar 2025AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1783/Chny/2024 ननिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Nicoloson Co-Operative Town Income Tax Officer, Bank Ltd., V. Ward (1), No 1120, East Main Street, Thanjavur. Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu 613001. [Pan: Aacft-3931-D] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. V. Alagappan, Ca प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. V. Alagappan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 43D

admit appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: a. In the absence of fresh tangible material there cannot be a formation of belief in vacuum for reopening the assessment ... accrued interest on NPA Loans to Members & other parties and added the same as Income on some incorrect reasoning and without any fresh tangible material. The ld.AR relied on the following judicial :-6-: ITA. No: 1783/Chny/2024 precedents in support of his argument on reopening of assessment

Navbharat Potteries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2700/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 22Section 23(1)(c)Section 250

reported in 288 Taxman 20 (SC) wherein it was held that there is no new tangible material to reopen assessment and existence of fresh tangible material is sine qua non to reopen assessment. Thus, Ld. AR submitted that the reopening of assessment