“escapement of income”

Sumangal Techpark (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 24(3), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri C.M. Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 Sumangal Techpark (P) Ltd., Vs. Ito, 117, Hans Bhawan, Ward-24(3), 1 Bsz Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aalcs4760R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Ms Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2023 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.02.2019 Of The Cit(A)-8, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. First Of All, We Have Heard The Arguments Of Both The Representatives On Legal Ground No.1 Of The Assessee Which Reads As Under:- “3. The Initiation Of The Proceedings U/S 148 & The Consequent Order Us 147 Are Bad In Law As A) The Initiation Of Proceedings U/S 148 Are Contrary To Provisions Of Law B) The Mandatory Procedure Laid Down In The Act Has Not Been Followed. C) The Notice Issued U/S 148 Is Time Barred As Issued After 4 Years From The End Of The Relevant Assessment Year Where The Case Has Already Been Assessed U/S 143(3). D) The Approval Of Addl. Cit & Pcit Is Bad In Law & Mechanical Without Application Of Mind & Has Been Taken Without Bringing To Their Notice Material Facts Of The Case. E) The Information Has Been Collected Behind The Back Of The Assessee & The Assessee Was Never Confronted With The Same Nor An Opportunity Provided For Cross-Examination Of Jain Brothers, Alleged Intermediary & The Relevant Seized Material Relied Upon Has Not Been Provided To The Assessee.”

initiated after expiry of four years from the end of assessment year, the appellant’s case could not have been reopened unless the escapement of income occasioned due to failure of assessee to disclose truly & fully all material facts necessary for assessment. There is no specific allegation in reason recorded ... year. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee’s case 17 should not have been reopened u/s 147 of the Act unless the escapement of income occasioned due to failure of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts necessary for the assessment. He, further drawing our attention

Vikas Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-32, Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

erred in upholding the finding of Ld. AO where the reassessment proceeding has been initiated on mere suspicion and in absence of any escapement of income subsequent to a survey conducted on the premise of the assessee. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the finding ... erred in upholding the finding of Ld. AO where the reassessment proceeding has been initiated on mere suspicion and in absence of any escapement of income subsequent to a survey conducted on the premise of the assessee. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the finding

Vikas Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-32, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

erred in upholding the finding of Ld. AO where the reassessment proceeding has been initiated on mere suspicion and in absence of any escapement of income subsequent to a survey conducted on the premise of the assessee. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the finding ... erred in upholding the finding of Ld. AO where the reassessment proceeding has been initiated on mere suspicion and in absence of any escapement of income subsequent to a survey conducted on the premise of the assessee. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the finding

Vikas Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-32, Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

erred in upholding the finding of Ld. AO where the reassessment proceeding has been initiated on mere suspicion and in absence of any escapement of income subsequent to a survey conducted on the premise of the assessee. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the finding ... erred in upholding the finding of Ld. AO where the reassessment proceeding has been initiated on mere suspicion and in absence of any escapement of income subsequent to a survey conducted on the premise of the assessee. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the finding

Vikas Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-32, Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

erred in upholding the finding of Ld. AO where the reassessment proceeding has been initiated on mere suspicion and in absence of any escapement of income subsequent to a survey conducted on the premise of the assessee. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the finding ... erred in upholding the finding of Ld. AO where the reassessment proceeding has been initiated on mere suspicion and in absence of any escapement of income subsequent to a survey conducted on the premise of the assessee. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the finding

Viswanathan Securities P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 147 of the Act only after due care and application of mind on the material/information so collected and which triggers belief towards escapement of income. As a corollary, the formation of reason to believe is an objective exercise based on material available on record. The Assessing Officer

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmabharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, Vs. Acit, Taxation Section, First Floor, Circle-6(2), Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, New Delhi Janpath, New Delhi-11001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aabcb5576G

absence of any omission and/or failure on part of the Appellant to disclose fully and truly all the material facts leading to escapement of income chargeable to tax, without appreciating the fact tha the additions made and confirmed in the re-assessment order were specifically dealt with and analysed

Jsd Steel P.Ltd (Formerly Cbs Steel P.Ltd), New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2011-12

alleging that in the year under consideration, the assessee had entered into cash transactions exceeding Rs.10,00,000 in a month, resulting in escapement of income. 7. In response to notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, assessee filed its return of income on 16.03.2015 declaring income of Rs.16

Shri Lal Mahal Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 8, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2009-10] Shri Lal Mahal Ltd., Vs Addl.Cit, B-5, Bhagwan Das Nagar, Special Range-8, East Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi-110026. Pan-Aaecs5326C Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15.02.2023

loss of Rs.6,38,57,040/- on 30.12.2011. Thereafter, the assessment was re-opened u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of escapement of income amounting to Rs.48,22,500/-. The assessment was framed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act vide order dated 26.12.2016. While framing the assessment

Rajesh Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-42(3), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

facts and in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that mere depositing cash in the bank accounts does not tantamount to escapement of income. 7. On the fact and circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the contention

Hazari Lal Kesari Chand, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-48(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

assessment has been made and it is noted by the assessing officer that assessee has understated his income, will be a case of’ escapement of income'. Here, I would like to draw strength from the order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indu Lata Ranqwala ... beyond a period of 4 years can only be initiated if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that there has been escapement of income and this escapement is owing to the lack of true and fair disclosure by the assessee. In this regard, it is essential to understand

M/S. Raghvender Shankar Finance & Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2003-04

learned Director of Income Tax (Inv.) which cannot be regarded as a material or evidence that prima facie shows and establishes escapement of income. He had erroneously accepted such information in a mechanical manner which is bad in law. 3. That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

Ashok Choudhary, Hisar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Hisar

escapement of any income; ii. passing order u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act without providing reasons recorded leading to belief of escapement of income; iii. making addition of Rs.58,41,700/- by treating the cash deposits in bank as un-explained; All the above actions being erroneous, unlawful ... Assessing Officer did not provide the assessee with reasons by the Assessing Officer which led the Assessing Officer recorded to his belief of escapement of income in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. SR. DR for Revenue did not dispute the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee

Shyam Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs ITO 236 ITR 236 ITR4 (sc; wherein it was held that the AO is not to conclusively prove the escapement of income to assume jurisdiction u/s 147 of the Act. In the case of ITO Vs Purshottam Das Bangur 224 ITR 362 the Hon'ble Apex ... page 31 also which led the AO to I.T.A. No. 4908/Del/2018 AND I.T.A. No. 4907/Del/2018 form a prima facie view of escapement of income chargeable to tax. 5. From these discussions, it is evident that the AO had no material to initiate action u/s 147 except for the material relating