“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

Motorola Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Gurgaon

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 672/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usi.T.A. No. 672/Del/2018 (A.Y 2008-09)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 234BSection 244ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 43B

relevant assessment, it is incumbent upon the Assessing Officer to make specific assertion the reasons recorded to the effect that escapement of income have any is on the 11 ITA. 672/Del/2018 Motorola Solutions India account of failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly material facts relating

Maxtech Realty Pvt. Ltd(Formerly Known As Nandivardhan Construction Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-2, Thane

ITA 690/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain & Shri Prateek JainFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Ld. DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153(3)Section 153ASection 250

total income of the assessee while passing order under section 153(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T. Act. This resulted in escapement of income to the extent of Rs. 2 Crore for A.Y. 2009-10. 5. In view of the above facts of the case, assessment

The ACIT Cent. Cir-6(4), Mumbai vs. Airmid Developers Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue/Department stands dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2381/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrythe Acit, Cc-6(4), Vs Airmid Developers Ltd. Room No. 1925, 19Th M-62 & 63, 1St Floor, Floor, Connought Place, Air India Building, New Delhi-110001. Nariman Point, Pan: Aagca5601G Mumbai-400021. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. K. Gopal, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

excess of the jurisdiction and restraint imposed by the first proviso of section 147 of the Act. Further a general statement that the escapement of income is by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for escapement of assessment

Mr Gajanan Parshuram Khismatrao, Thane vs. ITO Ward 3(2), Kalyan

ITA 817/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Pranav PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash Singh

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 50C

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 was relevant material on which a reasonable person could have formed a requisite

Prashant Chandra Sadh, Mumbai vs. ITO International Tax-4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 619/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleprashant Chandrasadh, Ito,(Intltax),C4(2)(1), C-1804, Oberoi Woods, Room.No.1708, बनाम/ Off Western Express Air India Building, Vs. Highway,Goregaon East, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400063. Mumba-400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Biips5544N (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.ARFor Respondent: Mr.Soumendu Kumar Dash.DR

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 194ISection 68

Officer erred in making addition on account of sale of property without appreciating ITA 619/Mum/2022 Prashant Chandra Sadh. Mumbai that there is no escapement of income under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That the addition is unjustified and ought to be deleted. 3. The Ld. Assessing Officer ... omitted erroneously. 4 | P a g e ITA 619/Mum/2022 Prashant Chandra Sadh. Mumbai Although this did not result in any escapement of income, to put the records straight, we are submitting herewith a REVISED COMPUTATION OF INCOME for your perusal and record. (Annexure A). We are submitting this additional information

ACIT Circle-11(2), New Delhi vs. Humboldt Wedag India Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1413/DEL/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148

initiating re-assessment proceedings. 4. The reassessment proceedings were concluded and the taxable income was re-assesed at Rs.23,30,89240/- (including alleged escapement of income of Rs.69,08,000/- vide reassessment order dated 28.03.2014 passed under Section 147 r.w. Section 143(3) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved

Humboldt Wedag India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-11(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1299/DEL/2020[206-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2023

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148

Dy, CIT 6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Epc Offshore Subsea Projects Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3834/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2023AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Biswanath DasFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

held that after 01/04/1989 , Assessing Officer has power to reopen, provided there is ‘tangible material’ to come to the conclusion that there is escapement of income from assessment and that the reasons must have a live link with the formation of the belief. On perusal of the reasons recorded

Keshnath Sahu, Dhamtari vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dhamtari, Dhamtari

ITA 135/RPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.135/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Keshnath Sahu Shri Balaji Construction Company, Near Power House, Kathuriya Complex, Ratnabandha Road, Dhamtari (C.G)-493 773 Pan : Cqips0706B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dhamtari (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 69

initiation of reassessment and invocation of Sec.147 is illegal, ab initio void inasmuch as there was no “reason to believe” that there was escapement of income. The initiation of reassessment and consequent reassessment order passed is illegal, unsustainable, ab initio void.” 3 Keshnath Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-Dhamtari 2. Succinctly ... support his said contention, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as the initiation of proceedings u/s.147 of the Act presupposes escapement of income of the assessee chargeable to tax, therefore, as had been expounded by the Hon’ble Courts in host of judicial pronouncements, a mere doubt

M/S. Patel Ambalal Hargovandas & Co., Surat vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-2, Surat

In the results, appeal filed by Revenue (in IT(SS)A Nos

ITA 185/SRT/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं/.It(Ss)A No.49/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Hearing) The Acit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Rasikbhai Narottamdas Patel, Surat. Flat No.9-10, Mahavir Nagar Co.Op H.S. Ltd., Bldg-12, Nr. Gayatri Mandir, Udhna Magdalla Road, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Adgpp4550M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.It(Ss)A No.86/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2015-16) The Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vs. Ashish Karamshibhai Koshiya, Surat. 40, Jivandeep Soceity, Singanpor Road, Katargam, Surat, Gujarat – 395004. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aojpk1118G (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.185/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2020-21) M/S. Patel Ambalal Hargovandas Vs. The Dcit, Central Circle-2 & Co., Surat. 5/725, Haripura, Bhavaniwad, Opp. Dhobi Sheri, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aadfp2517N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Shri Vartik Choksi, Shri Biren Shah & Shri Respondent By Nitin Gheewala, Ar Date Of Hearing 26/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26/05/2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 292CSection 69C

simply mentioned that the assessee had not disclosed any income from the accommodation entries, therefore, this is a clear cut escapement of income. In this situation, we clearly observe that the target of the AO in the reasons recorded was Shri Subodh Gupta, CA and not the assessee company ... Obviously there is no place for "doubt' in the scheme of reassessment, as it has to be belief of the AO about the escapement of income, which is the foundation for assessment or reassessment u/s 147. Even if for a moment we agree with the Id. DR that the protective

Shri Arun Narula, Ferozepur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Amritsar

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 14/ASR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 80C

chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, that he may assess or reassess such income. Thus, the reason to believe escapement of income has necessarily to be that of the AO only and not of any other authority. In CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking ... empowered to assess or re-assess the income which has escaped assessment. So at the most, if the Revenue wishes to tax the escapement of income then it has followed the scheme provided under the Act. The relevant provisions for taxing the escape income are given u/s 147/263

Shri Arun Narula, Ferozepur vs. Assistant Commissioner Ofd Income Tax Central Circle, Amritsar

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 13/ASR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 80C

Shri Arun Narula, Frozepur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Amritsar

Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above

ITA 12/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 68Section 80C

Saarthak Vanijya India P. Ltd., Varanasi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-28, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1473/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singhavi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153ASection 43(5)

being genuine and allowable in terms of proviso to section 43(5) of the Income Tax act, 1961, there is no case of escapement of income in terms of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and consequential reopening u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That ... Total 163,72,58,83 3,27,45,176 1 12. Basis of forming reason to believe and details of escapement of income: In view of the foregoing facts, it is clear that the assessee has benefitted from engaging in reversal trades in illiquid stock options on the USE/BSE resulting

Tadisetti Murali Mohan, Guntur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 35/VIZ/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

referred to section 149(1)(b) of the Act wherein the reasons recorded for reopening should specify that there is an escapement of income above Rs.1 lakh and a proper satisfaction should be recorded by the Ld. AO. In this regard, the Ld. AR submitted that ... that the order of the Ld. AO be quashed. Per contra, the Ld. DR vehemently argued that the Ld. AO has quantified the escapement of income but however has failed 6 to mention section 149(1)(b) of the Act. The Ld. DR referred to the reasons for reopening submitted

Tadisetti Murali Mohan, Guntur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 34/VIZ/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

Tadisetti Murali Mohan, Guntur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 33/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

Tadisetti Murali Mohan, Guntur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 32/VIZ/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144(1)(b)Section 148Section 68Section 69

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur vs. Ravindra Bharathi Educational Society, Nellore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 160/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.160/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19) The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ravindra Bharathi Income Tax, Educational Society, Central Circle-1, D.No.23/812, Ravindra 3Rd Floor, Raj Kamal Complex, Bharathi Bhavan, Lakshmipuram, Guntur. Fathekhanpet, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh-524003. Pan: Aaaar 2715 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) C.O. No. 21/Viz/2022 (आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.160/Viz/2022) ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2018-19 ) M/S. Ravindra Bharathi Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Educational Society, Income Tax, D.No.23/812, Ravindra Bharathi Central Circle-1, Bhavan, Fathekhanpet, Nellore, 3Rd Floor, Raj Kamal Complex, Andhra Pradesh-524003. Lakshmipuram, Guntur. Pan: Aaaar 2715 E ( Cross Objector) (""थ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/04/2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of : 23/05/2023 Pronouncement

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao

Section 12ASection 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

that since the assessee has not declared the income admitted, the Ld. AO has rightly considered that there is a reason to belief escapement of income by the assessee. The Ld. DR also referred to the reasons for reopening. The Ld. DR therefore pleaded that the order ... interest of Rs. 26 lakhs, which are already included in the sundry expenses in the P & L Account and hence there is no escapement of income as relied on by the Ld. AO. Further, the Ld. AR also submitted that during the course of survey proceedings, no material which

Govindbhai L. Kakadia, Mumbai vs. JCIT-19(2), Mumbai

ITA 310/MUM/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2023AY 2006-07

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Govind Menon

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 69A

assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer must have ‘reason to believe’. At this stage, whether the materials available can prove decisively that there was escapement of income, is not a relevant as the belief formed by the Assessing Officer is based upon subjective satisfaction drawn from the information/materials available with