← 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

Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 5623/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usshri Rajesh Kumar Vs. Jcit 1/3256, Ram Nagar, Range – 45, Mandoli Road, Shahdara New Delhi Delhi-110032 Pan No. Agfpk 1653 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Y. K. Kapoor, Adv. Revenue By Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2023

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 24Section 54B

income which has escaped assessment.” 5. Referring to the above, Learned Counsel for the assessee pleaded that no information for escapement of income has come to the Assessing Officer. It is all from the material on record that he has picked up and stated that this is escapement of income

M/S. Premji Valji & Sons (Jewellers) P. Ltd., Rajkot vs. The DCIT, Circle - 2 (1), Rajkot

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

ITA 257/RJT/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant, Judic Member आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.257 & 223/Rjt/2022 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S Premji Valji & Sons D.C.I.T, (Jewellers) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Circle-2(1), “Kuvarjibhai Tower” Rakot. Palace Road, Rajkot-360001. Pan: Aaccp2555N

For Appellant: Shri Ranjit Lalchandani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

case of the assessee dated 29th March 2013. Thereafter, the assessee was made subject to the escapement of income tax proceedings and hence, the assessment was again framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 12th February 2015. As per the ld. Authorized Representative, the issue

Income Tax Officer-1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Sohni Depak Tanna, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned assessing officer and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2245/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm C.O.No. 135/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2014-15) Sohni Dipak Tanna Ito 1(1)(1), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Tanna House, 11A, 534, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acept3611J Sohni Dipak Tanna Ito 1(1)(1), Mumbai 2Nd Floor, Tanna House, 11A, 534, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Nathlal Parekh Marg, M. K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acept3611J Assessee By : Shri. Madhur Agrawal & Pankaj Jain Revenue By : Shri. Kishor Dhule Date Of Hearing: 03.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Madhur Agrawal & PankajFor Respondent: Shri. Kishor Dhule
Section 10Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 68

part of price rigging/price manipulation. v. There is no material on the basis of which reasonable believe would have been formed for escapement of income and therefore reopening is on the basis of suspicion is and not on any concrete material. 08. The learned AO passed an order rejecting ... submitted that the information was received by the learned assessing officer and therefore there has to be only a prima facie belief of escapement of income is required to be verified. At that particular time when the reasons were recorded, the learned assessing officer was not required to record

Shri Mohammad Abbas Ashraf, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Srinagar

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

ITA 207/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Yashender Garg, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 44A

reasons recorded by the AO for issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act were invalid, being reasons not sufficient to believe escapement of income, based on vague information. Further reliance is made on latest judgement Dinesh kumar Dalsangbhai Chaudhary Kankavati Society Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmcdabad) Appeal Number

Aaradhna Develpoers Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Surat

ITA 179/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that reopening under section 147 in the present case is not valid, there was no escapement of income at all, thus, the assessment order passed in pursuance thereof is void ad initio and is liable to be declared as such

Aaradhna Develpoers Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Surat

ITA 178/SRT/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that reopening under section 147 in the present case is not valid, there was no escapement of income at all, thus, the assessment order passed in pursuance thereof is void ad initio and is liable to be declared as such

Aaradhna Develpoers Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), Surat

ITA 177/SRT/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that reopening under section 147 in the present case is not valid, there was no escapement of income at all, thus, the assessment order passed in pursuance thereof is void ad initio and is liable to be declared as such

Sh. Sanjeet S/O Shri Dharmbeer, Rewadi vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Alwar

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

ITA 483/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A). Considering These Facts, We Have Rejected The Adjournment Application. The Ld. D/R Is Ready With The Arguments

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 250

year under consideration. The AO issued letter dated 04.01.2017 to the assessee but no reply was filed by the assessee regarding the escapement of income of Rs. 3,00,000/- for the year under consideration. In view of this information proceedings under section 147 of the IT Act were initiated

Shri Khandelwal Diamonds Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 375/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Him On The Reason Of Issuing Notice U/S 148 On Borrowed Satisfaction Of Another Wing Of The Department.

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Khandelwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 148

claimed as deduction under Chapter-III or under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act. (vi) where there is information regarding escapement of income. In this case, appellant's case was reopened on the basis of information that a search and seizure action under section ... basis of DVO’s report the reassessment proceedings could not have been initiated in the absence of Assessing Officer’s own satisfaction about escapement of income from tax. The Tribunal found that the opinion about the escapement of income from tax ought to be of the Assessing Officer himself

Cricket South Africa (Npc), South Africa vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 604/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 148Section 194ESection 195

could not be ascertained. Further, drawing our attention to paragraph 4 of the reasons recorded, he submitted that the Assessing Officer, while alleging escapement of income has referred to M/s. Cricket Australia not filing return of income in India. Thus, he submitted, the reasons recorded reveal complete non-application ... used as a tool for harassment to the assessee. Unless there is concrete evidence and tangible material before the Assessing Officer indicating escapement of income, powers under Section 147 of the Act should not be exercised. However, this is not the case in the present appeal. Not only the Assessing

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Raipur vs. Meserss T.C. Buildcon Private Limited, Raipur

In the result CO filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 173/RPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Tc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Vasudev, B-5, Sector-5, Raipur, (C.G.) Devendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aacct4516F Cross Objection No. 26/Rpr/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 173/Rpr/2019) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Tc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Vasudev, B-5, Sector-5, Raipur, (C.G.) Devendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aacct4516F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16-08-2023 घोषणाक" तार"ख/Date : 27-10-2023 Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

this judgment Hon’ble Delhi HC has held that: “In absence of any tangible material available with AO to form requisite relief regarding escapement of income, reopening u/s 147 of assessment made u/s 143(1) is without jurisdiction.” 5.3 On the other hand, Ld. CIT(DR) opposed the objection raised

The Income Tax Officer Ward, 2, Raigarh(Cg) vs. Shri Shri Bishambhar Dayal Agrawal, Jashpur (C.G.)

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 223/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 223/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer-2, Raigarh (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 41(4)Section 69

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. Our view gets support from the changes made

Income Tax Officer, Surat vs. Magnifique Gems Private Limited, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 458/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.389 & 458/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Magnifique Gems Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 105, Rajshree Building, Maniyara 1(1)(4), Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Sheri Na Naka,Mahidharpura, Near Majura Gate, Opp. New Surat-395003. Civil Hospital, Surat-395001

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

No.03/2028 which is not applicable in this case as the assessment was completed on 30.12.2018 and also on the basis of information regarding escapement of income. 4. On the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld

Magnifique Gems Private Limited, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1)(4), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 389/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.389 & 458/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Magnifique Gems Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 105, Rajshree Building, Maniyara 1(1)(4), Surat, Aayakar Bhawan, Sheri Na Naka,Mahidharpura, Near Majura Gate, Opp. New Surat-395003. Civil Hospital, Surat-395001

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

No.03/2028 which is not applicable in this case as the assessment was completed on 30.12.2018 and also on the basis of information regarding escapement of income. 4. On the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld

Viral Lavjibhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), Surat

In the result, assessee`s appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 450/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.450/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) Viral Lavjibhai Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, A-18, Naginawadi Society, Ward-3(3)(5), Surat, Aaykar Sumul Dairy Road, Bhawan, Majura Gate, Opp. Surat – 395004. New Civil Hospital, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alvpp2897E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/10/2023

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

Counsel further contended that Assessing Officer was not having any material information to form "a reason to believe" that there was an escapement of income. The ld Counsel further submitted that cash deposit in the bank account is not an income of the assessee, which has escaped assessment, for that ... ground is related to the technical issue of reopening. The appellant had submitted that the AO should not come to a conclusion of escapement of income only based on the non-filing of the return of income and cash deposits made in the bank account. He argued that there shall

Bona Sera Hospitality Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Range 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1750/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1750/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Bona Sera Hospitality Pvt. बिधम/ Dcit, Range-7(2) Ltd. 6Th Floor, Aayakar Vs. M/S. Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Bhawan, M. K. Road, Llp, Esplanade House, 2Nd Mumbai-400020. Floor, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400001. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakcs7518L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M. M. Golvala & Shri Hormuzd Jamshedji Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 10/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/10/2023 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. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 24.03.2023 For Ay. 2011-12. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Partly Allowing The Appeal Of Assessee By Directing Ao To Verify Addition Of Rs.1,91,956/- & Rs.4,74,558/-. & For Not Deleting Rs.3,67,773/- (Amount Assessee Could Has Not Reconcile).

For Appellant: Shri M. M. Golvala & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (Sr. DR)

current year and the corresponding revenue shown by assessee is much more. So according to assessee, there is no escapement of income. According to assessee, it is evident from the 5 A.Y. 2011-12 Sera Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. AIR information itself that revenue as per the 26AS was only

Saraswati Garewal, Bilaspur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Bilaspur

In the result ground no. 1 of the assessee in terms of our aforesaid observations is allowed

ITA 166/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Saraswati Garewal, V Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), C/O Shivbhajan, Vill: Pendridih, S Bilaspur Post: Hirri Mines, Bilaspur – 495222, (C.G.) Pan: Bizpg5287R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) . (""यथ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri R.B. Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of : 13/10/2023 Hearing घोषणाक" तार"ख/Date : 25/10/2023 Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

facts. 2. The Ld. AO erred in issuing notice u/s 147 of the Act. The cash deposit in the bank does not mean escapement of income. 3. The Ld. AO erred in making additions u/s 69A of the Act. 2 I.T.A. No.166/RPR/2022 4. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in sustaining

Himanshu Goyal, Dhamtari vs. Pr. CIT-1, Raipur

In the result legal grounds raised by the assessee under present appeal is allowed

ITA 144/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.144/Rpr/2022 (Assessment Years: 2012-2013) Himanshu Goyal, Vs Pr.Cit, Raipur-1, Raipur Nawagaon Road, Dhamtari, 793773, (C.G.) Pan No. :Agtpg1746Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Praveen Goyal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Praveen KhandelwalFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 263

since there was no addition on the basis of reasons to believe initially formed by the ld. AO, shows that there was no escapement of income, however, there was a different ground or reason to believe 14 based on which ld. Pr.CIT has initiated the proceedings u/s.263 ... Pr.CIT u/s.263 of the Act were on an issue which was not forming a belief of the revenue that there was some escapement of income on the basis of sch reason. The original issue forming the reason to believe that the escaped assessment was relating to certain transactions with

Antima Rameshkumar Malpani, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(1), Surat

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

ITA 490/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Hybrid Hearing) Antima Rameshkumar Malpani, I.T.O., B-301 Gokuldham Society, Parvat Ward-2(3)(1), Vs. Patiya, Surat (Gujarat)-395010. Surat. Pan No. Akhpm 1951 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 144Section 147Section 254(1)Section 69A

invocation of Sec. 147 by the Ld. A.O. is unjustified and illegal as no reasonable person could have jumped to the conclusion of escapement of income on the basis of the material, then available with the Ld. A.O. 2. The initiation of proceedings u/s 147, appear to have been vitiated

Barcelona Mercantile Company Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Ward 12(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2346/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay N. KapadiaaFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

relevant. In other words, at the initiation stage, what is required is "reason to believe", but not the established fact of escapement of income. At the stage of issue of notice, the only question is whether there Barcelona Mercantile Company Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.2346/Mum./2023 was relevant material on which