← All Phrases

“escapement of income”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 1473,765 judgments

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

Leading authorities on escapement of income

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.

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO
236 ITR 34 · 1999 · Supreme Court
862
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings under Section 148, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material to have a reason to believe income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or evaluation of the sufficiency and correctness of such material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice.

CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd.
198 ITR 297 · 1992 · Supreme Court
814
citing judgments

A court's pronouncement derives its scope and color from the specific questions involved in the case, thus, due regard must always be given to the questions framed before the court when interpreting its judgment.

ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das
103 ITR 437 · 1976 · Supreme Court
721
citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings, the 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment must be based on some material and not mere suspicion, establishing a live link between the information and the belief. Furthermore, for reassessment beyond four years, there must be a specific finding of the assessee's failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts.

Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar
268 ITR 332 · 2004 · High Court
695
citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147, by issuing a notice under Section 148, must be judged solely on the reasons originally recorded by the Assessing Officer. These recorded reasons cannot be supplemented, improved upon, or modified at any later stage.

CIT v. Jet Airways (I) Ltd.
331 ITR 236 · 2011 · High Court
694
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer loses jurisdiction and the entire reassessment becomes invalid if no addition is made in respect of the income that formed the basis of the reopening. Explanation 3 to Section 147 does not permit assessing other escaped income unless an addition is made for the original income forming the reason to believe.

PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.
395 ITR 677 · 2017 · High Court
471
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated solely based on an investigation wing/appraisal report, without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment, are beyond jurisdiction, bad in law, and void ab initio.

Judgments citing escapement of income

Moonlight Properties Private Limited, Mohali vs. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is

ITA 216/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate and Shri Ashok Goyal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 203ASection 36(1)(iii)

Prestressing Co. (P) Ltd. Vs Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax” [2023] 154 taxmann.com 325 (Bom), it was held that the reasons to believe escapement of income recorded in that ITA 216/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2014-15 10 case were purely on the basis that the petitioner had advanced borrowed capital

Hem Lata Jhunjhunwala, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-11(2), Kolkata.

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in this respect for AY 2011-12 are allowed

ITA 751/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kataruka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

entire amount of commodity profit reported by the assessee in her original return has been subjected to due tax and there is no escapement of income on the part of the assessee which can be attributed in respect of the commodity profit already reported Hem Lata Jhunjhunwala ... Hence, after 1st April, 1989, AO 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.” 7.6. We also take assistance from the decision

Hem Lata Jhunjhunwala, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-11(2), Kolkata.

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in this respect for AY 2011-12 are allowed

ITA 750/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kataruka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Addl. CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

entire amount of commodity profit reported by the assessee in her original return has been subjected to due tax and there is no escapement of income on the part of the assessee which can be attributed in respect of the commodity profit already reported Hem Lata Jhunjhunwala ... Hence, after 1st April, 1989, AO 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.” 7.6. We also take assistance from the decision

ITO, International Taxation Ward1(2), Chennai vs. Rajamanickam Arulselvan, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 479/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.479/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & C.O. No. 44/Chny/2023 [In I.T.A. No. 479/Chny/2023] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Rajamanickam Arulselvan, 65, Defence Officer Colony, 2Nd International Taxation Ward 1(2), Bsnl Building Tower-1, 4Th Floor, Avenue, 6Th Cross Street, Guindy, Greams Road, Thousand Light, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Chennai 600 006. Chennai 600 032. [Pan:Aappa2346C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Manjunatha, G.: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai, Dated 22.02.2023 Passed In Ita No. 10039/Cit(A)-16/2012-2013 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds: 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On The Facts, The Merits Of The Case & Provisions Of Law As Well & Hence Unsustainable. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Failing To Appreciate That When The Assessee Had Applied For Conversion Of The Vacant Land Into A Plotted

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 45(3)

legality of reopening 14 I.T.A. No.479/Chny/23 & C.O. No. 44/Chny/23 based on the tangible material on which reasons recorded that there is an escapement of income was formed by the Assessing Officer. In the present case, reasons for reopening assessment was on the basis of fresh material which came

Thota Venkateswara Rao, Kakinada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 221/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Thota Venkateswara Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.67-21-12/4 Ward-1 Lb Nagar Ss Kakinada Kakinada [Pan : Abipt6770F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 187(3)Section 69A

provisions of section 197(b) of IDS 2016, issued notice to the assessee u/s 148 of the Act, stating that there is escapement of income of Rs.1.3 crores as admitted under IDS for the A.Y.2017-18. The Ld.AR further submitted that the AO also failed to give credit to the first ... after 1-4- 1989 , 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. Respectfully following the above ratio laid down in the decision

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -23(1), Mumbai vs. Kalpsaru Diamonds, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3400/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, Acit 23(2), Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. Cit-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth Floor, Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

information received from DGIT (Investigation), without forming on information received from DGIT (Investigation), without forming independent belief by AO with regard to escapement of income. independent belief by AO with regard to escapement of income. independent belief by AO with regard to escapement of income. II: DISALLOWANCES OF BOGUS PURCHASES ... fact of actual escaped assessment but not establishment of the fact of actual escaped assessment but not establishment of the fact of actual escapement of income. Accordingly, while issuing notice u/s.148 of escapement of income. Accordingly, while issuing notice u/s.148 of escapement of income. Accordingly, while issuing notice u/s.148

Kalpsaru Diamonds, Mumbai vs. ACIT 23(2), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3223/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, Acit 23(2), Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. Cit-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth Floor, Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

information received from DGIT (Investigation), without forming on information received from DGIT (Investigation), without forming independent belief by AO with regard to escapement of income. independent belief by AO with regard to escapement of income. independent belief by AO with regard to escapement of income. II: DISALLOWANCES OF BOGUS PURCHASES ... fact of actual escaped assessment but not establishment of the fact of actual escaped assessment but not establishment of the fact of actual escapement of income. Accordingly, while issuing notice u/s.148 of escapement of income. Accordingly, while issuing notice u/s.148 of escapement of income. Accordingly, while issuing notice u/s.148

M/S Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1638/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

opening of assessment has been carried out on the basis of ‘change of opinion’ without there being any fresh tangible material which suggest escapement of income. The assessee had also challenged re-assessment on the ground that the assessment has been re-opened after a period of four years from ... were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. The AO has re-opened the assessments on the basis of reasons recorded as per which, escapement of income on account of under assessment of rental income received from let out of property, but fact remains that rental income from

M/S Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1637/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

opening of assessment has been carried out on the basis of ‘change of opinion’ without there being any fresh tangible material which suggest escapement of income. The assessee had also challenged re-assessment on the ground that the assessment has been re-opened after a period of four years from ... were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. The AO has re-opened the assessments on the basis of reasons recorded as per which, escapement of income on account of under assessment of rental income received from let out of property, but fact remains that rental income from

Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1636/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

opening of assessment has been carried out on the basis of ‘change of opinion’ without there being any fresh tangible material which suggest escapement of income. The assessee had also challenged re-assessment on the ground that the assessment has been re-opened after a period of four years from ... were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. The AO has re-opened the assessments on the basis of reasons recorded as per which, escapement of income on account of under assessment of rental income received from let out of property, but fact remains that rental income from

M/S Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1635/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

opening of assessment has been carried out on the basis of ‘change of opinion’ without there being any fresh tangible material which suggest escapement of income. The assessee had also challenged re-assessment on the ground that the assessment has been re-opened after a period of four years from ... were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. The AO has re-opened the assessments on the basis of reasons recorded as per which, escapement of income on account of under assessment of rental income received from let out of property, but fact remains that rental income from

M/S Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1634/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

opening of assessment has been carried out on the basis of ‘change of opinion’ without there being any fresh tangible material which suggest escapement of income. The assessee had also challenged re-assessment on the ground that the assessment has been re-opened after a period of four years from ... were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. The AO has re-opened the assessments on the basis of reasons recorded as per which, escapement of income on account of under assessment of rental income received from let out of property, but fact remains that rental income from

Avm Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1633/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

opening of assessment has been carried out on the basis of ‘change of opinion’ without there being any fresh tangible material which suggest escapement of income. The assessee had also challenged re-assessment on the ground that the assessment has been re-opened after a period of four years from ... were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. The AO has re-opened the assessments on the basis of reasons recorded as per which, escapement of income on account of under assessment of rental income received from let out of property, but fact remains that rental income from

M/S. A V M Charities, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to 2018-19 are partly allowed

ITA 1632/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna, FCA &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 13(1)(c)Section 147Section 164(2)

opening of assessment has been carried out on the basis of ‘change of opinion’ without there being any fresh tangible material which suggest escapement of income. The assessee had also challenged re-assessment on the ground that the assessment has been re-opened after a period of four years from ... were completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. The AO has re-opened the assessments on the basis of reasons recorded as per which, escapement of income on account of under assessment of rental income received from let out of property, but fact remains that rental income from

Pooja Developers, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward-29(2)(5), (Current Juridiction: Ward-41(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3690/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3690/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2009-10) Pooja Developers बिधम/ Ito-29(2)(5) Shop No. 4 (Damini Wines) [Current Jurisdiction Vs. Shiv Shakti Building, Jn Ward 41(1)(3), Mumbai] Road, Near Apna Bazar, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Mumbai-400080. Kurla Complex, Mumbai- 400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaifp5595M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Snehal Shah Revenue By: Shri H. M. Bhatt (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Snehal ShahFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 801B(10)Section 80I

been allowed excess deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act in the year under consideration, therefore he had the “Reasons to believe, escapement of income”. 4. In this context, the Ld. AR brought to our notice that similar issue [deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act within time limit] came ... April 1989, the Assessing Officer has power to re- open provided there is tangible material to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment. Reasons must have a live link with the formation of belief. If we apply the aforesaid ratio laid down

The ITO, Ward-7(2)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Piyushbhai Bhailalbhai Hirpara, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and that of the assessee’s CO are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 553/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt. Madhumita Roywith Cross Objection No.16/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Ito, Ward-7(2)(1) Vs. Shri Piyushbhai Bhailalbhai Hirpara Ahmedabad. A/24, 1055/1064, Badrinarayan Society Nr.Sub-Station B/H. Thakkarbapa Nagar Ahmedabad 382 350, Gujarat. Pan : Aclph 3966 M 0 अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" य थ"/(Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" य थ" थ" Assessee By : Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, Ar Revenue By : Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, ARFor Respondent: Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 250(6)Section 69A

adjudicated by the ld.CIT(A), though, submissions in this regard were made before him, pointing out that the reasons recorded for escapement of income of the assessee were based on borrowed belief of the Investigation Wing, and no independent inquiry had been conducted by the AO to arrive ... satisfaction for escapement of income, which is a necessary pre-requisite for assuming jurisdiction to frame assessment under section 147 of the Act. 14. The ld.DR prayed that since the issue on merits requires reconsideration by the ld.CIT(A) and the legal ground has not been dealt with

Pataka Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata Presently Circle-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 342/KOL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 201(1)Section 40

condition prescribed in the 1st proviso to section 4 Pataka Industries Pvt. Ltd. AY 2010-11 147 needs to be satisfied i.e. the escapement of income is due to the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts during the assessment. 5.1. According

Priyasha Meven Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3814/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3814/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16) Priyasha Meven Finance बिधम/ Acit, Circle-4(2)(1) Ltd Room No. 642/669, Vs. R 404 Rotunda Building, Aayakar Bhawan, M. K. Bombay Samachar Marg, Road, Mumbai-400020. Fort-400001. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcp2042F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mani Jain Revenue By: Shri H. M. Bhatt (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi, Dated 28.08.2023 For Ay. 2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of The Reopening By Ao (Jurisdiction) U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). So The Legal Issue Is Taken Up First. According To The Ld. Ar, The Assessee Had Not Taken This Legal Issue Before The Ld. Cit(A). However, According To Him, Since It Is A Legal Issue, It Can Be Raised For The First Time Before This Tribunal & For Such A Preposition Relied Upon The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Ntpc Vs. Cit (229 Itr 383) (Sc). Per Contra, The Ld. Dr Objects To Raising Of This Legal Issue Before This Tribunal For The First Time. According To Him, The Assessee Had Not Taken Up This Issue Before The Ld. Cit(A), Therefore, The Same Should Be Remanded Back To The File Of The Ld.

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt (Sr. DR)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

director of assessee company) at best could have triggered “Reason to Suspect” and not the essential condition precedent viz “Reasons to believe, escapement of income”. According to the Ld. AR, when the AO got information (in this case ex-parte SEBI interim order) against director of the assessee company ... could have triggered the AO to suspect escapement of income either in the hands of the director of the assessee company Shri Nikhil Jalan or the assessee company. In such an event, according to Ld AR, the AO before resorting to re- opening/recording the reason to re-open the assessment

Reena Rakesh Kothari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-26(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2184/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Reena Rakesh Kothari Income Tax Officer 28-A, Kamgar Nagar, Ward 26(2)(5), S.G. Barve Marg, Kautilya Bhavan, Vs. Kurla (East), Bandra, Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahlpk7422J Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, DR
Section 10Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

approval/ sanction are also without application of mind. 014. Thus no reason to believe can be formed by LD AO with respect to escapement of income prior to the dates for filing of Return of Income. Explanation 2 (a) to section 147 of the Act also does not make

Maple Destinations and Dreambuild Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(1), New Delhi

ITA 1509/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.M/S. Maple Deputy Commissioner Of Destinations & Income Tax, Dreambuild Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Circle -16(1), Farm No. 3E, Dera New Delhi Mandi Bandh Road, Mandi. Village Tehsil Hauzkas, Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan : Aahcm2850J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. K. Sampath, Sh. Raj Kumar, Adv. & Sh. Vishal Sahgal, Ca Respondent By Sh. Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit Dr

Section 147Section 148Section 69

permission for cross– Maple Destinations and Dreambuild Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT examination of the persons on whose statements the entire belief of escapement of income rested. Therefore, submitted that failure of the authorities below to grant opportunity of cross examining the witnesses vitiates the reassessment as invalid. The value ... Maple Destinations and Dreambuild Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT making the addition. The AO while recording his belief for the escapement of income of the assessee, had heavily banked on the statement recorded on oath of Sh. Picheswar Gadde, Sh. Rakesh Sejwal, Sh. V. Chandrashekshar and CA Neha Kukreja