← 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Subhash Kumar Kedia, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 707/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.707/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Subhash Kumar Kedia Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afvpk8915Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 405/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs. Shri Bikash Kumar Asstt. C. I. T. Kedia Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afapk8794E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vamshi Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Dated 31/01/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Vamshi Krishna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

assessment of Long-Term Capital Gain derived from purchase and sale of shares. From the above, it is undisputedly clear that there is fresh tangible material in the form of material, found during the course of survey which is subsequent to completion of assessment for the impugned A.Ys and therefore ... argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee that the reopening of the assessment was not based on any fresh tangible material but merely on change of opinion is devoid of any merit and unsustainable. Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills

Bikash Kumar Kedia, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 405/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.707/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Subhash Kumar Kedia Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afvpk8915Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 405/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs. Shri Bikash Kumar Asstt. C. I. T. Kedia Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afapk8794E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vamshi Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Dated 31/01/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Vamshi Krishna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

assessment of Long-Term Capital Gain derived from purchase and sale of shares. From the above, it is undisputedly clear that there is fresh tangible material in the form of material, found during the course of survey which is subsequent to completion of assessment for the impugned A.Ys and therefore ... argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee that the reopening of the assessment was not based on any fresh tangible material but merely on change of opinion is devoid of any merit and unsustainable. Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills

Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle-5, Pune vs. Renu Electronics Private Limited, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 353/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.353/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant V Renu Electronics Private Commissioner Of S Limited, S.No.2/6, Near Baner Income Tax, Circle-5, Telephone Exchange, Baner, Pune. Pune – 411045. Pan: Aaacr8741G Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Cross Objection No.18/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant V Renu Electronics Private Commissioner Of S Limited, S.No.2/6, Near Baner Income Tax, Circle-5, Telephone Exchange, Baner, Pune. Pune – 411045. Pan: Aaacr8741G Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri Nikhil Pathak – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/10/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Are Two Appeals Ita No.353/Pun/2024 Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection C.O. No.18/Pun/2024 Filed By The

Section 10ASection 142(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 32(1)(iia)

material facts, the reopening u/s 148 be declared null and void. 3) The assessee submits that in this case there was no fresh tangible material with the A.O. for reopening the case and hence, the reopening u/s 148 is invalid in law and accordingly, the reasst. order be declared null

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ankur Agrawal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2308/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2011-12 Acit 4(1)(1), Mumbai Ankur Agrawal 2401, 2402, Anmol Pride, Opp. Vs. Patel Auto Petrol Pump, Off Sv Road Goregaon West, Mumbai- 400062. Pan: Akopa 7201 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

Ankur Agrawal A.Y. 2011-12 disclosed in the original assessment proceedings. He also submitted that reopening of the assessment was based on fresh tangible material and there was no change of opinion made by the AO. 7. Arguments of both the sides have been heard at length on the Rule

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Ernakulam, Kerala

ITA 749/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Assessing Officer invoked section 148/147 mechanism without even indicating in the above extracted reasons as to whether any fresh tangible material existed herein or not. We find in this factual backdrop that Indu Lata Rangwala vs. DCIT [2016] 384 ITR 337 (Del) holds in para 35.6 that such fresh tangible ... material ought to form the basis for initiating sec.148/147 proceedings. We make it clear that there is no fresh tangible material before us in the case records. This assessee’s appeal ITA.No.735/Coch./2023 succeeds in very terms thereby all issues on merits stand render academic. Ordered accordingly. ITA.No.749/Coch

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi, Kerala

ITA 736/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Assessing Officer invoked section 148/147 mechanism without even indicating in the above extracted reasons as to whether any fresh tangible material existed herein or not. We find in this factual backdrop that Indu Lata Rangwala vs. DCIT [2016] 384 ITR 337 (Del) holds in para 35.6 that such fresh tangible ... material ought to form the basis for initiating sec.148/147 proceedings. We make it clear that there is no fresh tangible material before us in the case records. This assessee’s appeal ITA.No.735/Coch./2023 succeeds in very terms thereby all issues on merits stand render academic. Ordered accordingly. ITA.No.749/Coch

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi, Ernakulam, Kerala

ITA 735/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Assessing Officer invoked section 148/147 mechanism without even indicating in the above extracted reasons as to whether any fresh tangible material existed herein or not. We find in this factual backdrop that Indu Lata Rangwala vs. DCIT [2016] 384 ITR 337 (Del) holds in para 35.6 that such fresh tangible ... material ought to form the basis for initiating sec.148/147 proceedings. We make it clear that there is no fresh tangible material before us in the case records. This assessee’s appeal ITA.No.735/Coch./2023 succeeds in very terms thereby all issues on merits stand render academic. Ordered accordingly. ITA.No.749/Coch

M/S Madras Race Club, Chennai vs. DCIT, Cenral Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 688/CHNY/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Bleshri Manu Kumar Giriand Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.688/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2007-2008 M/S.Madras Race Club, The Deputy Commissioner Of Race Course Road, Vs. Income Tax, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Central Circle 1(2) Guindy, Chennai Chennai 600 032. Pan: Aaacm 7640R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Irs, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. V. Nandakumar, IRS, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Assessing Officer could not have validly reopened an assessment. In the present case, the AO has reopened the original assessment with no fresh tangible material but based on the material available in the assessment records which was also taken upto the CIT(A). Therefore, the action of the AO/CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Futura Travels Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 723/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kapoor, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

claim of deduction towards prior period expenses. Assessee claims that doubt raised by the Ld. Assessing Officer is not based on any fresh tangible material but merely an attempt to probe the matter further. On the first issue relating to claim of deduction towards prior period interest cost

Sarojben Rajkumar Bansal Legal Heir of Late Rajkumar Kakaram Bansal, Bhavnagar vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bhavnagar

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

ITA 306/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.306/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sarojben Rajkumar Bansal The Dy.Cit बनाम/ Legal Heir Of Circle-1 V/S. Late Shri Rajkumar Kakaram Bhavnagar – 364 001 Bansal Plot No.1497/B, Opp. Theosophical Lodge Bhavnagar, Gujarat 364 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aanpb 1618 G अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prithviraj Meena, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

pointed out that the original assessment had accepted the returned income of the assessee and that there was no fresh tangible material justifying the reopening of the concluded assessment. The failure of the CIT(A) to deal with this fundamental challenge to the reopening of assessment goes against the Sarojben ... also note that the original assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed after accepting the returned income, and no fresh tangible material was brought on record to justify the reopening of the assessment. The addition under section 68 of the Act was made without providing the assessee

Regalia Laminates, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 62(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 764/DEL/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Regalia Laminates Mcd Vs Income Tax Officer Buliding, Ist Floor Db Gupta Ward- 62 (5) Road Paharganj, New Delhi- New Delhi 110055 Pan No. Aaifr7691F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

account books and other evidence, 85 while Explanation (1) may not lead to an automatic presumption of disclosure, unless there is some fresh tangible material available with the AO, he will not be able to show that there was a failure on the part of a Assessee to disclose fully

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Sew Infrastructure Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1717/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.K. ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Smt. Mamata Choudhary
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

invoke provisions of Section 147 of the Act, there should be income which has escaped assessment, and such escapement should be based on fresh tangible material which comes to the possession of the AO subsequent to the completion of the original assessment and further, the formation of belief of escapement ... income should have a live nexus with reasons to believe and fresh tangible material. Similarly, the provisions of Section 153A deal with assessment in case of search or requisition, and as per the said provisions, notwithstanding anything contained in certain provisions of the Act, in case of a person where

Ishoo Narang, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2022 & S.A. No.1/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ishoo Narang Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaupn9082B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/07/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Al The Mandatory Preconditions Before Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Were Duly Complied & Met With By The A.O.

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT (DR)
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 147Section 68

ground that the reopening of the assessment is merely on the basis of change of opinion without there being any fresh tangible material which suggests escapement of income. The appellant has also challenged the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards the consideration received from sale of shares in light ... assessment of Long-Term Capital Gain derived from purchase and sale of shares. From the above, it is undisputedly clear that there is fresh tangible material in the form of material, found during the course of survey which is subsequent to completion of assessment for the Page

ACIT, Circle 1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Sml Isuzu Ltd., Chandigarh

ITA 644/CHANDI/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate and Ms. Somya Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 3

27/09/2021 is bad in law for reasons as under: (a) No escapement of income – reassessment proceedings without jurisdiction and illegal. (b) No fresh / tangible material to reopen the closed assessment and proceedings initiated merely on the basis of change of opinion on existing facts. (c) Legal objections filed ... filed by the assessee on the income tax e-filing portal; (i i ) There is no requirement to have any fresh tangible material for reopening in terms of section 148 of the Act; (iii) The present case is not a case of change in opinion; (iv) On merits - allowability

Amancherla Venkata Prabhakar Rao, Nellore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Nellore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 243/HYD/2020[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad18 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.243/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri Amancherla Venkata Vs. Income Tax Officer P:Rabhakar Rao, Ward 5 Nellore Nellore Pan:Agspa2284N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate Vvsc Muralidhar Rao राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Rahul Singhania, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 18/09/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate VVSC Muralidhar RaoFor Respondent: : Shri Rahul Singhania, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

further submitted that the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment based on information available with the assessment folder without there being any fresh tangible material and also without any allegation on the appellant for failing to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Therefore, he submitted that